Talk:New York City English

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Sibyllwang.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 05:13, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lexicon[edit]

I don't know why you think "stoop" is a New York only word. It has certainly been in use in Kansas City ever since i was a child. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.136.147.139 (talk) 14:12, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For a variety of reasons:
  • Some visitors/transplants from outside the region claim never to have heard it before,
  • It's widely believed to have originated from the Dutch word for "step", consistent with the city's founders, and
  • it was used in the area only for a long time before spreading out to the rest of the country. Daniel Case (talk) 15:42, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've literally never heard the word skel used in New York City. However, I've frequently heard e.g. bodega, schmuck, bubkes, on line, etc. Is this term restricted to a particular cultural group? --Alex Hajnal (talk) 11:56, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Circular reference[edit]

"such as the low back chain shift and the short-A split (see below)" and later below "Labov has pointed out that the short-A split is found in southern England as mentioned above."... I keep seeing "above" and "below" back and forth over and over for hours on end. and don't know what this is talking about. 207.239.94.2 (talk) 19:14, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

why not fix it?mnewmanqc (talk) 02:23, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good article[edit]

Very informative. Nguyễn Quốc Việt (talk) 04:12, 31 December 2014 (UTC) Informative, indeed. I added Eddie Murphy but the edit's new URL link hasn't gone live yet. Why? Can someone help me fix this? I'm a Wikipedia novice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nicashmc (talk • contribs) 01:56, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pronunciation of horrible and forest[edit]

I am from Central Jersey. I myself pronounce the o in horrible and forest like the o in port, and I hear others pronounce the o in the two words similarly. However, people with heavy New York accents will pronounce the letter like a in part. And there are New Jerseyans who will pronounce the o this way. So, I feel how horrible tends to be pronounced in New Jersey should be noted. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.53.226.245 (talk) 22:01, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This was prior to the expansion of the New Jersey talk page. Therefore, there would no longer be a need to address how the vowel is pronounced in New Jersey on this page. Over and out. (My IP address changed for whatever reason. This is the same person speaking.)74.102.216.186 (talk) 00:18, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

One need not have a "heavy" New York accent to pronounce the o in words like horrible and forest like the a in part. (I would consider my own New York accent to be quite light (I am largely rhotic, for example) and I do pronounce such o's in this manner. This pronunciation is by no means unique to New York. (For example, announcer Peter Thomas of Forensic Files fame, a Florida native, also had it.) Kostaki mou (talk) 17:32, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Fronted aʊ[edit]

I am only confused because it would seem, based on transcription, that the nucleus of the diphthong aʊ is the vowel a, which is a front vowel already. Note that I myself pronounce this as a front vowel. So, I humbly ask that someone explain how this diphthong is pronounced in other areas of the country. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.53.226.245 (talk) 15:57, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The symbol [a] technically represents a front vowel in the IPA, but (1) it's not very front, compared to other front vowels; and (2) since IPA doesn't have a symbol to represent a low central vowel, [a] is often used for that purpose too. So in area of the country where /aʊ/ isn't fronted, its nucleus is a low central [a]; in New York and other regions where /aʊ/ is fronted, it's a low front-ish [a], or something even further front such as [æ]. AJD (talk) 18:50, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, sir/ma'am. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.102.218.18 (talk) 23:54, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In NYCE it's typically fronted [æʊ]. I'll have to fix that too with the citations. mnewmanqc (talk) 01:59, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Backed aɪ[edit]

