<<The tide turned after WWII, when midwestern famboys who just got out of the military started participating in the business economy and became the dominant class.>>
It's true that non-rhotic accents used to be much more prestigious in the United States. Take Franklin Roosevelt, for instance, who spoke in an extremely posh non-rhotic accent. He talked about "these dastahdly acts by the Japanese Emp-eye-a".
It's interesting how the transition from the Northeastern, non-rhotic Roosevelt to the Midwestern, rhotic Harry Truman corresponded with the general shift in accent preferences in America.
<<It's interesting how the transition from the Northeastern, non-rhotic Roosevelt to the Midwestern, rhotic Harry Truman corresponded with the general shift in accent preferences in America.>>
Bla, bla, bla. Hasn't this rhotic/non-rhotic thing been a bit over-analyzed.
Lazar makes an interesting observation, Jeb, and rhoticism is a major feature of American English, and carries major sociological weight, especially regarding nonrhotic American vs rhotic American accents. So, if you're bored by this topic, just ignore it. Anyway, back to Lazar, the only presidents I can think of past Truman with nonrhotic accents are JFK with his Boston accent and Carter, with his southern coastal accent, both accents traditionally known to be nonrhotic (altho I've read nonrhotic accents are quickly dying in the south...I think they're still relatively common in Boston...any Bostonites here on the forum?).
>That's interesting. In the rest of the world, rhotic American English creates an impression of stupidity.<
This is true.
>>Non-rhotic English creates an impression of stupidity or low socioeconomic status.<<
Thanks for that; there I was thinking Harvard graduates were both smart and rich.
Nic, I don't lose any sleep over the southern accent decline. I know it will be here for several more generations. I admit that when I'm in another part of the country, I like hearing one because it makes me feel like home.
I have an ignorant question. I'm not a linguist or anything, just always fascinated by origins of English, accents, languages, etc. I'm new to this kind of discussion and terminology and just found this site but my question is, what is non-rhotic English? The absence of r's? That seems to be what I am picking up here.
It's the absence of "post-vocalic" r's meaning the r's at the end of words like butter, car, or board.
<<(altho I've read nonrhotic accents are quickly dying in the south...I think they're still relatively common in Boston...any Bostonites here on the forum?)>>
Well I'm from central Massachusetts, and non-rhotic speakers are pretty common here, especially in urban areas like Worcester (though less so in the suburbs).
"though less so in the suburbs"
I'd say that's due to immigration from other states. What's it like in Boston? Does there appear to be a shift like in Southern accents where nonrhotic accents appear to be quickly dying?
Den stad Boston muut dialekt med rootskisme nok dan hevven, ik wurt sien.
Correction:
Den stad Boston muut een dialekt med rootskisme nok dan hevven, ik wurt sien.
Bob,
I think it has to do more with the fact that accents are socially stratified, and people of a higher socioeconomic status in the suburbs are more likely to speak a more standard English. And since rhoticism is standard in the U.S., suburban Worcesterians more likely to pronounce their R's.
Ack, nother change: "wurt" above should be "vurt".
Well, there would have to be an external influence and newcomers tend to settle suburban areas because it appeals more, say to families than the urban areas... The mass media is the main cause?
<<What's it like in Boston?>>
Non-rhoticism is extremely common in Boston - even more so than in Worcester. Non-rhoticism may be declining a bit in Massachusetts, but it's still pretty strong.
<<I think it has to do more with the fact that accents are socially stratified, and people of a higher socioeconomic status in the suburbs are more likely to speak a more standard English. And since rhoticism is standard in the U.S., suburban Worcesterians more likely to pronounce their R's.>>
I agree. It's more a case of suburbanites adapting to mainstream English than of out-of-state immigrants coming in. Take my mother for instance: she was born and raised in Worcester and her original accent was completely non-rhotic, but she has now moved to the suburbs and become primarily rhotic (although often lapsing into non-rhoticism in informal speech). I myself am totally rhotic, but I still exhibit many unique Eastern New England dialectal features.
P.S. It's Worcesterite, not Worcesterian. And in case you didn't know, the city is pronounced Wooster. :-)