At least from the perspective of here in Wisconsin, Canadians really do not sound that much different from Americans from outside the Upper Midwest. Also, the lack of the NCVS does not make individuals "sound Canadian", particularly since one can very easily hear other people from the US speak in media content and like without the NCVS.
Valley Girl talk: the preferred variation of English
There's a common misconception that "hella" is somehow a feature of valley girl (I looked up Valspeak on wikipedia and it listed "hella" as a feature of valley girl) but this is simply incorrect. "Hella" is a feature of the speech of those in Northern California, and those in SoCal correct those "outsiders" who use "hella," much as perscriptionists would correct someone for saying "good" instead of "well."
Canadians do sound a little Californian. Especially the kids who used to be on "You Can't Do That on Television." I think it's a combination of the question-like intonation (which some Australians also have,) the fronting of the oo-sound, and the way the short-a sound is pronounced (sort of like la-ahst.) California and Canada both have people who pronounce the word two in a very unique and Valley-Girl-ish way that I can best approximate as tih-uw. Listen to Keanu Reeves talk and try to decide if he's Canadian, Californian, or Hawaiian.
<< I think it's a combination of the question-like intonation (which some Australians also have,) the fronting of the oo-sound, and the way the short-a sound is pronounced (sort of like la-ahst.) >>
Since this is an English forum, I feel compelled to point out that putting punctuation inside parentheses in that manner is one of my major pet peeves. A clause that begins outside parentheses also ends outside it, so the comma and period both belong on the outside (like this). But if you have a sentence completely within parentheses, then the period belongs inside. (Like this.)
- Kef
Since this is an English forum, I feel compelled to point out that putting punctuation inside parentheses in that manner is one of my major pet peeves. A clause that begins outside parentheses also ends outside it, so the comma and period both belong on the outside (like this). But if you have a sentence completely within parentheses, then the period belongs inside. (Like this.)
- Kef
<<Since this is an English forum, I feel compelled to point out that putting punctuation inside parentheses in that manner is one of my major pet peeves. >>
Kef, didn't you see Josh's post about not questioning native speakers' usage? It not allowed here. Please cease.
Kef, didn't you see Josh's post about not questioning native speakers' usage? It not allowed here. Please cease.
I have never heard of this 'Valley girl speak' before, but seeing as this dialect is allegedly the source of one of my major grievances I have to comment.
I have asked this question before but never did get an answer “What is the story with this 'like' speak"???????
EVERYBODY is talking 'like' it and IT GETS ON MY BLEEDIN NERVES!!! I am starting to get a tad scared for my own sanity, please someone just talk to me like a normal human being!!! I do not know one person outside of my grandparents and dad that don’t use it, I mean; it has even got my mum doing it!!!! Every second of the day all I hear is 'I was like, then he was like then she was like and they were like and then we were like and then we were all like' – NOOOO PLEASE STOP IT !!!!!! What’s it all about?? Where did it come from???
I have family in Oz whom I speak to on a regular basis and yep you guessed it – they do it too. Arrgghhhhh - there is no escape!!!!!!! How did this spread??? I know for a fact that until recently no-one spoke like this over here in Blighty. But now, and I really am not exaggerating, I can't have a conversation with anyone, save those already mentioned, without hearing the word 'like' being repeated virtually every other word, and I mean EVERY OTHER WORD. It is doing my nut in.
Thankfully my fellow compatriots don’t use it quite as much as the American’s I work with do, but we are catching up big style. I swear to god that I am starting to develop an allergic reaction to it or something, every time I hear it I start flinching and my eye keeps twitching – HELP ME (ok perhaps not - but I feel like it).
It’s funny because I’d always take the piss out of my American work colleagues when they would do it, but it was only a joke, it did not actually bother me because if it is the way they speak in the US then it is of no concern of mine. But now I have to hear all and sundae saying it, it is becoming just a tad bothersome. What happened to “I thought” or “I said” or “I went??”
Phew, serious apologies people but I had to get that off my chest.
I have asked this question before but never did get an answer “What is the story with this 'like' speak"???????
EVERYBODY is talking 'like' it and IT GETS ON MY BLEEDIN NERVES!!! I am starting to get a tad scared for my own sanity, please someone just talk to me like a normal human being!!! I do not know one person outside of my grandparents and dad that don’t use it, I mean; it has even got my mum doing it!!!! Every second of the day all I hear is 'I was like, then he was like then she was like and they were like and then we were like and then we were all like' – NOOOO PLEASE STOP IT !!!!!! What’s it all about?? Where did it come from???
I have family in Oz whom I speak to on a regular basis and yep you guessed it – they do it too. Arrgghhhhh - there is no escape!!!!!!! How did this spread??? I know for a fact that until recently no-one spoke like this over here in Blighty. But now, and I really am not exaggerating, I can't have a conversation with anyone, save those already mentioned, without hearing the word 'like' being repeated virtually every other word, and I mean EVERY OTHER WORD. It is doing my nut in.
