I believe the entire concept of keeping infinitives un-split has been thrown out the window in America... Whenever I see it the prescriptivist in me cries out... In Linguistics classes I was told not to be a prescriptivist (or, rather, I was told TO NOT BE a prescriptivist) but it really does irritate me when I see it in print...
Valley Girl talk: the preferred variation of English
Perhaps in the future when there start to be a lot of humanoid robots around people will be taught that in order to speak correctly you have imitate those robots.
<<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.>>
Well it's true that in Latin infinitives were actually impossible to split being built in to the verb. One should note however, that Latin didn't have articles. English has a useful distinction with it's use of articles i.e. "the" and "a/an" that was nonexistent in Latin. Would grammarians saying English grammar should be similar to Latin grammar suggest getting rid of the articles that English has? I don't think so.
Well it's true that in Latin infinitives were actually impossible to split being built in to the verb. One should note however, that Latin didn't have articles. English has a useful distinction with it's use of articles i.e. "the" and "a/an" that was nonexistent in Latin. Would grammarians saying English grammar should be similar to Latin grammar suggest getting rid of the articles that English has? I don't think so.
Skippy:
<Whenever I see it the prescriptivist in me cries out...>
Even to the limit of writing illogical and/or awkward sounding texts?
Here, splitting is used to define the difference in meaning between the first and the second example.
Steve decided to quickly remove Amy's cats.
Steve decided quickly to remove Amy's cats.
<Whenever I see it the prescriptivist in me cries out...>
Even to the limit of writing illogical and/or awkward sounding texts?
Here, splitting is used to define the difference in meaning between the first and the second example.
Steve decided to quickly remove Amy's cats.
Steve decided quickly to remove Amy's cats.
"I plan to really enjoy to the party"
"I plan really to enjoy the party"
"to be or to not be"
"to be or not to be"
"It's wrong to ever do that"
"It's wrong ever to do that"
Which sounds better in each case?
"I plan really to enjoy the party"
"to be or to not be"
"to be or not to be"
"It's wrong to ever do that"
"It's wrong ever to do that"
Which sounds better in each case?
I may say that out loud, but if I would never write that in an essay or anything like that...
<< Here, splitting is used to define the difference in meaning between the first and the second example.
Steve decided to quickly remove Amy's cats.
Steve decided quickly to remove Amy's cats. >>
A third alternative has the same meaning as the first: "Steve decided to remove Amy's cats quickly."
However, I believe that the most famous split infinitive should remain split: "to boldly go where no one has gone before."
I don't see any problem with splitting infinitives, but that's a topic for another thread, really...
- Kef
Steve decided to quickly remove Amy's cats.
Steve decided quickly to remove Amy's cats. >>
A third alternative has the same meaning as the first: "Steve decided to remove Amy's cats quickly."
However, I believe that the most famous split infinitive should remain split: "to boldly go where no one has gone before."
I don't see any problem with splitting infinitives, but that's a topic for another thread, really...
- Kef
The use of the word "like" overmuch, is from Beatniks. Try Maynard G Krebs - from the Dobie Gillis show as an example of Beatnik. Sorry, I'm not inta lookin up URLS for ya. (NJ talk).
Valley Girls TRY to be airheads and sound like airheads.
Like wow, man, totally bitchin. Awesome wicked. It's like, they totally have like PSI between their ears. LMAO. They're so intellectual, NOT.
Ugh, lemme get outa heeya - I'm makin myself sick. G'head, tell me ta leave (NJ accent).
Valley Girls TRY to be airheads and sound like airheads.
Like wow, man, totally bitchin. Awesome wicked. It's like, they totally have like PSI between their ears. LMAO. They're so intellectual, NOT.
Ugh, lemme get outa heeya - I'm makin myself sick. G'head, tell me ta leave (NJ accent).
