<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
	xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
	>

<channel>
	<title>New Zealand English Archives - The Historical Linguist Channel</title>
	<atom:link href="https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/tags/new-zealand-english/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/tags/new-zealand-english/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Sep 2019 20:03:53 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.0.9</generator>
<site xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">135321646</site>	<item>
		<title>Eh: What’s the Big Deal, eh?</title>
		<link>https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/eh-whats-the-big-deal-eh/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=eh-whats-the-big-deal-eh</link>
					<comments>https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/eh-whats-the-big-deal-eh/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Guest]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Apr 2019 09:00:08 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Archive - Blog]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[English]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Scots]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sociolinguistics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New Zealand English]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[canadian english]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[maori]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dialect formation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tags]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[discourse]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sociolinguistics]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/?p=679</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>You may have heard the word eh being used before. Often, it’s found at the end of sentences; for example, you might hear someone say ‘nice day, eh?’. Usually, eh serves to mark a question or initiate some kind of response from the listener, though it can also be used to signal agreement or inclusiveness. &#8230; </p>
<p class="link-more"><a href="https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/eh-whats-the-big-deal-eh/" class="more-link">Continue reading<span class="screen-reader-text"> "Eh: What’s the Big Deal, eh?"</span></a></p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/eh-whats-the-big-deal-eh/">Eh: What’s the Big Deal, eh?</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com">The Historical Linguist Channel</a>.</p>
]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[
<p>You may have heard the word <em>eh</em> being used before. Often, it’s found
at the end of sentences; for example, you might hear someone say ‘nice day,
eh?’. Usually, <em>eh</em> serves to mark a
question or initiate some kind of response from the listener, though it can
also be used to signal agreement or inclusiveness. We call these kinds of words
‘tag particles’ – they have no set meaning on their own but are often used for
a particular communicative function. </p>



<p>The tag particle <em>eh</em> has a long history, dating back in literature to the 1600s. It has been noted across a far-ranging spread of dialects and varieties, including Scottish English, Canadian English, Guernsey English and New Zealand English, suggesting a common British origin. In each variety it shares several semantic and social functions and it is frequently associated with national identity and vernacular use. However, over time these different varieties have also developed dialect-specific uses of <em>eh</em>. Today we’re going to focus particularly on the use of <em>eh</em> in New Zealand English, where it has the shortest but nonetheless very interesting history. But first, we cannot talk about <em>eh</em> without briefly mentioning its prominent role in Canadian English.</p>



<p><strong>Canadian
English</strong></p>



<p><em>Eh</em> has long been recognised as a typical feature of Canadian English,
and it is so prevalent and so well-known that it is often the subject of jokes
or caricatures of the Canadian accent. Already in the 1970s and 80s it was
being used in advertisements, indicating that this particle was becoming
widespread and nationally recognised. </p>



<div class="wp-block-image"><figure class="aligncenter"><img data-attachment-id="680" data-permalink="https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/eh-whats-the-big-deal-eh/sarah1/" data-orig-file="https://i0.wp.com/thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Sarah1.jpg?fit=500%2C447&amp;ssl=1" data-orig-size="500,447" data-comments-opened="1" data-image-meta="{&quot;aperture&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;credit&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;camera&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;caption&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;created_timestamp&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;copyright&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;focal_length&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;iso&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;shutter_speed&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;title&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;orientation&quot;:&quot;0&quot;}" data-image-title="Sarah1" data-image-description="" data-image-caption="" data-medium-file="https://i0.wp.com/thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Sarah1.jpg?fit=300%2C268&amp;ssl=1" data-large-file="https://i0.wp.com/thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Sarah1.jpg?fit=500%2C447&amp;ssl=1" width="500" height="447" src="//i1.wp.com/thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Sarah1.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-680" srcset="https://i0.wp.com/thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Sarah1.jpg?w=500&amp;ssl=1 500w, https://i0.wp.com/thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Sarah1.jpg?resize=300%2C268&amp;ssl=1 300w" sizes="(max-width: 500px) 100vw, 500px" /><figcaption><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Franklin-Motor-Syracuse-Canadian-Pacific/dp/B010FDU8X0">Source</a></figcaption></figure></div>



