Who's English is the best here?

[Pogo]

Dammit koshergrl the ANSWER is IN THERE and you are giving it away !!!

STFU.

"y'all can satisfy several grammatical functions, including an associative plural"

Is that like fuck can be a noun, verb, adverb, and adjective?

And what about "youz guyz"?

"Youz guys" is Bronx or Philly, yes.

Youse is an Irishism. Nothing specific to "Bronx or Philly" --- you'll find it where there was Irish working-class immigration. Sometimes.

Youse is strictly Italian-American that originated in New Yawk.

No, it's an Irishism, northern Irish specifically. I didn't grow up in Noo Yawk and I heard it in the Irish Catholic neighborhood. Although we, an Irish Catholic family, never used it as it was below our class. Although there's a case to be made that it's more Protestant-Irish than Catholic-Irish if we want to split heirs.

Hee hee split heirs I kill me

I have no doubt it's equally pervasive in Boston or Chicago, which are also Irish pop centers. Doesn't have anything to do with the city they landed or settled in.

You (or if multiple people are interested, y'all) can read about this in this blog, where a New Yawkuh who mentions he's of Italian extraction muses on his youses. He takes the approach, as somebody else did here, that Romance languages distinguish between "you-singular" and "you-plural" and assumes his Italian ancestry carried over a form of Italiano second-person plural. What he's missing is that the use of youse wasn't picked up in Italy but in New Yawk, where it was specifically brought by the Irish and spread into the lingua franca of the common class, so it has nothing to do with Italian.

The question of WHY English, unlike more sensible languages, no longer has a standard way to distinguish between "you-singular" and "you-plural" is what I already covered in post 212*. That leaves a gap that needs to be filled (or as they say in some parts of North America, "that needs filled") with a specific plural. Youse is one option. Y'all is another. It's a matter of personal preference which one one goes with.

*still more on that in detail, here

 

[RodISHI]

I could have said the excessively instead of overly but the later count took up less space to keep the diatribe down.

I could have said the excessively instead of overly

"Overly," "excessively" and "too" are, in the contest of your statement, synonymous; thus doing so would not have altered the oxymoronic nature of the remark.

Perhaps, however, you'd care to share with us just how one can have too much education. Frankly, I can't imagine that's possible. I think it's possible to make a qualitative judgment about how much education one needs or should have in various situations and life circumstances, but the notion that there is such a thing as absolutely being over educated is preposterous.

As very wise person once told me that if you really desire to get someone people's attention speak as though talking to a kindergartner. Formal education, knowledge base and wisdom are not all one in the same even though some may believe that they are. One can be totally educated to the highest degree and yet still have the common sense total idiot.

if you really desire to get someone people's attention speak as though talking to a kindergartner.

Yes, I've also heard that saying. It's quite effective when one must convey instruction and one is well advised to use that approach in such instances.

I've observed, however, that when one speaks as though one were speaking to a kindergartener, one is quite likely to get kindergartener grade responses to one's adult remarks. Thus if one doesn't care to be responded to by children or adults who think and remark like children, it's best not to communicate as a child might.

Ultimately one should choose one's approach to communication based upon one's targeted audience, not based merely upon who might come by one's remarks.

One can be totally educated to the highest degree and yet still have the common sense total idiot.

Be that as it may, quite often common sense is neither. Additionally, for whatever value so-called common sense has, it's certainly not the entirety of sense one must have; moreover, it's usually not nearly enough sense. To wit, think of how often people use common sense to choose/give an answer on an exam only to be wrong. Take a college-level course in macroeconomics and you'll come by many principles that are indeed so and that common sense, for most people, never indicates. Also, consider that common or any other kind of sense would tell one to do myriad things to be highly successful (at "whatever") and look at how many people do few or none of those things when in fact they should have done them religiously.

Let me offer a simple (highly summarized) example....

In the 1980s and '90s, the portent of the role of microprocessing were all over the place. It was on TV and in movie theaters as news and as entertainment. Countless authors wrote about the potential of computers and the impacts they would have on society. Common sense, assuming one had it, instructed one to prepare for the coming transformation wrought by the silicon chip.

How many people paid attention and prepared themselves for the change? Sure, millions did, but a lot of folks didn't, and now those who didn't are the vocal horde bemoaning that there are no physical labor jobs that pay well enough to sustain the "middle class" lifestyle they (or their parents) -- a lifestyle that because it was "middle class" provided them with the resources needed to purchase the requisite preparation -- once enjoyed.