Thankfully my fellow compatriots don’t use it quite as much as the American’s I work with do, but we are catching up big style. I swear to god that I am starting to develop an allergic reaction to it or something, every time I hear it I start flinching and my eye keeps twitching – HELP ME (ok perhaps not - but I feel like it).
It’s funny because I’d always take the piss out of my American work colleagues when they would do it, but it was only a joke, it did not actually bother me because if it is the way they speak in the US then it is of no concern of mine. But now I have to hear all and sundae saying it, it is becoming just a tad bothersome. What happened to “I thought” or “I said” or “I went??”
Phew, serious apologies people but I had to get that off my chest.
<< Kef, didn't you see Josh's post about not questioning native speakers' usage? It not allowed here. Please cease. >>
That's not very funny, M56.
<< It’s funny because I’d always take the piss out of my American work colleagues when they would do it, but it was only a joke, it did not actually bother me because if it is the way they speak in the US then it is of no concern of mine. >>
Oh, it annoys plenty of people here, too. I use the construction sometimes, but I usually don't go nuts with it.
- Kef
That's not very funny, M56.
<< It’s funny because I’d always take the piss out of my American work colleagues when they would do it, but it was only a joke, it did not actually bother me because if it is the way they speak in the US then it is of no concern of mine. >>
Oh, it annoys plenty of people here, too. I use the construction sometimes, but I usually don't go nuts with it.
- Kef
>>Is it possible to write in Valley Girl English?<<
It is not really possible to write in most English dialects, since there is no such tradition of creating new orthographies for them, unlike with various West Germanic and North Germanic dialects outside of English. Yes, you may see informal writing approximating them, but such is generally very loose, being essentially informal English orthography in many cases with some pronunciation spellings added, and glosses over much of the actual phonemic structure present in them.
It is not really possible to write in most English dialects, since there is no such tradition of creating new orthographies for them, unlike with various West Germanic and North Germanic dialects outside of English. Yes, you may see informal writing approximating them, but such is generally very loose, being essentially informal English orthography in many cases with some pronunciation spellings added, and glosses over much of the actual phonemic structure present in them.
PUB LUNCH:
I understand you perfectly well!!! It gets on my nerves, too, really. Even lots of non-native speakers are doing the "like" bit all the time. There was a Tailanese girl (at least she spoke American English with an American accent) here whose every second word was "like". I didn't know what she was going to say but I thought she would surely say "like". Other international students do it, too. I don't *like* it.
Some years ago I only heard this usage from Americans. Some Irish people used it but in a different way, for example: "He was angry, like.", so not in the "I was like, he was like, she was like - they are all alike because great minds think alike" way. :-)
I understand you perfectly well!!! It gets on my nerves, too, really. Even lots of non-native speakers are doing the "like" bit all the time. There was a Tailanese girl (at least she spoke American English with an American accent) here whose every second word was "like". I didn't know what she was going to say but I thought she would surely say "like". Other international students do it, too. I don't *like* it.
Some years ago I only heard this usage from Americans. Some Irish people used it but in a different way, for example: "He was angry, like.", so not in the "I was like, he was like, she was like - they are all alike because great minds think alike" way. :-)
I knew I could rely on you Liz - good girl!!
You are right, the Irish do use 'like' in the way that you describe but so do the Scots as well as the Northern English (not to sure about the Welsh). They all use the word "like" in exactly the manner you mentioned, sometimes I do as well, but this new “I'm like, there like" usage is driving me potty!!
It's not that I am a snob or anything and I'm not saying it is incorrect English, I mean, I can understand it's usage for certain instances. But when a word is constantly repeated the way this word is it starts to bug me. Also, in most instances the word is not even needed anyway!! Arrgghhh!!! My little sister is the worst, most of the time we talk now, I actually lose track of what she is saying and just start counting the number of 'likes' I hear (I'm only half joking - how sad but true) please stop little sister!!! I always tell her off for doing (actually, I also tell my other sister off, my big bruv and even my mum as well). I think I am going to have to let it go - it's a losing battle.
I really am the only person I know of that does not use it, but then that is only because I am conscious of it and have somehow resisted going over to the dark side.
The thing is I don't really notice this usage in American films or programmes very often so I am puzzled as to how this caught on the way it has.
<<Oh, it annoys plenty of people here, too. I use the construction sometimes, but I usually don't go nuts with it. >>
I bet it does matey!! And glad to hear it, although surprised that Americans would be aware of it as I thought it was normal usage over there - obviously not!!!
You are right, the Irish do use 'like' in the way that you describe but so do the Scots as well as the Northern English (not to sure about the Welsh). They all use the word "like" in exactly the manner you mentioned, sometimes I do as well, but this new “I'm like, there like" usage is driving me potty!!