<p>Canadian <em>eh</em> has with time become associated with national identity, and this
has endowed it with the status of a purely Canadian feature, or ‘Canadianism’,
despite the fact that <em>eh</em> also plays
this role in a number of other accents. The Canadian variant is typically pronounced
as the short, front, mid-high vowel [e], and has a rising intonation. The main
function of <em>eh</em> is to mark informality
and inclusiveness, as well as seek agreement from the listener. <em>Eh</em> has been found to be widespread
across Canada geographically and socially, although it is more frequently used by
the lower classes, who tend to make more use of addressee-oriented devices in
general. Though it has several functions, Canadian <em>eh</em> is most commonly found in:</p>



<p>Opinions: ‘nice day, eh?’<br>Statements of fact: ‘it goes over there, eh’<br>Exclamations: ‘what a game, eh?’ <br>and fixed expressions, such as: ‘I know, eh’ and ‘thanks, eh’. </p>



<p>It is also found in questions, requests for
repetition, insults, accusations, and narrative functions, although the
questioning and narrative function of <em>eh</em>
is often seen by speakers as uneducated, lower class, and rural.</p>



<p><strong>New
Zealand English</strong></p>



<p>To jump forward a few centuries to a more
recently developed English accent, <em>eh</em>
is commonly found in New Zealand English as well. New Zealand English (NZE) speakers
tend to prefer <em>eh</em> to other possible
tags, leading to its highly salient nature. As in Canadian English, <em>eh</em> is a well-recognised feature, and is
also showing signs of growing national awareness, exemplified in its use in a
nationwide advert promoting New Zealand’s national soft drink; L&amp;P. This
soft drink is an iconic feature of New Zealand, originating and being produced there,
and it is partially named after the small town it was created in.</p>



<div class="wp-block-image"><figure class="aligncenter"><img data-attachment-id="681" data-permalink="https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/eh-whats-the-big-deal-eh/sarah2/" data-orig-file="https://i0.wp.com/thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Sarah2.jpg?fit=500%2C500&amp;ssl=1" data-orig-size="500,500" data-comments-opened="1" data-image-meta="{&quot;aperture&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;credit&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;camera&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;caption&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;created_timestamp&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;copyright&quot;:&quot;\u00a9 Images in Space Ltd, all rights reserved&quot;,&quot;focal_length&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;iso&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;shutter_speed&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;title&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;orientation&quot;:&quot;0&quot;}" data-image-title="Sarah2" data-image-description="" data-image-caption="" data-medium-file="https://i0.wp.com/thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Sarah2.jpg?fit=300%2C300&amp;ssl=1" data-large-file="https://i0.wp.com/thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Sarah2.jpg?fit=500%2C500&amp;ssl=1" loading="lazy" width="500" height="500" src="//i1.wp.com/thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Sarah2.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-681" srcset="https://i0.wp.com/thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Sarah2.jpg?w=500&amp;ssl=1 500w, https://i0.wp.com/thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Sarah2.jpg?resize=150%2C150&amp;ssl=1 150w, https://i0.wp.com/thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Sarah2.jpg?resize=300%2C300&amp;ssl=1 300w, https://i0.wp.com/thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Sarah2.jpg?resize=100%2C100&amp;ssl=1 100w" sizes="(max-width: 500px) 100vw, 500px" /><figcaption><a href="https://shop.countdown.co.nz/shop/productdetails?stockcode=742189">Source</a></figcaption></figure></div>



<p>Notice that the spelling here is <em>aye</em> rather than <em>eh</em>. This is most likely because in NZE <em>eh</em> is realised as the diphthong [æe], as in ‘face’, with a slight <em>palatal approximant gesture</em> (meaning that
the vowel is followed by a slight ‘y’ sound), unlike Canadian <em>eh</em> which is realized as [e] in IPA. New
Zealand speakers generally pronounce <em>eh</em>
with a falling intonation, which distinguishes <em>eh</em> from most other varieties of English who typically have a rising
intonation, Canadian English included. <em>Eh</em>
most commonly occurs at the end of sentences, but is also likely to occur
mid-utterance, unlike in most other varieties. For example:</p>



<p>‘the phone will be non-stop eh with all the
girls ringing him up and stuff’</p>