Common sense tells one that while one may not like "what's inexorably coming," one must nonetheless be prepared to thrive once "it" arrives. Common sense says that what one likes doesn't much matter, what one does is what matters, and what one does had better be well thought out and reasonably effective, enough such that one isn't "f*cked" when the inevitable occurs.

Common sense says that one must go with the flow. Now, that doesn't mean just being a patsy; it means one finds a way to work with, not against, that which one cannot change. For example, we don't stop rivers, we figure out how to harness their power.​

When you harnessed the power of the river did you allow for the fish and other critters that depend on the free-flowing streams of that river? If you didn't the whole Eco-system of that river and what it serves will ultimately die off and very possibly become diseased from the parasites that live in stagnant waters. Was that even a consideration when you thought you could, should or would harness the power of that river?

How did we get onto fishing ??

It is work in progress for a portion of a vision quest.

 

[Hossfly]

Dammit still no authentic real Texans here yet ??

Hossfly !!

Where the fokk are you man ??

I've spent a lot of time in Texas but I'm a native Appalachian Marylander and have lived in Charlotte and Ft. Worth for the past 39 years. I haven't read 1/10th of this thread but from what I've seen so far it ain't purty.

I thought that spellin' was purdy?

That's the upper class pronunciation.

 

[yiostheoy]

Please list all candidates. Foreigners are not counted, I want to speak pure American English

Very few people realize there is actually quite a difference between British English and American English.

And then there is also Canuck English, Auzzie English, and Kiwi English too.

In Boston they don't pronounce the "R".

In the South they drawl their vowels.

BS.

Everyone that has seen "My Fair Lady," knows this.

Well, I can generally manage well enough with folks "murdering" the English language so long as they do so in a way that leaves their meaning clear and unambiguous. Besides, the vast majority of folks who would do so rarely have something to say that's critical for me to comprehend. There are, of course, exceptions. Donald Trump is one exception, but only because (1) he sought to be POTUS and (2) he won the election. I find it highly problematic that a person in either of those two circumstances -- along with other leadership roles -- communicates with vague and/or ambiguous expressions. And, no, it doesn't matter what they lead; it could be Sunday choir, and I'd feel the same. If one must lead others, one must communicate clearly and unambiguously.

The most important test of everyday speech and writing is successful communication.

The most important tool to accomplish this is proofreading.

Legalese lawyer-talk is different -- it must communicate literally and precisely to a judge.

A judge is a completely different scholarly animal. That's where the semicolons come in.

The key to each one is audience level. Who is your audience?

 

[Pogo]

Very few people realize there is actually quite a difference between British English and American English.

...

In Boston they don't pronounce the "R".

My grandfather, who was from Coastal Maine and had a fairly thick accent, was travelling in England once...and a British person asked him what part of England he was from.

And while I was in college, I had many debates with my mid-western friends about how the words CAUGHT and COT are pronounced. In New England, we pronounce them exactly the same.

My dad was from Illinois and I was raised in Florida.

It would annoy him when I would pronounce "creek" like "meek" instead of like "cricket".

And he would say "route" as in "out" while I said it like "root".

Ding ding ding! Chips gets one right. Stopped clock viewed at the right time.

I blame NFL pundits for the degradation of that particular pronunciation. I like to say, when Andy Reid plans what roads he'll take to drive to the stadium, he plans his route ("root"). When he gets there and his team goes down to defeat 48 to nothing ---that's a rout.

 

[MisterBeale]

My English is wicked good.

For the OP ---- that ^^ adjective is only used in New England.

Not true, we used it throughout the Midwest in the eighties and nineties. Now it is mostly reserved to the upper Midwest and parts that have connections to New England. That's what they refer to as the Yankeedom.

But as you can see, it is still used in parts of the Midwest, including Chicago. During the eighties, I heard it as far away as KC though.

 

[yiostheoy]

Kind of on topic...one of my all time favorites:

I like that one too. I think it's great for as much about conjunctions as it covers, which is certainly enough for the target audience.

Moses used conjunctions a lot.

His favorite was "and" or "and then".

He would go on and on with these.

He would even start sentences with them.

 

[Pogo]

My English is wicked good.

For the OP ---- that ^^ adjective is only used in New England.