Currently, the article says that the New York accent features a backed aɪ. However, when I hear a backed /aɪ/, I think specifically of a Staten Island accent, not a generic New York accent. So, in the other boros of New York, is the backed /aɪ/ still used as the local accent? If anyone can clear me up, that would be helpful. Thank you.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.102.218.18 (talk) 03:10, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There's no know variation in phonology around the different boroughs despite the widespread belief that there's a Brooklyn accent, Queens accent, SI accent etc. No one has ever demonstrated what any differences might consist of or even that it's possible to detect which borough someone's from. That said, the notion of backed /aɪ/, presumably [ɑɪ], is an oversimplification, which I will fix and with proper citations. The way it works is that [aɪ] appears before voiceless obstruents and [ɑɪ] appears elsewhere. It's similar to Canadian raising. Thus high is [hɑɪ] but height is [haɪt]. Give me a day or two to fix that. Labov actually has that wrong. mnewmanqc (talk) 01:57, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, sir/ma'am, I really need somebody from New York, who knows the accent well enough to make that call. I do see your good intentions of answering my question. However, the real problem is that the variation between the boroughs is not a sociolinguistic one, but an analytic one. For an example, I have some relatives from Staten Island who almost always pronounce aɪ as ɑɪ. However, Bugs Bunny, who is supposed to be from Brooklyn, hardly ever pronounces aɪ as ɑɪ. All said, this is not a bust on you at all. And I do thank you, sir/ma'am, nonetheless for your participation in this discussion. 74.102.216.186 (talk) 01:56, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I take that back. Now knowing you do research, you might be the go-to man, sir.74.102.216.186 (talk) 01:39, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Mnewmanqc: By accident, I found the source you were looking for. [1] pg. 389.LakeKayak (talk) 22:13, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
right. The issue with PRICE backing is that Labov got it wrong. As pointed out by phonologist Jonathan Kaye cited in my book, there is no backing when the diphthong is followed by a voiceless obstruent. This is related to what's called Canadian Raising. mnewmanqc (talk) 02:49, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Mnewmanqc: I actually only posted the link because I was under the impression you were still looking for a source to fix the citations.LakeKayak (talk) 03:28, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

thanks. It's useful to have the link mnewmanqc (talk) 02:41, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Father-bother merger[edit]

Currently, on this page, it reads that the vowels in father and bother are particularly merged. However, on "Phonological history of English low back vowels," it says that the father-bother merger did not reach New York English. How we tend to speak around here, the two vowels are not merged. Father is pronounced as [fɒðɝ], and bother is pronounced as [bäðɝ]. It is very unlikely that the two were once merged in New York English only to be split up back into their original classes, especially when the rest of the country tends to merge these two vowels. Therefore, it is safe to say that the merger never occurred in New York English in the first. Therefore, I am going to change that line. I can neither support nor refute the idea of a diphthong [ɑə] or [ɒə] occurring before certain consonants. As I live in Central Jersey, there are some features of this dialect that I don't have. So although I don't have such feature, it still may occur in some speakers who reside within the city itself. Over and out.74.102.216.186 (talk) 02:18, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As you live in Central Jersey, how you speak "around here" isn't directly relevant for an article on New York City, and moreover personal experience is not taken as more compelling than scholarly literature in Wikipedia. However, I agree with you that it's troubling that some articles say NYC English is father-bother–merged and some say it's not. The heading "father-bother variability" is probably most accurate—some people are merged but a few maintain some distinction—but the paragraph following it doesn't really support that. I'll page Mnewmanqc on this, since I know he's done research on this merger in New York. AJD (talk) 03:10, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
AJD is right. There is an ongoing merger and lots of variability. The ANAE has it as unmerged, although with some discussion of variability. I also found variability in my small sample. However, most recent (post 1990) research just assumed that the vowels were merged despite the fact that prior literature mentions three back vowels: LOT, PALM, and THOUGHT. I'll look at the main article and fix it there with appropriate citations. Thanks for bringing this up. mnewmanqc (talk) 17:36, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Back vowel chain shift[edit]