<p><em>Eh</em> performs a number of functions in New Zealand English and tends to
be used to a greater extent by working-class speakers and in informal contexts,
which overlaps with the patterning we find for Canadian English. The array of semantic
roles <em>eh</em> has acquired are both New
Zealand-specific and share significant overlap with the Canadian variant. In
New Zealand English its most common purpose is to signal, recheck or establish
common ground with the interlocutor, but <em>eh</em>
can also be used to checking the comprehension of information, confirm shared
background knowledge or seek reassurance of the listener’s continued attention.
However, question and answer sentences discourage <em>eh</em>, quite unlike the Canadian variant. This wide range of usage may
be partially due to the historical developments it has undergone since it
arrived on New Zealand’s shores.&nbsp; </p>



<p><strong>But
where did this <em>eh</em> in New Zealand
English come from exactly?</strong></p>



<p>Whilst we cannot know for sure with the
current information we have, it seems very likely that <em>eh</em> came from Scots, where it is still found today. Previously, the
general assumption was that New Zealand English was generally derived from the
English of South East England, but now we know that a surprising number of words
came from the north of Britain, particularly from Scots. The use of Scottish <em>eh</em>, or rather <em>e</em> (as it is commonly transcribed), is prevalent in some Scots varieties
such as Hawick Scots and also in Edinburgh. Just like New Zealand English, it
too has a falling intonation, although it is pronounced [e] rather than [æe]. <em>E</em> typically occurs with<em> be</em> and <em>have</em>, for example:</p>



<p>‘he had a stroke, e?’</p>



<p>There are a number of significant overlaps
between use of <em>eh</em> in NZE and use of <em>e</em> in Scots. <em>E</em> can be used to confirm shared background knowledge, which matches
its usage in NZE, where <em>eh</em>
acknowledges the shared understanding between speakers. For example: </p>



<p>‘we know him quite well by now, e?</p>



<p>Furthermore, both <em>eh</em> and <em>e</em> can also be used
as a positive politeness feature to make a statement, opinion, or request less
sharp and more polite. For example; </p>



<p> ‘Put it down there, e’<br> ‘I like Sambuca, e’ </p>



<p>However Scots <em>e</em> is also noticeable in question and answer sentences, unlike NZE. For
example: </p>



<p>‘he’s coming, e?’  <br>‘he isnae coming, e?’ </p>



<p>We can see here that Scots <em>e</em> performs a number of functions, some
of which have significant similarities with <em>eh</em>
in NZE, and some which differ. So, if NZE <em>eh
</em>possibly comes from <em>e</em>, how did it
get into the accent? </p>



<p>Scottish <em>e</em> contributed to the rise of <em>eh</em>
in New Zealand English through process of <em>new
dialect formation</em>. Historical dialect formation is (often) the result of a
number of different dialects being brought into close proximity with one
another in unique, isolated circumstances. Through various processes these form
a new dialect. These processes have been categorized into five distinct periods
by Peter Trudgill. Initially there is <em>reduction</em>
and <em>accommodation</em> between the
different dialects; the most dialectal features are discarded and ‘half-way’ features
are frequently chosen. The next two steps involve further <em>levelling</em> (so removing the strongest dialectal features) and <em>modification through speaker convergence</em>
(speakers adapt their speech to make themselves more comprehensible). During
this process one feature is chosen and becomes <em>standardised</em>; in this case it was <em>eh</em> rather than other tags that was chosen as the agreement marker.
The final components to dialect formation are <em>focussing</em> and <em>adoption</em> by
the wider community. These last steps are still ongoing today; use of <em>eh </em>is led by the youth in the NZE
community. </p>



