Re: American Dutch dialects

> > > Read Wikipedia
> > >  
> > >
> > en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_English_regional_phonology
> > >  
> > > New York is NOT a rhotic dialect but Philadelphia is the only
> > > rhotic dialect on the East Coast
> >
> > Dat's de toid time you tell me dat.
> >
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_dialect#History :
> > 'The origins of the dialect are diverse, and the source of many
> > features is probably not recoverable. Labov ... claims that the
> > vocalization and subsequent loss of (r) was copied from the
> > prestigious London pronunciation, and so it started among the
> > upper classes in New York and only later moved down the
> > socioeconomic scale. This aristocratic r-lessness can be heard,
> > for instance, in recordings of Franklin Roosevelt. After WWII,
> > the r-ful pronunciation became the prestige norm, and what was
> > once the upper class pronunciation became a vernacular one.'
> >
> > So the r-lessness may not be original, which is what I proposed.
> >
> >
> > Torsten
>
> In the wikipedia article they claim Philadelphia is the probable
> focal point for the spread of General American English.

This is what you mean?
http://tinyurl.com/ae38fa
'The accent of Philadelphia and nearby parts of Pennsylvania, New
Jersey, Delaware, and Maryland, is probably the original ancestor of
General American. It is one of the few coastal accents that is rhotic ...'

So they are using as a premise for that conclusion that the Philly
dialect is rhotic. But since Labov claims New York once was too, that
argument doesn't eliminate NYC as a candidate.

> Keep in mind that in colonial times and for a while after
> independence, Philly was the largest city and the main port of
> entry to the US. NYC took off with the river steamboats and the
> Erie Canal.

I know. The Erie Canal opened in 1825.
http://www.eriecanal.org/
I don't think the U.S.A. was done settled by that time.


Torsten