Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
People with accents know they have an accent. Please stop pointing it out. As
someone who learned both English and Pennsylvanian accents (to match my citizenships), I
pause before words like tomato and the letter z, judging the current conversation. Either I
expect an interjection and follow my natural inclination (tomahto and zed) or I conform to
my audience with a lingering feeling of false colours (tomayto and zee). If I say h (haytch),
how many people will turn around? Primed one liners like “haytch––the only time English
people pronounce the letter!” help push the conversation forward, but the interruption lingers.
For the most part, I use an American accent in the states and an English one in Britain; I
would never say mate in the States and never y’all in England, but some words and phrases
transfer. Most interruptions follow with “can you pronounce (insert commonly asked word
here)?” Yes, yes I can pronounce that word, but I was talking about something else entirely
so how about we continue instead? Accents are like language: switching between two
requires concentration and sometimes I can’t switch back. Nevertheless, the most annoying
people are those who go on holiday in Canada or marathon Sherlock and claim they just
picked up the accent––frankly, no. No American’s British accent could fool a native Briton
and vice versa; Britons and Americans speak a nonstandard English accent, overlapping with
dialect and word choice. Some words cannot translate, for instance: mall and shopping centre
differ, but only someone knowing both accents would know so. Accents are no fad to pick
up, try on, and then discard; like language, dialect and word choice, they represent a lifetime
Foremost, from language to dialects, everything begins with words. Every word
meanings differ from someone else’s. Language and dialect impact which words someone
uses most often, but so do family, age, ethnicity, location, power dynamics and more
Smith 2
situations. Many synonyms exist in a language, but society often dictates when to use each
word, especially with more taboo words about sex or bodily excretions. For instance,
although vulgar, the words referring to male genitals are relatively common and accepted in
most nonprofessional and nonformal settings: penis is clinical, dick and cock are negative
Comparatively, far more words exist for female genitals; the medical term vagina
“sounds like an infection at best, maybe a medical instrument... it never sounds like a word
you want to say” (Ensler), but of course, neither does penis. However, many common terms
for vagina are diminishing, ie pussy, twat, or fanny, hence why many of them are used to
mean weakling. The word cunt is an extremely offensive word in the States (less so in the
UK) connoting jerk. Most terms avoid naming the vagina, promoting the “darkness and
secrecy surrounding them” (Ensler): down there, lady garden, private parts, kitty, flower or
peach. None of the female words are celebrated, reflecting the historic prudish attitude
focused on women and their genitals; however, in recent years the term vajayjay or vag in the
UK have grown in popularity, normalising and accepting speaking about female genitals. In
this case, the words impact the people speaking them; as children, girls learn their genitals
represent weakness and impolite talk, whereas boys learn their genitals are normal and
manly. In US’ legal system, men deny women the right to name their vaginas, as when a
woman was barred from the floor for doing so; in “social structure where women have less
power than men to make decisions, using a word like vagina or vasectomy is a claim to
power..meaning women should have legitimacy in speaking about issues related to control
over their own bodies” (Diamond-Welch). Whether a woman (or girl) calls her genitals a
vagina or down there indicates her social upbringing and comfort with herself; the acceptance
of each word in different social situations also indicates how vaginas are perceived overall––
shouts, “I am not a Polack. People from Poland are Poles, not Polacks. But what I am is a one
hundred percent American, born and raised in the greatest country on earth and proud as hell
nationalistic man, finds his American heritage matters the most. He disdains the word Polack
as a racist term for Polish people against two women from a higher socioeconomic status:
Polack placed him below them and reclaiming the word Polish elevates him to their level. In
this play, as in life, words communicate power relationships and societal beliefs; although
connotational meanings may differ slightly, these subtle differences matter greatly.
A person’s language represents their personal experiences and cultural history and
control language, they must hold enormous amounts of power must exist. For example, in
Orwell’s 1984, the government forces a shift from Oldspeak to Newspeak, a more efficient
and basic language devoid of nuance. The party’s spoken reasoning is:
If you have a word like ‘good,’ what need is there for a word like ‘bad’? ‘Ungood’
will do just as well – better, because it's an exact opposite...if you want a stronger
version of ‘good,’ what sense is there in having a whole string of vague useless words
like ‘excellent’ and ‘splendid’ and all the rest of them? ‘Plusgood’ covers the meaning
However, removing the synonyms and antonyms also removes the individual’s interaction
with language; for some, excellent and splendid carries a similar meaning, but for others they
differ in connotations. The existence of both terms creates a distinction for interpretation––
for myself, the term excellent feels more satisfactory, whereas splendid feels more posh and
unexpected––overall, while their meanings change between every individual, they are not
perfect synonyms, as no two words are, and therefore cannot condense into a single word
Smith 4
‘good’. This simplification targets not synonyms for ‘good’ but “the range of thought...[they]
shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to
express it. Every concept that can ever be needed will be expressed by exactly one word, with
its meaning rigidly defined” (Orwell). Explicitly stated, the government removes all personal
Newspeak removes almost all self identity and nuanced emotions or beliefs; one may
either call the weather plus good, good, ungood or plusungood but not fantastic or pleasant or
crappy or nostalgic or hopeful. The linguistic relativity hypothesis and linguistic determinism
theorise that an individual’s language can either define or create thought, hence differences in
language, even minimal ones, create and show differences in people. A common example
occurs in spatial awareness between body related languages (left/right and front/back) versus
environment related (north/south and east/west). In the latter “you always have to know
where you are with respect to the compass points, whether you are speaking or not”
(“Language and Thought”). Due to how directions are given in compass-oriented languages
changes the entire worldview––things centre not on the individual but on the individual’s
relation to the world. Without shades of meaning, the people in 1984 cannot be subtly
The government also aims to destroy all literature of the past so they will “exist only
in Newspeak versions, not merely changed into something different, but actually changed
Removing the literature and written record of the past removes the culture and history
Shakespeare: Romeo and Juliet, and while the adaptations may aid new readers, the actual
plays still contain their own merit. In 1984 people are discouraged from thinking, to create a
Smith 5
mindless, hive-like and enthusiastic army for the government to employ. Altogether, the
government strives to eliminate personal identity and cultural history by erasing the words
expressing them. Ideas relate to language because they need language to exist.