<p>One of the great things about the New
Zealand dialect is that we actually have recordings from the very first British
settlers setting foot on New Zealand soil, right up until present day NZE.
These recordings, stored in what is known as the ONZE (Origins of New Zealand
English) corpus (https://www.canterbury.ac.nz/nzilbb/research/onze/), have
allowed researchers to see (or rather hear) these processes of dialect
formation in action. In the corpus, we found that use of <em>eh </em>was significantly higher in the region of Otago, which historically
saw a high concentration of Scottish settlers. Unlike the rest of New Zealand,
the dialect from this local area has a number of Scottish-inspired features,
including Scots vocabulary items and rhoticity. Furthermore, speakers with Scottish
parents showed greater usage of <em>eh</em>, regardless
of where they had settled in New Zealand. Small numbers of <em>e</em> were in fact present in the first wave of recordings (1860-1900),
but this becomes gradually replaced by <em>eh</em>
after 1900. So here we can see the stages of dialect formation taking off; initially
<em>e</em> is present in the dialect, but with
<em>reduction</em>, <em>accommodation</em>, and <em>levelling,</em>
<em>eh</em> was chosen and has become widely
adopted into everyday NZE during the last fifty years. However, this might not
be the whole story. </p>



<p>Whilst it seems likely that <em>eh</em> came into NZE from Scots and pre-colonial
varieties of English, the difference in pronunciation between the two is more
difficult to account for. However, there is some precedent for minority
language influence on New Zealand <em>eh</em>;
various studies have found that Maori speakers, particularly males, were the most
frequent users of <em>eh</em>. The particle <em>eh</em> is very similar both in pronunciation
and function to the Maori tag particle <em>nē</em>
(pronounced [næe]. It is possible that once <em>eh</em>
was adopted by Maori speakers if would have been influenced by <em>nē</em> to produce a form similar in phonetic
quality. The functions of <em>eh</em> also
appear to have expanded, again through influence from <em>nē</em>. </p>



<p>This change in turn possibly influenced young
Pakeha (non-Maori) speakers, who have shown increasing use of <em>eh</em> by from around 1940 onwards. This gives
us the particular ‘ay-ye’ pronunciation that is now in wide circulation, as
well as the new meanings associated with <em>eh</em>.
We can see this change happening shortly after increasing numbers of Maori were
migrating to the cities in search of work, bringing them into greater contact with
Pakeha speakers. The New Zealand Government also practiced a policy of ‘pepper
potting’- the scattering of individual Maori families among Pakeha neighbours,
in an effort to prevent the Maori community from clustering together in the
cities. This naturally brought the two speaker groups into closer contact with
one another, allowing for cross-dialectal influence. </p>



<p>So it appears that eh came initially from
Scots and influenced the New Zealand English dialect. It was chosen as the
invariant tag of choice, and was in use within the post-colonial population in
New Zealand. This tag was then adopted by Maori speakers acquiring English and
influenced by their own particular tag particle, <em>nē</em>. The pronunciation changed, as well the particular uses of <em>eh.</em> This new form of the variant was
then adopted by younger, Pakeha speakers, and is now spreading through the
society, led by the youth. </p>



<p><strong>But
what about Canadian eh?</strong></p>



<p>Again, there are similar possible links
between the Scots <em>e</em> and Canadian <em>eh</em>. In 1851-61 there were several waves
of British settlers to Canada, especially Scots and Irish immigrants as part of
a concerted effort by the British government to populate Canada. In 1901-11
another wave of British migrants settled in Canada, particularly Scottish. In
the unsettled areas of Ottawa Valley, the colonial lineage of Scottish and
Irish accents remains to this day and can still be heard in the speech of some
local speakers in the Ottawa basin.</p>