This bullet point seemed inaccurate and even slapped on. It seemed that way the chain shift was not described on any other page. So, I have removed this bullet point. For my only comment, the vowel in cart is not pronounced like the vowel in caught. What is pronounced like the vowel in caught is the vowel in court. Over and out.74.102.216.186 (talk) 02:38, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just because something isn't mentioned on other pages doesn't mean it's inaccurate here, especially when it's supported with references to scholarly literature. Also, it doesn't say that cart in NYC is pronounced the same as caught in NYC; it says thaty cart in NYC is the same as caught in Boston, which is true. AJD (talk) 03:06, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have a doubt that such a feature exists in New York, and at times there are errors in scholarly literature. However, Mnewmanqc usually can say when errors occur in scholarly literature in New York English. Therefore, I think I best ask him, just so that I personally know. However, either way, it seems best that I leave that section of the article alone. And I thank you, sir, for you participation in this discussion. 74.102.216.186 (talk) 01:58, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, it seems I lost the debate. I found evidence supporting the Back Vowel Chain Shift[1]. However, if this is a genuine characteristic, shouldn't it have its own page or at least a section on a page with other mergers? Over and out.74.102.216.186 (talk) 03:27, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have three things more to say.

  1. It seems like this shift only occurs in the city. As far as I can recall, I myself have never really heard born pronounced [bʊən]. I typically hear born pronounced as [bɔɹn].
  2. I finally can explain why I was confused when I read in the article that cart in New York sounds similar to General American caught. Unfortunately, living in Central Jersey, there are a few New York features that I don't have, and that people around tend not to have. I pronounce the vowel in caught as traditional [ɔ]. Simply, I completely forgot that it is shifted to [oə] or [ɔə] in New York.
  3. The name "Back Vowel Chain Shift in Transition" probably seems a little better. Already mentioned in the section, the chain shift is in transition. Therefore, there would be nothing wrong with that name per se. However, that is only my opinion. I am going to make this change. However, if anyone so wishes to undo this edit, I do respect that you reserve the right to do so. Over and out.74.102.216.186 (talk) 04:01, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

While making the edit, I realized that the name of the section was "Back vowel chain shift before r." The new name of the section is "Back vowel chain shift before r in transition." Also, I added "shore" and "sure" as example for the two vowel classes, for a small reason. Not everybody will know the difference between the vowel in bore and boor or Tory and tour. In my experience, I never even heard of a difference before. However, typically even if you don't make the distinction yourself between shore and sure, you probably will know what the distinction would be. Growing up, I would have debates with my mother on how the word sure was pronounced. Over and out.74.102.216.186 (talk) 04:15, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ https://books.google.com/books?id=Gfd2z3fHdHIC&pg=PA180&lpg=PA180&dq=back+vowel+chain+shift+before+r&source=bl&ots=nNBqmHxXKE&sig=nKTN8cFxL5Tf5bBSW2T7Z5ZGm4I&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwixlNrgusrQAhXEbSYKHaoBAdUQ6AEIMzAE#v=onepage&q=back%20vowel%20chain%20shift%20before%20r&f=false

Rhoticity in New York[edit]

Alright, I have a slight problem with one line: "Items with /ɔɪ/ may occur with an r-colored vowel (e.g., /ˈtʰɝlət/ toilet), apparently as a result of hypercorrection. Younger New Yorkers (born since about 1950) are likely to use a rhotic [əɹ~ɜɹ] (like in General American) for the diaphoneme /ɜːr/ (as in bird), even if they use non-rhotic pronunciations of beard, bared, bard, board, boor, and butter."

  • First, could somebody actually tell me beyond the shadow of a doubt that hypercorrection of /ɔɪ/ actually occurs in New York? It doesn't sound like New York at all.
  • Secondly, could somebody actually tell me beyond the shadow of a doubt that bird is really pronounced as [bəɹd~bɜɹd] in New York?

I have my doubts. I may have come to accept that linking and intrusive r exists in New York, but I cannot wrap my head around hypercorrection of /ɔɪ/ or the lacking of r dropping in bird. I am begging for someone to respond. Thank you. 74.102.216.186 (talk) 00:49, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have figured out what my issue was. I was able to access one of Labov's books through Google Books. Labov said, "This record of the repaid extinction of the major NYC stereotype is certainly accurate as far as it goes: r-less /əy/[See note] has disappeared. Yet close listening to New Yorkers over the years has convinced me that it lingers on in a modified form. Many New Yorkers today can be heard to use a palatalized form of a well contracted, mid-central [r] in first and work".[1]

Note: Labov transcribed the sound in a few different ways all referring to the same sound [ɜɪ].

