The New “Regional” Accents and Colloquialisms

Th ‘Burgh

Hiya. Good ta see ya here. Yinz ain’t been readin iss ere blog at much, hon. I git kinda lonely, an at. Know whad I mean?

Yes, that is pretty much how a Pittsburgher (of which I am one) would greet you in your reading of this. But relish it, because the uniqueness of geographic regionalism in speech is on the wane.

Where once our talk was peppered with phrases, grammatical constructs and tonality of purely geographic  regional origin, now it is overrun mostly by language that is promulgated by the popular media in a kind of cultural regionalism. If you’re old enough to have them, just listen to your children. Then have some fun by trying to guess which of their favorite shows their speech mimics.

Accent and colloquialisms were always intended to mark the clan. You know, they were mouthed to show one was part of the group, the local community. So in a local bar, say, you would be know as being from “right” neighborhood. Now, though, it seems the desire is to be marked as one who absorbs the “right” entertainment – who mimics the “right” entertainers.

Today, I think, phrases and intonations are intended mostly to show how you, hip person that you are, are keeping up with the latest prime time video – that you are a discerning connoisseur of popular media.

Here comes the rub:

Why do so many youngsters sound like Paris Hilton or the Kardassian du jure? Are those and others of their ilk what youngsters aspire to be?

Remember when this trend (of mimicking the popular media) became, well,  popular? Phrases like “Here’s looking at you, kid,” and “Frankly, Scarlet, I don’t give a damn” came from the movies’ Bogart and Gable  while “A-OK” and “Roger that,” from the brave astronauts we subconsciously aspired to be like.

So ask yourself just whom is being emulated the next time you hear “Awesome!” or “Like totally,” or (even more poignantly) “Duhh.” And that ask yourself just what is the attraction of Homer Simpson.

Arjay

Straps

What do you think of when you hear this word? For me, “straps” conjures one thing: bras.

You know, brassieres, or as we used to furtively chuckle as young boys, “Over the shoulder boulder holders.”

Straps, and the rest of it.

When I was a kid, straps were a topic for discussion in my house and almost on a daily basis at that. The talks at those moments, all of which had in common only that they immediately preceded my sister’s departure from our home, always went something like this:

Mom: I can see your straps!
Patty: Oh mother! You can’t.
Mom: Oh yes I can. You’d better [blank]

Here the reader is invited to fill in the [blank] with one of the following:
a. change to another sweater – not one of those boat-neck things.
b. button that top blouse button. That’s what it is for.
c. change to your (either black or white, depending) bra.
d. put on a pullover.
e. put on that other bra – the one with the narrow straps.
f. safety-pin the straps to your blouse – here…

Or other situation-specific words to that effect.

So when I hear “straps,” only because I heard the word dozens of times in the above context, does my mind immediately go to bras. And upon checking with some same-aged male friends with sisters, so it is with them, too.

Back in the 1950s, I’m thinking most women would rather have been shot than have their bra straps show. At least so it seemed to a pre-teen male subjected to interminable discussions about how to hide them. Therefore it has been ingrained (more or less) into my psyche that women really don’t want to tip their hands on just how that buxom figure came to be.

But that just goes to show you how much of a geezer I’ve become.

Having returned to a college campus late in life, it’s become clear to this particular geezer that

Times Have Changed.

Today, it is evident that young women are intent not on hiding their straps but on actually displaying them. They apparently seek out contrasting colors and strange strap configurations and clothing construction that “just happen” to maximize the exhibition of their straps, in a kind of bizarre notion of “if you’ve got them (straps), flaunt them (straps).”

You know, for all that, I find that the word “straps” (never singular!) has, sadly for me at least, lost a certain sensual cachet. Moreover, the male youth of today will unfortunately never in their lives know – at the mere mention of such a seemingly mundane word – such, ah, titillation.

–Arjay–

Thank Whom?

Checkout Mayhem

Weary and bleary after an endless afternoon at work, I patiently awaited my turn in the supermarket checkout line. I then stacked my groceries on the belt, swiped my plastic and awaited the total.

$125.71, said the “checker,” as they are now called.

I Signed the electronic pad, and started to wheel away when the cashier (they used to be called that) handed me the $125.71 paper ribbon I had purchased along with my groceries and flatly said, “Have a nice day.”

“Thank you,” I automatically replied.

What???

Rewind, but also go back in time ten years or so. Pressing Play again, here is what we get…

I had just checked out, paid my money, when the market clerk said, “Thank you.” Without thinking, I said, “You’re welcome.”

So what, apart from ten years elapsed time and a few silly words, is different about these two dialogues? Well, I think a lot. It really has to do with the meaning of the interaction itself. Who should thank whom?

At one time it was customary to thank a customer for their commerce – for their business. But today, it is more important to thank someone for being polite – even vapidly so. Thanking a platitude today is even more crucial than expecting to be thanked for the $150 you just spent with that person’s employer – hence for their own paycheck.