Even more than language, dialects and accents distinguish people. They are also
of education, family and more; they represent a personal history and culture. Someone’s
dialect reveals some of their background, both in real life and in books. Naturally, the dialects
stratify based on the group who speaks it; when two people from opposing dialects converse,
it can lead to prejudice or tension. In literary works, authors can write dialect and accent into
dialogue to subtly reveal more about a character. For example, in Their Eyes Were Watching
God, with no description of the setting or the characters speaking, the dialogue implicitly
provides information:
What she doin’ coming back here in dem overhalls? Can’t she find no dress to put
on?—Where’s dat blue satin dress she left here in?...What dat ole forty year
ole ’oman doin’ wid her hair swingin’ down her back lak some young gal?...What he
done wid all her money?...why she don’t stay in her class? (Hurston)
Many linguistic changes are presented here from standard English: th-stopping (as in “dat”
instead of that), unstressed final consonants (as in “doin” instead of doing), use of done
instead of did (as in “what he done wid” instead of what did he do with) and, notably, the
Vowel Shift (as in “lak” instead of like) (“Southern States English”). A reader, even without
noticing these things individually, gathers the characters are southern and likely uneducated,
from the vowel shift and the persistence of the accent and incorrect grammar respectively.
While in books such dialectal difference only exposes more information, in real life
interaction it can cause tension and highlight coinciding social cleavages between people.
Here enters prestige, the “level of respect normally accorded to a specific language or
Smith 6
dialect...In general, a language or dialect associated with an upper class has positive prestige,
while a language or dialect associated with a lower [or working] class has negative prestige”
(“Prestige”). The standard dialect in many languages, including English, is the one taught in
schools, another reason why those using incorrect grammar are more likely uneducated. Here
lies another coinciding cleavage as uneducated people speaking a nonstandard English dialect
also are more likely to be in a lower economic class. Further, “dialects stigmatized by the
education system still enjoy a covert prestige among working-class men for the very reason
that they are considered incorrect" (“Prestige”); those speaking nonstandard English,
especially men, are often proud of it, distrusting those who speak a more standard,
educated American woman descendant from an old rich family, and Stanley, a relatively
uneducated Polish-American man descendant from a poor recently immigrated family. Their
dialects and lexicons vary; Blanche blathers on in long dreamy paragraphs with literary
allusions and occasional French, whereas Stanley predominantly shouts short phrases littered
with slang and profanity. Blanche criticises Stanley, displaying her knowledge with an
extended metaphor, saying he “talks like [an animal. There is]...something--ape-like about
him, like one of those pictures I've seen in--anthropological studies!...His poker night!--you
call it--this party of apes! Somebody growls--some creature snatches at something--the fight
is on! God!” (Williams). Here, Blanche correlates Stanley’s way of speech with his intellect
and, although the dialect and education level do correspond, she takes it too far in insisting
the fault lies with his inborn abilities, continuing on to call him a “brute” (Williams) while
insinuating his lack of intelligence. After overhearing this, Stanley uses a stronger accent, as
when he says, “Them dam mechanics at Fritz's don't know their ass fr'm--Hey!” (Williams).
Proud of his dialect, he uses it to further differentiate himself from her in every way.
Smith 7
Frequently he interrupts her with his own interjections, breaking her dreamy speech and
bringing her to reality. Essentially, a person’s language reflects their culture and upbringing,
allowing some assumptions and prejudice between dialectal groups; more differs than just
pronunciation, lexicon and grammar. Mocking one’s speech mocks their culture, engendering
a fine line between making a funny joke and making a hurtful joke when it comes to playing
accents.
unconscious feelings and thoughts, or the formality of the situation. Dialect and accents
dialects and accents between groups indicate socioeconomic power differences. However, the
nuance in language allows for identity, removing nuance removes any personal interaction
with language. Ergo, playing accents, with no regard towards the history and culture of the
accent, understandably annoys the true speakers. Appreciating the differences is fine; most
people enjoy the attention from unfamiliar words and pronunciations––just don’t interrupt us
to mention it. As an American, I speak an American accent, and as a Briton, I speak a British
Works Cited
Diamond-Welch, Bridget. “The Power of Vagina: The Structure and Meaning of Words.”
Ensler, Eve. The Vagina Monologues. Dramatists Play Service, Inc, 2000.
1974.