So, that is where my doubt came from. I have been hearing a New York accent long enough to pick up some alteration to words "bird" and "first," but I misidentify the alteration. So, I am going to add the above quote in. As my full understanding of the quote is vague, I am in no position to explain on the article myself. Anybody else is free to do that.74.102.216.186 (talk) 01:53, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I found cases of the non-rhotic NURSE vowel (to use Wells's key word designation) in one young woman from Howard Beach; so it's not extinct. I found none of the supposed hypercorrection of /ɔɪ/ (i.e., toilet to terlet).However, I think it may appear in Carrol Conner's rendition of Archie Bunker. Of course, that's performance speech. I've heard anecdotal reports of it too. Labov believes, however, it's a myth (I can't remember where he said that). As for his rhotic palatalization, I'm not sure what he means by that frankly. I discuss this in my book New York City English.

I do wish to thank you personally, sir. I myself have had doubts on the extinction of the non-rhotic NURSE vowel and the hypercorrection of [ɔɪ]. However, I stood alone for sometime with no "scholarly literature" to support my side. Now, I might be able to clarify what could have been meant by rhotic palatalization, but it may or may not occur in New York. Under the palatalization page, it says palatalization of a vowel result in a front vowel. So possibly he meant that [ɜɪ] was fronted to maybe [ɛɪ]. However, the chances that I am misunderstanding him are high. And it is possible that this is not how the sound is pronounced in New York. But, nonetheless, I do thank you, sir, for your response when I needed it the most.74.102.216.186 (talk) 04:29, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So I thiiink what Labov means by rhotic palatalization is in effect a NURSE vowel with a lower F1 than in other dialects. AJD (talk) 04:55, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I will admit, sir. It took me some time to figure out what F1 was. The page "Vowel" described it to mean the first formant, or the inverse of height. So, I really had problems figuring out what a formant was. But anyway, according to "Vowel," a lower F1 results in a higher vowel. So, to clarify my understanding, you're saying that Labov probably means by rhotic palatalization that the /ɝ/ class is slightly raised compared to other dialects.74.102.216.186 (talk) 02:34, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to AJD, I think I have a clear understand of what is meant by rhotic palatalization. Thank you, sir.

So, therefore, I am considering adding an explanation to the article of what is meant by rhotic palatalization. Would anybody care whatsoever if I did so? If so, you may speak now. Thank you.74.102.216.186 (talk) 22:47, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As it seems nobody has an opinion, I am going to add in the explanation. Thank you. (f.k.a 74.102.216.186) LakeKayak (talk) 01:51, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ https://books.google.com/books?id=bJdKY0mZWzwC&printsec=frontcover&dq=the+social+stratification+of+English+in+new+york+city&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjq35mz1L3QAhUmIsAKHY6pDaUQ6AEIKzAA#v=onepage&q&f=true

Request for removal: hypercorrection of /ɔɪ/ to [ɝ][edit]

Currently, the article says that, "Items with /ɔɪ/ may occur with an r-colored vowel (e.g., /ˈtʰɝlət/ toilet), apparently as a result of hypercorrection," sourced by Matthew Gordon. However, if we are going to make such a claim, I would rather have certainty. And there seems to be a debate on whether or not such does occur. I know user mnewmanqc has done some research on the coil–curl merger and the loss of it. However, he says he could not find any case of hypercorrection of the /ɔɪ/ class to [ɝ]. Therefore, would anybody object to removing the line? If so, I just wish to hear your side. Thank you.LakeKayak (talk) 04:15, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