Not true, we used it throughout the Midwest in the eighties and nineties. Now it is mostly reserved to the upper Midwest and parts that have connections to New England. That's what they refer to as the Yankeedom.

But as you can see, it is still used in parts of the Midwest, including Chicago. During the eighties, I heard it as far away as KC though.

Oh you can hear it anywhere New Englanders travel. But it's specific to that region and marks the speaker as such.

Not sure why you say "as you can see" --- what I see is your map makes no mention of it at all. Understandably so, since it's not a dialect map anyway.

 

[xotoxi]

Very few people realize there is actually quite a difference between British English and American English.

...

In Boston they don't pronounce the "R".

My grandfather, who was from Coastal Maine and had a fairly thick accent, was travelling in England once...and a British person asked him what part of England he was from.*

And while I was in college, I had many debates with my mid-western friends about how the words CAUGHT and COT are pronounced. In New England, we pronounce them exactly the same.


* Or they probably said "from what part of England are you?"

New Englanders ain't right in the head, as granny used to say.

And now granny's dead.

 

[koshergrl]

Very few people realize there is actually quite a difference between British English and American English.

...

In Boston they don't pronounce the "R".

My grandfather, who was from Coastal Maine and had a fairly thick accent, was travelling in England once...and a British person asked him what part of England he was from.

And while I was in college, I had many debates with my mid-western friends about how the words CAUGHT and COT are pronounced. In New England, we pronounce them exactly the same.

My dad was from Illinois and I was raised in Florida.

It would annoy him when I would pronounce "creek" like "meek" instead of like "cricket".

And he would say "route" as in "out" while I said it like "root".

Ha we grew up saying "crick" and I didn't know until I was a teenager that people actually used the term "creek".

I was also appalled that the mighty Rio Grande river in New Mexico looked like what we would have called a "crick" on the Oregon coast (before the out of state environmentalist infestation took place).

 

[koshergrl]

Kind of on topic...one of my all time favorites:

I like that one too. I think it's great for as much about conjunctions as it covers, which is certainly enough for the target audience.

Moses used conjunctions a lot.

His favorite was "and" or "and then".

He would go on and on with these.

He would even start sentences with them.

Style.

It's kind of a hit and miss venture.

Sometimes people try to pass off lack of editing and proof reading as *style*. But sometimes it's a real and glorious thing.

 

[yiostheoy]

Very few people realize there is actually quite a difference between British English and American English.

...

In Boston they don't pronounce the "R".

My grandfather, who was from Coastal Maine and had a fairly thick accent, was travelling in England once...and a British person asked him what part of England he was from.

And while I was in college, I had many debates with my mid-western friends about how the words CAUGHT and COT are pronounced. In New England, we pronounce them exactly the same.

My dad was from Illinois and I was raised in Florida.

It would annoy him when I would pronounce "creek" like "meek" instead of like "cricket".

And he would say "route" as in "out" while I said it like "root".

Ha we grew up saying "crick" and I didn't know until I was a teenager that people actually used the term "creek".

I was also appalled that the mighty Rio Grande river in New Mexico looked like what we would have called a "crick" on the Oregon coast (before the out of state environmentalist infestation took place).

My dad would have loved you.

All his kids learned to say "kreek".

 

[xotoxi]

My English is wicked good.

For the OP ---- that ^^ adjective is only used in New England.

Not true, we used it throughout the Midwest in the eighties and nineties. Now it is mostly reserved to the upper Midwest and parts that have connections to New England. That's what they refer to as the Yankeedom.

But as you can see, it is still used in parts of the Midwest, including Chicago. During the eighties, I heard it as far away as KC though.

Oh you can hear it anywhere New Englanders travel. But it's specific to that region and marks the speaker as such.

Not sure why you say "as you can see" --- what I see is your map makes no mention of it at all. Understandably so, since it's not a dialect map anyway.

However, it is a pretty map.

 

[RodISHI]

Please list all candidates. Foreigners are not counted, I want to speak pure American English

Very few people realize there is actually quite a difference between British English and American English.

And then there is also Canuck English, Auzzie English, and Kiwi English too.

In Boston they don't pronounce the "R".

In the South they drawl their vowels.

BS.

Everyone that has seen "My Fair Lady," knows this.