<<I don't know. What about the usage of the word "gross" meaning "disgusting"? From what I understand, that originated in Valley Girl talk. (Before, it had only meant "large" or "12 dozens).>>
Beneficii, "gross" didn't originate with the Valley Girls, who became prominent in the 80s.
it started in the early 70s through the hippies; I'm a child of the 70s, so I used it all the time, long before the Valley Girls.
For what it's worth, Valley Girl talk is a lower form of Southern Californian English, and should not be aspired at as a dialect goal, in my opinion.
Beneficii, "gross" didn't originate with the Valley Girls, who became prominent in the 80s.
it started in the early 70s through the hippies; I'm a child of the 70s, so I used it all the time, long before the Valley Girls.
For what it's worth, Valley Girl talk is a lower form of Southern Californian English, and should not be aspired at as a dialect goal, in my opinion.
Southern Californian speech, in general, could be a nice goal to aspire to, however. The advent of CVS has made the dialect more pleasant to listen to than most American dialects, because the vowel-lowering sounds pleasant. You need to find a speaker younger than 30, though; CVS is relatively new.
This is my own personal opinion.
This is my own personal opinion.
I find the conservative Californian accent (/A/ in cot, caught, don, dawn, all, fall, call, doll; no U fronting, but only shifting-fronting of A in mass, draft, cat...) more pleasant...
if you listen to Gwen Stefani and other Cali singers, you can see they don't use VG accent at all..VGaccent is somewhat stigmatized in California, it is considered a low middle class accent with no prestige, adored by young girls...the same girls go back to the conservative Cali accent when they are in their late 20ies... So, VG is more of a sociolect than a dialect...
if you listen to Gwen Stefani and other Cali singers, you can see they don't use VG accent at all..VGaccent is somewhat stigmatized in California, it is considered a low middle class accent with no prestige, adored by young girls...the same girls go back to the conservative Cali accent when they are in their late 20ies... So, VG is more of a sociolect than a dialect...
I noticed that both the examples posted were comedy skits. Just thought I'd toss this out as an example of a real valley girl speaker.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9NF-NWsT7xk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9NF-NWsT7xk
<<VGaccent is somewhat stigmatized in California, it is considered a low middle class accent with no prestige, adored by young girls.>>
Umm, yes, VG is stigmatized, but that's because it's associated with airheaded-ness and immaturity, not because it's low middle class, which it's not. VG was the sociolect of spoiled white girls from the affluent communities of Encino, Sherman Oaks, Tarzana, Woodland Hills, West Hills, Northridge, etc.
Today's San Fernando Valley, where the accent originated, has become predominantly low to middle class Hispanic, so you're more likely to hear Latino-inflected English there these days.
Umm, yes, VG is stigmatized, but that's because it's associated with airheaded-ness and immaturity, not because it's low middle class, which it's not. VG was the sociolect of spoiled white girls from the affluent communities of Encino, Sherman Oaks, Tarzana, Woodland Hills, West Hills, Northridge, etc.
Today's San Fernando Valley, where the accent originated, has become predominantly low to middle class Hispanic, so you're more likely to hear Latino-inflected English there these days.
>>Umm, yes, VG is stigmatized, but that's because it's associated with airheaded-ness and immaturity, not because it's low middle class, which it's not. VG was the sociolect of spoiled white girls from the affluent communities of Encino, Sherman Oaks, Tarzana, Woodland Hills, West Hills, Northridge, etc.<<
I agree - the stigmatization of VG around here, for instance, has nothing to do with class at all, but rather purely has to do with similar associations of shallowness and a lack of any kind of real sophistication as well as immaturity. Similarly, it is not thought of as lower or lower middle class at all but rather is probably more associated with the upper middle class or even upper class here.
I agree - the stigmatization of VG around here, for instance, has nothing to do with class at all, but rather purely has to do with similar associations of shallowness and a lack of any kind of real sophistication as well as immaturity. Similarly, it is not thought of as lower or lower middle class at all but rather is probably more associated with the upper middle class or even upper class here.