These are good points. It seems best to me to leave the claim and add the lack of certainty about it with sources in Gordon and then Newman (2014). That would provide the best overall coverage. mnewmanqc (talk) 10:47, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Mnewmanqc: As I don't have access to either source, I would not be able to do that myself. Do you, sir, have access to either source? If so, perhaps you could do the job.LakeKayak (talk) 18:54, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I actually did know a woman who said, "terlet." Also, in one of her films, Mae West said, "You've got a pernt there." Kostaki mou (talk) 00:46, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Kostaki mou: The Mae West example would probably consider performance speech, and it may have been used only for effect. However, as for the analysis of your first example, used in real life, I can say that means, the hypercorrection probably does happen, but it is rather rare. Anyway, I thank you for your participation in this discussion.LakeKayak (talk) 21:40, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Only two of his 51 speakers under age 20 used the form as compared with those over age 50 of whom 23 out of 30 used the r-ful form."[edit]

Was "r-ful" meant to be "r-less?" I am asking because I have no clue.LakeKayak (talk) 16:23, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reading the source, it looks like "r-ful" was meant to be "r-less." I am going to fix it.LakeKayak (talk) 20:21, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Back Vowel Chain Shift(2)[edit]

I made one change to this section. Although I did leave an edit summary, I may have to show how I "connected the dots," per se. Therefore, I have created this section of the talk page to explain myself in the event that I have confused anyone. To start, Mnewmanqc has done a little research on this. From what he found, the vowel in cart in New York English has an F1 value of approximately 700 Hertz. However, according to the formant page, the vowel in caught in General American, represented as [ɔː] typically has an F1 value of approximately 500 Hertz. Therefore, I have removed the following line from the article:

The result of the shift is that cart in New York sounds similar to cot/caught in Boston or caught in General American, with its round-lipped vowel.

If anybody objects, I wish to hear your side. Thank you.LakeKayak (talk) 00:09, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@LakeKayak: Where are you getting this specific data? Wolfdog (talk) 14:06, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.academia.edu/17279625/LOTs_of_THOUGHTs_about_the_endangered_PALMs_of_New_York page 3.LakeKayak (talk) 14:17, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Questions on "Variability based on social register"[edit]

Currently, there is a bullet labelled "Variability based on social register," formatted as a second level bullet under the bullet labelled "Cot-caught distinction." It sounds like we're saying that the cot–caught merger has some variability based off social structure, which I don't believe to be accurate. If this is a mistake, then we easily change the level of the bullet. However, before I make any such edit, I want to make sure that it was not intentional first. LakeKayak (talk) 02:07, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Frank Sinatra[edit]

Wasn't he from New Jersey? Shouldn't he be listed as notable speaker from New Jersey?LakeKayak (talk) 01:10, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yep... seems like it. Wolfdog (talk) 01:43, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done.LakeKayak (talk) 19:07, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't Sinatra grow up in Hoboken, which is in the NYCE dialect region. That he's from a different state is irrelevant. No one can tell the difference between those east of the Hackensack River and any other part of the dialect region. This is documented in Labov, Ash, and Boberg (2006). mnewmanqc (talk) 04:13, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Mnewmanqc: I don't know. I'll have to look that one up.LakeKayak (talk) 12:54, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Although it turns out he did grow up in Hoboken, I have no confirmation either way about how he spoke. And I don't know which one is the case. I think it may be easiest to leave in the New Jersey section until we have confirmation.LakeKayak (talk) 13:07, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
If it makes you feel better, just listening to Sinatra speaks makes it abundantly obvious that he speaks NYCE. Listen: [2]. Wolfdog (talk) 15:22, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. This will do. Thank you.LakeKayak (talk) 15:28, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
good. Agreed. He can stay in NJ too. NJ is not a dialect region but forms part of various ones. mnewmanqc (talk) 23:51, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Initial l[edit]