Well, I can generally manage well enough with folks "murdering" the English language so long as they do so in a way that leaves their meaning clear and unambiguous. Besides, the vast majority of folks who would do so rarely have something to say that's critical for me to comprehend. There are, of course, exceptions. Donald Trump is one exception, but only because (1) he sought to be POTUS and (2) he won the election. I find it highly problematic that a person in either of those two circumstances -- along with other leadership roles -- communicates with vague and/or ambiguous expressions. And, no, it doesn't matter what they lead; it could be Sunday choir, and I'd feel the same. If one must lead others, one must communicate clearly and unambiguously.

The most important test of everyday speech and writing is successful communication.

The most important tool to accomplish this is proofreading.

Legalese lawyer-talk is different -- it must communicate literally and precisely to a judge.

A judge is a completely different scholarly animal. That's where the semicolons come in.

The key to each one is audience level. Who is your audience?

I've known some judges (stupid ones and intelligent ones) in my days. There are many sitting on the bench that are very illiterate when it comes to both contract law and constitutional rights. Either that or many of them are simply lazy f'ks. There are damn few true contract lawyers out there that are knowledgeable in both areas.

 

[yiostheoy]

Kind of on topic...one of my all time favorites:

I like that one too. I think it's great for as much about conjunctions as it covers, which is certainly enough for the target audience.

Moses used conjunctions a lot.

His favorite was "and" or "and then".

He would go on and on with these.

He would even start sentences with them.

Style.

It's kind of a hit and miss venture.

Sometimes people try to pass off lack of editing and proof reading as *style*. But sometimes it's a real and glorious thing.

Well the fascinating thing about Moses is that in 1450 BCE he was actually the first narrative writer that we know of.

He did not have any rules. So he made them up as he went along.

Thus I can imagine Moses telling stories with lots of "and's" and "and then's" in them.

There was no such thing as punctuation because nobody had invented it yet.

 

[koshergrl]

Very few people realize there is actually quite a difference between British English and American English.

...

In Boston they don't pronounce the "R".

My grandfather, who was from Coastal Maine and had a fairly thick accent, was travelling in England once...and a British person asked him what part of England he was from.

And while I was in college, I had many debates with my mid-western friends about how the words CAUGHT and COT are pronounced. In New England, we pronounce them exactly the same.

My dad was from Illinois and I was raised in Florida.

It would annoy him when I would pronounce "creek" like "meek" instead of like "cricket".

And he would say "route" as in "out" while I said it like "root".

Ha we grew up saying "crick" and I didn't know until I was a teenager that people actually used the term "creek".

I was also appalled that the mighty Rio Grande river in New Mexico looked like what we would have called a "crick" on the Oregon coast (before the out of state environmentalist infestation took place).

THIS is what I thought of when I thought "river":

 

[koshergrl]

Kind of on topic...one of my all time favorites:

I like that one too. I think it's great for as much about conjunctions as it covers, which is certainly enough for the target audience.

Moses used conjunctions a lot.

His favorite was "and" or "and then".

He would go on and on with these.

He would even start sentences with them.

Style.

It's kind of a hit and miss venture.

Sometimes people try to pass off lack of editing and proof reading as *style*. But sometimes it's a real and glorious thing.

Well the fascinating thing about Moses is that in 1450 BCE he was actually the first writer that we know of.

He did not have any rules. So he made them up as he went along.

Thus I can imagine Moses telling stories with lots of "and's" and "and then's" in them.

I'm not at all convinced that you know what you're talking about here, but it's an interesting theory.

 

[xotoxi]

My English is wicked good.

For the OP ---- that ^^ adjective is only used in New England.

Not true, we used it throughout the Midwest in the eighties and nineties. Now it is mostly reserved to the upper Midwest and parts that have connections to New England. That's what they refer to as the Yankeedom.

But as you can see, it is still used in parts of the Midwest, including Chicago. During the eighties, I heard it as far away as KC though.

Why does Yankeedom (I take offense to that word because Yankees Suck!) extend over to North Dakota? If we are talking accents, I see no similarities between the Boston and the Fargo accents.

 

[xotoxi]

Moses used conjunctions a lot.

His favorite was "and" or "and then".

He would go on and on with these.

He would even start sentences with them.

Do does a 3rd grader when he is writing an essay of what he did during Summer Vacation.

 

[xotoxi]

My father, raised by two Mainers in Eastern Mass, learned in college that the compartment where he stored his clothes was a "DRAWER" and not a "DRAW".