It's not that I am a snob or anything and I'm not saying it is incorrect English, I mean, I can understand it's usage for certain instances. But when a word is constantly repeated the way this word is it starts to bug me. Also, in most instances the word is not even needed anyway!! Arrgghhh!!! My little sister is the worst, most of the time we talk now, I actually lose track of what she is saying and just start counting the number of 'likes' I hear (I'm only half joking - how sad but true) please stop little sister!!! I always tell her off for doing (actually, I also tell my other sister off, my big bruv and even my mum as well). I think I am going to have to let it go - it's a losing battle.
I really am the only person I know of that does not use it, but then that is only because I am conscious of it and have somehow resisted going over to the dark side.
The thing is I don't really notice this usage in American films or programmes very often so I am puzzled as to how this caught on the way it has.
<<Oh, it annoys plenty of people here, too. I use the construction sometimes, but I usually don't go nuts with it. >>
I bet it does matey!! And glad to hear it, although surprised that Americans would be aware of it as I thought it was normal usage over there - obviously not!!!
I hope you never meet me Pub Lunch. I am a Valley Girl. However, I must say on my own behalf that I am not half as bad about it as most people I know. Also, whoever said the thing about "hella" being Northern California, you were right. I moved North 5 years ago and that was the first time I ever heard it.
"Since this is an English forum, I feel compelled to point out that putting punctuation inside parentheses in that manner is one of my major pet peeves. A clause that begins outside parentheses also ends outside it, so the comma and period both belong on the outside (like this). But if you have a sentence completely within parentheses, then the period belongs inside. (Like this.)"
I stand corrected. I was under the possibly mistaken impression that I was taught in school that punctuation marks always go inside the parentheses, as with quotation marks. But after some research, I have come to the conclusion that the rule applies only with quotation marks--and even then only in the U.S.
In e-mails and memos at work I have always put the punctuation wherever it seems logical--for both parentheses and quotation marks. For more formal usage, however, I have up until now followed the rule to always place them inside. I have been doing this for years.
If I was taught that in school, I see that it was wrong, as is the rule to never split infinitives, which I was definitely taught.
I stand corrected. I was under the possibly mistaken impression that I was taught in school that punctuation marks always go inside the parentheses, as with quotation marks. But after some research, I have come to the conclusion that the rule applies only with quotation marks--and even then only in the U.S.
In e-mails and memos at work I have always put the punctuation wherever it seems logical--for both parentheses and quotation marks. For more formal usage, however, I have up until now followed the rule to always place them inside. I have been doing this for years.
If I was taught that in school, I see that it was wrong, as is the rule to never split infinitives, which I was definitely taught.
Which is correct?
the preferred variant of English
the preferred variation of English
the preferred variant of English
the preferred variation of English
>>I stand corrected. I was under the possibly mistaken impression that I was taught in school that punctuation marks always go inside the parentheses, as with quotation marks. But after some research, I have come to the conclusion that the rule applies only with quotation marks--and even then only in the U.S.
In e-mails and memos at work I have always put the punctuation wherever it seems logical--for both parentheses and quotation marks. For more formal usage, however, I have up until now followed the rule to always place them inside. I have been doing this for years.<<
I myself have actually adopted British-like conventions for such, only placing punctuation within quotation marks or parentheses if it is actually part of that contained within such in the first place. Such conventions are common in computing-related contexts, as such conventions allow exact quoting of text. Being able to exactly quote text is important as very often a period or comma at the end of some given text is actually rather significant in practice in such contexts.
>>If I was taught that in school, I see that it was wrong, as is the rule to never split infinitives, which I was definitely taught.<<
What you were taught is yet another prescriptivist lie about English grammar that is unfortunately very frequently taught in schools. Being able to split infinitive has been part of English grammar in general since Middle English, and the "rule" that one cannot do so was something that was artificially introduced by grammarians in the 19th century.
However, it should be noted that it is actually disputed whether such deprecation was really in emulation of Latin grammar, as commonly stated. It is likely that such was actually due to split infinitives being far more common in everyday speech than in formal language at the time combined with grammarians' trying to promote formal language.
In e-mails and memos at work I have always put the punctuation wherever it seems logical--for both parentheses and quotation marks. For more formal usage, however, I have up until now followed the rule to always place them inside. I have been doing this for years.<<
I myself have actually adopted British-like conventions for such, only placing punctuation within quotation marks or parentheses if it is actually part of that contained within such in the first place. Such conventions are common in computing-related contexts, as such conventions allow exact quoting of text. Being able to exactly quote text is important as very often a period or comma at the end of some given text is actually rather significant in practice in such contexts.
>>If I was taught that in school, I see that it was wrong, as is the rule to never split infinitives, which I was definitely taught.<<
What you were taught is yet another prescriptivist lie about English grammar that is unfortunately very frequently taught in schools. Being able to split infinitive has been part of English grammar in general since Middle English, and the "rule" that one cannot do so was something that was artificially introduced by grammarians in the 19th century.
However, it should be noted that it is actually disputed whether such deprecation was really in emulation of Latin grammar, as commonly stated. It is likely that such was actually due to split infinitives being far more common in everyday speech than in formal language at the time combined with grammarians' trying to promote formal language.