According to Wells, the initial l in New York is typically unvelarized. This page fails to address the topic at all, neither supporting or refuting this claim. It would be feasible to add a bullet addressing the topic under the bullet for "L-vocalization." I am left to use Wells as source because Labov never mentions the topic, either. (His focus was rhoticity and the evolution of vowels in the different dialects of American English.) Over and out.LakeKayak (talk) 13:45, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure how important a distinction it is, but if Wells says it, then you can cite it. By the way, what do you mean with your addition "(See further below.)"? Wolfdog (talk) 21:06, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Wolfdog:The next bullet describes the feature of laminal consonants, including /l/, being articulated with the blade of the tongue. "See further below" was an attempt to avoid redundancy. If you can fix it, please do.LakeKayak (talk) 00:32, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Formatting table[edit]

Can anybody help me out with the table for the vowels of New York City English? I want to merge the two /ɒ/ cells in the first column. However, I seem to have problems doing it.LakeKayak (talk) 20:37, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"On line"[edit]

@Ajd: The Atlantic article may be supporting evidence. However, my question is whether or not "on line" is confined to New York. Currently, this page makes it seems like it is. If I mistook the article, just tell me. Thank you.LakeKayak (talk) 00:33, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The page doesn't make it seem like on line is confined to New York in the strict sense. It says that "most other" American dialects don't use on line, which is certainly true (and is supported by the Atlantic article). And it's definitely a distinctive feature of NYC English. Other NYC features aren't "confined to" New York either. AJD (talk) 04:17, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Ajd: I think it would be clearer if we said, "New Yorkers 'tend to' stand "on line," whereas most other American-English speakers 'tend to' stand "in line." Otherwise, when I read it, I feel that we are speaking in absolute. Either way, before I make such an edit, I wish for your approval. Thank you.LakeKayak (talk) 16:43, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I mean, that's fine, although the exact same thing could be said about literally every other dialect feature mentioned in the article. AJD (talk) 03:46, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Thanks for your response.LakeKayak (talk) 20:08, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Recent developments[edit]

I think the section may need to be revised. And I think I agree with Labov more on the stability of the New York accent. From my experience, the New York accent is relatively stable. I have relatives from Staten Island who have heavy New York accents.LakeKayak (talk) 21:56, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mary-marry merger in Northern New Jersey[edit]

I initially was going to say this on the talk page English-language vowel changes before historic /r/, but it didn't seem to be the most appropriate spot for it. I don't know if here is any more appropriate.

I believe I hear "Mary" and "marry" variably merged from where I live in Central Jersey within the New York dialect area. While the ANAE never addresses the issue, one issue that the ANAE never addresses, I found in another source "Transmission and Diffusion" also written by Labov. Therefore, I am left to wonder if Labov, or anybody for that matter, ever discussed this feature. Does anybody know for sure? Thank you.LakeKayak (talk) 01:58, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The ANAE seems to have quite a bit of information on New Jersey in terms of Mary, marry, and merry. The ANAE shows a three-way distinction throughout the entire state, except in two cities -- (one I can't identify precisely in north-central or north-western NJ and the other being Vineland) -- which both show a Mary-merry (but not marry) merger. (Ironically, it doesn't at all mention the idea of a Mary-marry [but not merry] merger, which I personally have.) Wolfdog (talk) 21:43, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I also have a Mary-marry [but not merry] merger. I was under the impression Labov et al. simply never addressed the issue. I was basing this off an experience I encountered while researching the New York /æ/ split system. Labov et al. report that all function words are lax. However, in "Transmission and Diffusion", Labov says that in between the Passaic the Haskensack Rivers in Northern New Jersey, this constraint is pretty much absent altogether. Meanwhile, he does state that this constraint still holds for New York City proper and in New Jersey east of the Haskensack River. It remains clear why Labov et al. never mentioned this issue in the ANAE. The ANAE was intended to each dialect as a whole rather than how a dialect can vary. Therefore, I was under the impression that this was the case for the Mary-marry merger.LakeKayak (talk) 22:22, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I forgot one thing. As the Mary–marry–merry three way distinction is found in New York City proper, I at least can see how it may not have been appropriate for Labov et al to mention the variability in a subset of the dialect in Northeastern New Jersey.LakeKayak (talk) 23:08, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

How best we split the page?[edit]