<p>So, it seems that <em>eh</em> could have spread via Scottish immigration during the colonial
period. It concurrently underwent linguistic changes through <em>new dialect formation</em> to produce the form
that has surfaced in several colonial countries over time. Both the New Zealand
and Canadian dialects have developed their own version of <em>eh</em>, but it seems that the roots of this particle in both dialects
stems from the same source; Scots. Pretty cool, eh?</p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/eh-whats-the-big-deal-eh/">Eh: What’s the Big Deal, eh?</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com">The Historical Linguist Channel</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
					<wfw:commentRss>https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/eh-whats-the-big-deal-eh/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">679</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Did the Southern Hemisphere Englishes develop from Cockney?</title>
		<link>https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/did-the-southern-hemisphere-englishes-develop-from-cockney/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=did-the-southern-hemisphere-englishes-develop-from-cockney</link>
					<comments>https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/did-the-southern-hemisphere-englishes-develop-from-cockney/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Lisa Gotthard]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Mar 2019 09:00:58 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Germanic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Archive - Blog]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[English]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Southern Hemisphere English]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cockney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Received Pronunciation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Australian English]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[South African English]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New Zealand English]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[prestige]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[language variation and change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[language contact]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/?p=616</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>Remember two weeks ago, when I said that I’d get back to you about Southern Hemisphere Englishes? Well, I’m following through with this post!1 So, what do I mean by Southern Hemisphere (SH) Englishes? Well, it can be defined more broadly or more narrowly, but for this post I mean varieties of English that are &#8230; </p>
<p class="link-more"><a href="https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/did-the-southern-hemisphere-englishes-develop-from-cockney/" class="more-link">Continue reading<span class="screen-reader-text"> "Did the Southern Hemisphere Englishes develop from Cockney?"</span></a></p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/did-the-southern-hemisphere-englishes-develop-from-cockney/">Did the Southern Hemisphere Englishes develop from Cockney?</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com">The Historical Linguist Channel</a>.</p>
]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[
<p>Remember two weeks ago, when I said that I’d get back to you about Southern Hemisphere Englishes? Well, I’m following through with this post!<sup>1</sup><br></p>



<p>So, what do I mean by Southern Hemisphere (SH) Englishes? Well, it can be defined more broadly or more narrowly, but for this post I mean varieties of English that are spoken as a first language in the Southern Hemisphere, such as in Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, St Helena, and the Falkland Islands. Today, I will focus on the first three varieties on that list: Australian English, New Zealand English, and South African English.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image"><img data-attachment-id="617" data-permalink="https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/did-the-southern-hemisphere-englishes-develop-from-cockney/sh-map/" data-orig-file="https://i0.wp.com/thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/SH-map.gif?fit=2400%2C2400&amp;ssl=1" data-orig-size="2400,2400" data-comments-opened="1" data-image-meta="{&quot;aperture&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;credit&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;camera&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;caption&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;created_timestamp&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;copyright&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;focal_length&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;iso&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;shutter_speed&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;title&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;orientation&quot;:&quot;0&quot;}" data-image-title="SH map" data-image-description="" data-image-caption="&lt;p&gt;Public domain map from https://ian.macky.net/pat/index.html &lt;/p&gt;
" data-medium-file="https://i0.wp.com/thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/SH-map.gif?fit=300%2C300&amp;ssl=1" data-large-file="https://i0.wp.com/thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/SH-map.gif?fit=525%2C525&amp;ssl=1" loading="lazy" width="525" height="525" src="https://i0.wp.com/thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/SH-map.gif?resize=525%2C525&#038;ssl=1" alt="" class="wp-image-617" srcset="https://i0.wp.com/thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/SH-map.gif?resize=1024%2C1024&amp;ssl=1 1024w, https://i0.wp.com/thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/SH-map.gif?resize=150%2C150&amp;ssl=1 150w, https://i0.wp.com/thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/SH-map.gif?resize=300%2C300&amp;ssl=1 300w, https://i0.wp.com/thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/SH-map.gif?resize=768%2C768&amp;ssl=1 768w, https://i0.wp.com/thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/SH-map.gif?resize=100%2C100&amp;ssl=1 100w, https://i0.wp.com/thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/SH-map.gif?w=1575&amp;ssl=1 1575w" sizes="(max-width: 767px) 89vw, (max-width: 1000px) 54vw, (max-width: 1071px) 543px, 580px" data-recalc-dims="1" /><figcaption>Public domain map from <a href="https://ian.macky.net/pat/index.html">https://ian.macky.net/pat/index.html </a></figcaption></figure>



<p>If you, like me, enjoy listening to accents, imitating them, and trying to figure out their characteristics, you may have noticed that these three SH varieties often sound very similar<sup>2</sup>. With Australian and New Zealand English, them being geographical neighbours could partly explain this, but this does not work as an explanation for South African English. Also, there is not great dialectal variation within these varieties, relative to, for example, the UK, where you get distinct accents and dialects between two places only a commuter’s distance apart. How can this be?<br></p>



