If you were/are learning English, wouldn't/do you want to learn a form that would help/helps you communicate with the greatest number of people who spoke/speak that language? I mean, if you were/are paying good money for classes and had/have little time to give to studying a multitude of forms of a language, would you/do you want to learn a form that is either understood or used by the majority of speakers? If so, does such a form exist?
Which form of English
Aaffff, stop trolling around, will you??! how many times have you posted this question?
I may sound a bit like a troll sometimes, BUT YOU'RE A TROLL IN THE MOST FLAWLESS... MOST PUREST... MOST ANNOYING FORM...
Yes, everyone must learn American English... Happy now??
I may sound a bit like a troll sometimes, BUT YOU'RE A TROLL IN THE MOST FLAWLESS... MOST PUREST... MOST ANNOYING FORM...
Yes, everyone must learn American English... Happy now??
??? Do I know you? Please stop blocking this thread. I am interested in real opinions. Thanks.
Why not learn Canadian English? It's the most intelligible version because 1) in vocabulary it has very few words that would confuse an American or an Englishman 2) The spelling is sort of in between American and British spellings 3) The accent is closer to General American than many of the dialects in the US, and so it is much easier for example a New Yorker to understand a Canadian than a New Yorker to understand someone from Alabama. 4) It doesn't have the Northern Cities Vowel shift so most British won't comment on your "funny" pronunciation of "o's" (like [a]), or your "nasal" a's (something like [e@]). And you won't be mocked by Westerners for saying stuff like: "Your ma'am slept on cat". (="Your mom slept on a cot"). 5) The Canadian vowel shift is not as extensive as the Northern Cities vowel shift, the Southern vowel shift, or the California vowel shift. 6) It is one of the largest and most uniform dialect regions in the world: the differences between accent in Western/Central Canada are extremely minimal. 7) It won't label you as being of any particular social class, or conjure up any negative stereotypes. 8) It is similar enough in pronunciation to RP, that you will be understood by almost everyone in the English speaking world (the whole world :) )
9) It's rhotic, which makes it easier for people to hear the distinctions: e.g. a British person's "guard" sounds like an American's "God". 10) It preserves more t's than most dialects in the US.
Sounds like a good choice... Non-rothic accents sometimes cause trouble among people who are not used to the accent.
But they will maybe coment on your "funny" way of saying 'about', nothing is perfect, still a good accent.
But they will maybe coment on your "funny" way of saying 'about', nothing is perfect, still a good accent.
How is Canadian similar in pronunciation to RP, when it's almost identical to general American?
>>4) It doesn't have the Northern Cities Vowel shift so most British won't comment on your "funny" pronunciation of "o's" (like [a]), or your "nasal" a's (something like [e@]). And you won't be mocked by Westerners for saying stuff like: "Your ma'am slept on cat". (="Your mom slept on a cot").<<
Is that really a good reason to not teach people a variety with the NCVS?
Of course then, we obviously should make the dialect right here in Milwaukee, WI (including down to very informal speech) THE standard, for reasons that should be obvious to anyone who as listened to a speech sample by me. ;)
Is that really a good reason to not teach people a variety with the NCVS?
Of course then, we obviously should make the dialect right here in Milwaukee, WI (including down to very informal speech) THE standard, for reasons that should be obvious to anyone who as listened to a speech sample by me. ;)