I think that as the byteage of the article is at around 100 kilobytes, according to WP:SIZESPLIT, the page should be split. But the question is how.LakeKayak (talk) 17:03, 13 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

LakeKayak: This is a very strange question coming from you, since it appears that you moved the entire New York Latino English page to New York City English. There was a very large amount of information on that page. Why move it then? I hope you don't mind me moving it back. We can discuss as needed, but obviously that is the first major way to move some information out of the NYCE page. Wolfdog (talk) 21:29, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Now, for other ways to answer your question, it seems that the "Phonology" section is the largest and so could be split off into its own new page. Initially, I would think this would be called something like "New York City English phonology" (much like Australian English phonology, South African English phonology, etc.). However, my next thought is that by WP:COMMONNAME this would probably be quickly moved to the name "New York accent", since "accent" is enormously much more reader-friendly term for "phonology". New York City English could remain the page for the larger dialect of which the accent is a subset. Thoughts? Wolfdog (talk) 21:53, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Wolfdog: Well, I kind of do mind about New York Latino English. (I'll use NYLE for short.) The article had rather unusual information and seemed to be written as someone's personal opinion of the topic. From reading the article, it seemed to be a very specific ethnolect of New York City English. Now, as this article is rather large, NYLE will not necessarily have to be on this page. But I fail to see the argument of why it merits its own page.
But I do think the idea of a separate page for New York City accent is a good one.LakeKayak (talk) 02:00, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 16 external links on New York City English. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:41, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Manning vs. manning[edit]

You say ' "Manning" and "manning" might not be the best example. This may imply that the two form a minimal pair. However, according to Labov et al., at least in perception, the use of one pronunciation will not change the meaning of the word.' Can you show me where Labov says that? I'd like to look further into that topic. Thanks. Wolfdog (talk) 16:29, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In chapter 17 of the ANAE, Labov et al. say "The correction of [se:əd] to [sæ:d] is heard as as form of the same word, while the correction of [soəd] to [sɑd] is heard as a different word."LakeKayak (talk) 21:16, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Conversational Style[edit]

This is caused by the LakeKayak's elimination of the section called Conversational Style and Bellagio99's reversal and invitation for comment. The question is really whether they conversational styles associated with a particular regional variety belong in an article on that variety (or complex of varieties). I'd say yes for two reasons. First, where else would the topic go? Second, it is a feature of a regional pattern that has been researched and commented on in the public sphere. More anecdotally, when I got the template for the Dialects of English series of books, they had a section on Conversational Style and it appears in the book [York City English. So I say it belongs. mnewmanqc (talk) 08:39, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not so sure whether or not there is a strong difference about how New Yorkers speak enough for it to be a defining feature of the dialect.
Mnewmanqc, I cannot see your argument for "where else would the topic go" as very sound. If it doesn't belong here, then there is a chance it doesn't belong on the encyclopedia. It did seem like a very opinionated topic.LakeKayak (talk) 20:15, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
In terns of opinionated, there's published research on conversational styles and by a very well-known sociolinguist Deborah Tannen. There's no research I know of that claims Tannen is wrong. If people make judgments about the relative values of one style over another, that's irrelevant to the case. mnewmanqc (talk) 07:04, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Of course, I support Mnewmanqc. But I wanted to go on the record for that. It struck me that this article was the perfect place for it. And it so fits my experience and what others say. PS: I have to be away for the next 2 days, so absence of comment should not imply anything but that. Bellagio99 (talk) 21:20, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on New York City English. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:24, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on New York City English. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:02, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on New York City English. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:00, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Noo Yawk English" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Noo Yawk English. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Utopes (talk / cont) 22:10, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Merger/Redirect[edit]

Can we propose a redirect from the New York accent page to this page? Or perhaps a merger? There are not many concrete reasons for them to be separate pages. 021120x (talk) 12:17, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the split was motivated by the fact that the WP community recommends that pages over 100,000 bytes be split. Wolfdog (talk) 22:19, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:New_York_City_English&oldid=1176388697"