Hey British guys, I love this accent!!!

Well, much as I hate to quote from Wikipedia, look up "penal colony" and you get this:


The British used North America as a Penal Colony through the system of indentured servants. Convicts would be transported by private sector merchants and auctioned off to plantation owners upon arrival in the colonies. It is estimated that some 50,000 British convicts were banished to colonial America, representing perhaps one-quarter of all British emigrants during the eighteenth century. When that avenue closed in the 1780s after the American Revolution, Britain began using parts of modern day Australia as Penal Colonies. Some of these early colonies were Norfolk Island (which became the flogging hell meant to deter even the most hardened criminals- see cat o' nine tails), Van Diemen's Land and New South Wales. Advocates of Irish Home Rule or of Trade Unionism (the Tolpuddle Martyrs) often received sentences of transportation (the harsh regime started during the long shipping) to these Australian colonies.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convict_settlement


And a more reliable source, the BBC, has this to say:


The colonisation of Australia and New Zealand began with the desire to find a place for penal settlement after the loss of the original American colonies. The first shipload of British convicts landed in Australia in 1788, on the site of the future city of Sydney.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/timelines/britain/geo_antipodes.shtml

Actually, the "perfect" man would be both handsome and RP speaking. However, since that is often not the case, I would rather sleep with a handsome non-RP speaking man than with an ugly RP-speaking one. Even that is an oversimplification since there are infinitely many degrees of handsomeness and ugliness and an infinitely range of accents anywhere in England rangling from the broadest local accent all the way up to RP. If I just wanted a good fuck I would go for the looks and to hell with the accent. However, if I wanted a sincere, caring, long-term relationship with a man who will treat me with courtesy, dignity, and respect.... Well, in that case his speech (in addition to his personality, intelligence, and maturity) would be a factor.

Although an RP-speaking man may turn out to be a playboy or a cad, he is equally likely (or even more likely) to turn out to be a gentleman. However, a man with a very broad local accent is not very likely to be a gentleman. Such men can sometimes be very "slippery" with women (although that is sometimes also the case with upper class men).

The only men I would really reject as potential long-term mates are those who fall below a certain degree of handsomess or those whose accents falls beyond a certain degree of commoness.

The truth of the matter is that you have to look at the entire man and not just one particular aspect. You have to see if the "package" is what you want, even if one or two elements of that package are less than perfect.

To me, the men on "The Full Monty" movie are not exactly husband material (although I find the movie to be an excellent one). Aside from looks, the accents they use are so divergent from RP that they might as well be from a totally different country than Pierce Brosnan or Hugh Grant. This is also true of the broadest Cockney. I don't like my men to be highbrows but I DO want then to sound just a little bit more educated than that. Most Americans who are push-overs to "British accents" have either never heard such accents or are completely braindead in confusing them with anything even REMOTELY resembling RP.

The truth is that the vast majority of Americans are extremely stupid (among other things) for thinking that all British people talk like certain British characters in popular American movies or epic movies or who guest star on American TV programmes. They incorrectly draw a parallel between RP (which is on its deathbed as we speak) to GAE (which is currently used by over two-thirds of native born Americans). The truth is that RP in Britain does NOT correspond to GAE in the US. It is NOT characteristic of the way the average British person speaks. Most Americans don't even know what the hell RP is anyway. However, it's what they typically associate with a "British" accent. They think that "British English" is refined even though what they consider "British English" is the accent which is spoken by certain actors and not by the general public in the UK. The truth is that most Americans know as much about the sociolinguistics of British speech as a rubbish collector knows about particle physics.

Sadly, their love of "British" speech stems from pure, complete, and total ignorance and is based on a VERY false and misleading stereotype of how british people really talk.

To all you American girls out there: Most British men do NOT look or sound like Hugh Grant or Pierce Brosnan. You need to start watching some REAL British programming with REAL people. Enough said.

Candy, do you agree with ANY of what I said? It'sokay if you don't. I respect others' opinions... but am I not right in at least SOME of what I said???

<<This brings to mind a question I've been meaning to ask. Why do so many Canadians say, "aboot' for about? Is it the Scottish influence? I doubt seriously it's the French.>>

The short answer is that Canadians don't say "aboot." However, people with a phenomenon called Canadian Raising (which includes many, but not all, Canadians and some Americans especially in the Northern US) *do* have a different vowel in "about" than General American has.

This is how it works. For Canadian Raising, the diphthongs /aI/ (as in "high") and /aU/ (as in "how") raise to [@I] and [@U] respectively before unvoiced stops. Some X-SAMPA information--[@] is a schwa, so it's called "raising" because that's a higher place in the mouth than low /a/. As for unvoiced consonants, those are just ones that don't have voicing when you say them (feel your vocal chords when you say the pairs /p/ and /b/ or the pair /t/ and /d/ and you'll notce they're the same sound except for one your vocal chords vibrate and for the other they don't).