<p>In <a href="https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/american-english-the-language-of-shakespeare/">my post about American English</a> I went a little bit into how the development of that variety is affected by the linguistic diversity of the input (that is, what English accents and dialects were spoken by settlers), challenging the claim that American English would be a preserved Shakespearean English. The story of the formation of SH Englishes is, unsurprisingly, not so different from this. Once again I want to investigate the idea that a language develops in a straight line from one single older language, and the question of the week is therefore: Is Cockney to blame for the similarities between SH Englishes?</p>



<p>The SH countries in question were colonised by Britain much later than North America was, but in the same century as each other; the 19th century. The nature of their settlement differed slightly, however: Australia was at first a penal colony, New Zealand was initially settled by craftsmen, labourers, and farmers, and in South Africa, which was previously colonised by the Dutch, a deliberate action was made to start British farming communities by sending out 5000 British settlers to start this up (this did not work very well, and the British settlers soon moved into the cities to take on other professions). <br></p>



<p>Now, let me tell you a little bit about Cockney: <br></p>



<p><strong>Famous fictional Cockney speaker:</strong> Eliza Doolittle, in George Bernard Shaw’s <em>Pygmalion</em> (perhaps more known from the stage musical adaption <em>My Fair Lady</em>)</p>



<p><strong>Famous non-fictional Cockney speaker:</strong> Michael Caine (an actor who, depending on your age, you either know from the movie <em>Alfie</em>, or as <em>Alfred</em> in Christopher Nolan’s Batman trilogy)</p>



<p><strong>Famously bad attempts at Cockney:</strong> <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6Myk5mpO7w">America’s Next Top Model season 4 acting challenge</a><br></p>



<p>Cockney is the accent traditionally spoken in London’s West End, which, in the 19th and early 20th century, was one of the more impoverished areas of London. The Southern English accent spoken in the West End developed in a quite distinct way, influenced in part by the culturally diverse population which resided there. If you’re not from Britain, you may recognise Cockney as the accent often used to make fun of/imitate the British. Some notable Cockney features are, for example: pronouncing the diphthong in words like ‘mate’ so that it sounds like the diphthong in ‘might’, dropping word-initial /h/ so that &nbsp;‘hello’ becomes ‘ello’, <em>vocalising</em> (= turning into a vowel) the /l/ in certain environments so that ‘milk’ sounds like ‘miwk’, and <em>glottalising</em> the /t/-sound between vowels so that words like ‘glottal’ become something like ‘glo-al’. The cockney accent also had more general South-Eastern English features (and indeed, some of the already mentioned features are also found elsewhere), such as not being <em>rhotic</em> (so that ‘far’ is pronounced ‘fah’), and raising of the ‘e’-vowels to sound more like ‘i’, making ‘better’ sound more like ‘bitter’. <br></p>



<p>During the 20th century, the rise of the prestigious <em>Received Pronounciation</em> (RP)<sup>3</sup> meant that Cockney became more and more seen as vulgar and overall unprestigious. However, Cockney speakers were large in numbers, and, as is often the case in language change, features from Cockney have successively found their way into wider South-Eastern British English and even RP – so much so that the traditional RP known as the Queen’s English sounds much more “common” these days, even when spoken by the Queen herself.<br></p>



<div class="wp-block-image"><figure class="aligncenter"><img data-attachment-id="618" data-permalink="https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/did-the-southern-hemisphere-englishes-develop-from-cockney/ello-govna/" data-orig-file="https://i0.wp.com/thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/ello-govna.jpg?fit=300%2C429&amp;ssl=1" data-orig-size="300,429" data-comments-opened="1" data-image-meta="{&quot;aperture&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;credit&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;camera&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;caption&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;created_timestamp&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;copyright&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;focal_length&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;iso&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;shutter_speed&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;title&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;orientation&quot;:&quot;0&quot;}" data-image-title="ello-govna" data-image-description="" data-image-caption="" data-medium-file="https://i0.wp.com/thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/ello-govna.jpg?fit=210%2C300&amp;ssl=1" data-large-file="https://i0.wp.com/thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/ello-govna.jpg?fit=300%2C429&amp;ssl=1" loading="lazy" width="300" height="429" src="//i1.wp.com/thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/ello-govna.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-618" srcset="https://i0.wp.com/thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/ello-govna.jpg?w=300&amp;ssl=1 300w, https://i0.wp.com/thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/ello-govna.jpg?resize=210%2C300&amp;ssl=1 210w" sizes="(max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px" /><figcaption><em>From a British perspective, Cockney and monocles don’t exactly go hand in hand</em></figcaption></figure></div>