People with Canadian Raising in their dialects have a phonological rule that raises the beginning points of these diphthongs to centralized [@] instead of [a]. Remember, this only happens before unvoiced consonants. So, compare the Canadian Raised vowels in:

"loud" [laU:d]
"lout" [l@Ut]

"bout" [b@Ut]
"bowed" [baU:d] (as in "bow down" with /aU/, not as in "bow and arrow")

"knife" [n@If]
"knives [naI:vz]

"house" [h@Us] (the noun)
"house" [haU:z] (the verb)

People without Canadian Raising (such as me) have the same vowel for all those pairs. Thus I have [l{Ut] for "lout" and [l{U:d] for "loud" and [naIf] for "knife" and [naI:vz] for "knives." Also, note the [:] indicates longer vowel length--this is irrelevant to what we're talking about here so you can disregard it for this but I thought I should mention it.

So, back to "aboot"--"aboot" is a jocular faux-phonetic spelling that inaccurately describes a real phenomenon. "Aboot" would imply [@"but] but that doesn't happen--it's [@"b@Ut], as I described above.

As for where this came from, there are some competing theories, which are kind of complicated but some think it might be due to Scottish influence while some think it might be an independent variation (either one is quite plausible so it may never be resolved since we can't go back in time and check).

Also, I kind of simplified a bit here, but these are the basics to Canadian Raising. As Travis can explain to you, he has partial Canadian Raising (it only applies to his /aI/, not his /aU/) and the rules are somewhat different for him. It appears several regions have variations on the Canadian Raising theme but that's the basic textbook explanation for you. If you'd like more information check out the Wikipedia article on it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_raising

Hey guys, Let's meet and have some fun. I worked in UK for almost three years and I miss the camaraderie. British guys are a lot of fun. Different from American , in terms being a good listeners. I found American guys as dry. Love to meet British guys out there.... Is there anybody out there.

I worked for a Fortune 500 company, as Financial Analyst. We have about 10,000 employees in the UK, big operation in general... Miss to hear and converse the British accent. There's something to it that is appealing... Is it like Fieness??? LOL. Pls. reply.... Cheers...Nora

<<I would rather sleep with a handsome non-RP speaking man than with an ugly RP-speaking one.>>

I'm ready when you are love!

<<The British used North America as a Penal Colony through the system of indentured servants. Convicts would be transported by private sector merchants and auctioned off to plantation owners upon arrival in the colonies.>>

Thanks, Uriel, and thanks for the link. I have read of the indentured servants in Howard Zinn's "A People's History of the United States 1492 - Present." Now that I think of it he must have mentioned the Penal Colonies in there. I'll check that too.

<<Thanks, Uriel, and thanks for the link. I have read of the indentured servants in Howard Zinn's "A People's History of the United States 1492 - Present." Now that I think of it he must have mentioned the Penal Colonies in there. I'll check that too.>>

I didn't think Columbus ever made it to what is now the US in 1492. I thought that was left to John Cabot in 1497 sponsored by Welshman Richard Ameryk- hence the name "america" after him!

<<The short answer is that Canadians don't say "aboot." However, people with a phenomenon called Canadian Raising (which includes many, but not all, Canadians and some Americans especially in the Northern US) *do* have a different vowel in "about" than General American has. >>

Thanks again for all the info, Kirk. Now that I think about it, it really isn't aboot, there's a subtle sound difference but the only way I know how to mimic it is to say aboot [@"but], probably because I don't have Canadian Raising.

My very first X-SAMPA. Hehe.

<<I didn't think Columbus ever made it to what is now the US in 1492. I thought that was left to John Cabot in 1497 sponsored by Welshman Richard Ameryk- hence the name "america" after him! >>

I think you're talking about the controversy over who America was named after. Some say it was named after a sailor on Columbus' ship, called Amerigo Vespucci, others say it was Ameryk. I honestly don't know which as I'm not an expert.

<<I think you're talking about the controversy over who America was named after. Some say it was named after a sailor on Columbus' ship, called Amerigo Vespucci, others say it was Ameryk. I honestly don't know which as I'm not an expert.>>

Well, since Columbus never reached the USA and the continent isn't called Vespuccia, I would guess the latter.

"America" is the Latinized version of "Amerigo". I think it's more widely accepted that the place was named after Vespucci after a German cartographer erroneously assumed that Amerigo Vespucci had discovered the place.

<<I'm ready when you are love! >>

LOL, Rick. I wonder if she'll take you up on it. :)

BTW I met an Englishman in London who kept calling me "love," which I now know from you and Candy, means, he was probably from the North of England. I couldn't tell his accent from RP really. It sounded almost the same to me. It must be the American ear.

<<Well, since Columbus never reached the USA and the continent isn't called Vespuccia, I would guess the latter. >>

You may be right. He landed in the Bahamas, after all.

<<Thanks again for all the info, Kirk. Now that I think about it, it really isn't aboot, there's a subtle sound difference but the only way I know how to mimic it is to say aboot [@"but], probably because I don't have Canadian Raising.

My very first X-SAMPA. Hehe.>>

Yay! See, I knew you'd catch on in no time :) Glad the info helped.

<<To all you American girls out there: Most British men do NOT look or sound like Hugh Grant or Pierce Brosnan. >>

I don't think any of us ever thought they did. Where did you get that impression?

<<Yay! See, I knew you'd catch on in no time :) Glad the info helped. >>

Well, it's a start.:) It does feel good, though, to begin to grasp something you thought was beyond reach. I'm printing all the explanations that you give as well as those of Travis and Lazar and saving the links you suggest. They're helpful, along with the tutorials. Thanks again, you may make me look good yet.