<p>Cockney is frequently given credit for the Australian English accent, and this is not an entirely bonkers idea. In a situation such as the settlement of Australia and New Zealand, the number of speakers of a certain variety, i.e. the frequency of certain accent features, has been said to play a greater role than the social prestige of a variety, and the majority of convicts arriving in Australia were Cockney speakers. The interaction between the convicts, and thus the numerical influence of Cockney features over other accents, started already on the ships taking them to Australia, and once there, the speech of the convicts even affected the speech of the penal officers. Thus, Cockney speech features became numerically dominant in Australia and shaped the way English was spoken there.<br></p>



<p>We know already that the type of settlement was different in New Zealand, so what role did Cockney play there? Well, Cockney speakers in New Zealand were not as many as in Australia, but there were significant numbers of speakers from the South-East of England (about half of the settlers). There were also many settlers from Scotland, and a smaller but relevant number of settlers from Australia (7%)<sup>4</sup>, in the early days of New Zealand settlement. So, even though Cockney specifically wasn’t spoken by great numbers in New Zealand, those features of Cockney which were also found in other Southern English and (Cockney-influenced) Australian accents spoken in New Zealand had numerical strength among the settlers there. Therefore, these features, such as the high ‘e’ in better, non-rhoticity, and the distinct diphthong in <em>mate</em>, eventually became features of New Zealand English.<br></p>



<p>Likewise, the British settlers in South Africa were largely from the South-East of England. While the number of settlers was quite small in South Africa, they formed a tight-knit community of English-speakers in a region where many other languages were spoken, Dutch/Afrikaans being only one of them, and largely resisted influence from these other languages. Thus, even though the group of English-speakers in South Africa was small in numbers compared to the rest of the South African population, it was the <strong>majority accent within the English-speaking community</strong>, i.e. South-Eastern British English, which came to influence the development of South African English.<br></p>



<p>The numerical strength of individual features, rather than the “whole accent”, is important to understand why some notable cockney characteristics, such as h-dropping and t-glottaling, are missing from all of these SH accents. New Zealand, for example, had plenty of input from other British accents than South-Eastern ones, so pronouncing &nbsp;/h/ and /t/ was more common among speakers than not doing so. Australia was also subsequently settled by speakers of different English varieties, which we can assume swamped out some of the features more specific to Cockney. <br></p>



<p>So, can we blame Cockney entirely for the similarities between the different SH varieties? Of course, which I hope to have shown in this post, it is never that simple. <br></p>



<p><strong>Footnotes</strong><br><sup>1</sup> The content of this post is again largely credited to material by Dr. Claire Cowie at the University of Edinburgh. I also recommend <a href="http://(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGID-SgatN8) ﻿">this video</a> for a general (albeit slightly dated) overview of Cockney and Australian English.<br><sup>2</sup> Of course, a more trained ear than mine will hear clear differences between them. If you’re not very &nbsp;familiar with these accents, listen to some samples from the International Dialects of English Archives (IDEA):<a href="https://www.dialectsarchive.com/australia-27 ">Australian English, </a><a href="https://www.dialectsarchive.com/new-zealand-6 ">New Zealand English, </a><a href="https://www.dialectsarchive.com/south-africa-25﻿">South African English.</a><br>I picked three samples that were similar in that they were all by men in their 20s. There are more samples to listen to on the IDEA site (and many many more accents!).<br><sup>3</sup> We’ve mentioned RP before, for example <a href="https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/454-2/">here</a> in the context of standardisation.<br><sup>4</sup> As a reminder, I’m getting these numbers from material put together by Dr. Claire Cowie for the course LEL2C: English in Time and Space at the University of Edinburgh.</p>



<p></p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/did-the-southern-hemisphere-englishes-develop-from-cockney/">Did the Southern Hemisphere Englishes develop from Cockney?</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com">The Historical Linguist Channel</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
					<wfw:commentRss>https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/did-the-southern-hemisphere-englishes-develop-from-cockney/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">616</post-id>	</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