Now you can just tich-tich if you want, but you could actually try to do something about this particular obligee/obligor reversal. I, for one, will give it a go.

From now on, when I am again in the checkout situation above, presented with the inevitable comment of “Have a nice, day/evening/ afternoon/whatever,” I am going to reply: “You’re welcome.” Perhaps even with a fixed gaze at the clerk in question. It will be interesting to see if they even notice, don’t you think? I will report back here after a while about my experiences in doing this. If you would like to comment on what you think will happen, I’ll keep a tally on what the conventional wisdom is. Maybe I’m just being, well, a curmudgeon here, but I don’t think so.

And continuing on right now, I have a little more to say about “Thank you.”

Back in the dim gray past (maybe ten years ago) one could expect a reply whenever one said “Thank you,” no matter what the context. In the USA this reply invariably took the form of the phrase: “You’re welcome,” whereas in the UK the reply was almost always the word “Thenkew.”  That to indicate rising inflection – a different sound from the words “thank you,” sort of the nice circularity of a mirror image.

However, today in the USA…

When one says “Thank you,” more often than not, the reply is “No problem.” No kidding. Think about this over your own past experiences before dismissing it, or just go out and listen to what is said to you after you thank people. They are likely to tell you that their effort was insignificant – that helping you was perhaps also of no significance to them.

I suggest that we all get into the habit of protesting the “No problem” rejoinder, albeit mildly. Whenever someone replies to your thanks with this insipid phrase, I heartily recommend that you close the dialogue with a hearty, “Didn’t think so.” And what’s the harm in that? You really didn’t think they had a problem anyway, did you? So what could be the harm in saying so, especially since they brought it up in the first place?

Let’s all get behind these small movements to keep our language and the meanings of the words we are used to using intact. Some non-thinkers would cast us in the roles of reactors (particularly over-reactors)  – that is – the ones who need to react to changes, wanted or not. I propose that we resist their dumbing down of a language that has pretty much been adequate for a few hundred years, and just pretend they, and the dolts they support, had said the appropriate thing at the appropriate time. Perhaps they will get it after a while.

Lavish the clueless souls with a sincere “You’re welcome,” even if they neglected to thank you. Also, assure the ignorant that although they just said so, you already knew they didn’t have a problem in serving you.

If not us, then who? If not now, then when?

–Arjay–

Forseeing the Global Future

View of the globe from above Australia

When I travel, I read the local newspapers, if they happen to be written in English. Now “Australian” is no more English than is “American,” but on a semi-recent trip I found that I could read The Sydney Morning Herald without too much trouble, fair dinkum, mate. By the way, for those of you who think that we speak English here in the USA, just let me mention a sign I saw in the window of a drug store in Basel, Switzerland. In a delightful effort to accommodate foreign visitors, it said, “English spoken here. American understood.” And that really is not a digression.

To actually understand is an increasingly rare trait. But I think that the folks in Australia, at least the writers of their op-ed pages, seem to understand, specifically about global politics. Since the leaders of the USA appear to have been flummoxed on  this particular topic for quite some time, the Aussies’ insight immediately caught my attention.

Australians seem to understand that except to themselves (naturally) their lovely country is not the most important one in the world. This would be, of course, an extremely foreign concept (pun intended) to most Americans. A further difficult-to-accept notion for us is that Australians, because of where their continent is geographically located, are by no means certain the USA is #1, nor is that a particularly crucial matter for them. You see, in Australia China looms large – perhaps even larger than she does in the USA these days.

Well, the Aussies seem to have figured out how to center their geopolitical thinking on two very different countries simultaneously – the USA and PRC (People’s Republic of China).

As Stephen Colbert would say, “And that brings us to

Today’s WΦRD: Chimerica.”

The Aussies have come up with the clever concept of a “Chimerica” to guide their international thinking. It simply goes like this: Whatever Chimerica, wants, Chimerica gets. And conversely, whatever Chimerica doesn’t want, doesn’t happen.

Now here is the interesting part, the part where Australians can predict the future because they understand the present. If the USA and the PRC both definitely want something or both embrace some concept, then it will definitely happen. Likewise, if the USA and the PRC both do not like something or shun some concept, then it definitely will not happen. For any country, knowing what is very likely and very unlikely to happen in the world is akin to achieving political nirvana.

Clever, eh? All that the Australians (or any other country who has the USA and the PRC tied for most important) have to do to likely correctly predict the future is to look for Chimerica’s expressed desires. Then of course, all they need to do is react appropriately and invest in that likely future – for them that part is probably more difficult than actually understanding what the future is likely to be..

Oh, naturally there are those “corner cases” where the USA and the PRC disagree on some particular issue.* On these obviously Australia is no worse off not knowing exactly what Chimerica will do than it would be not knowing what the PRC and the USA will individually do – even as Chimerica goes a bit schizophrenic on the issue.

And what we have here is a simple case where the creation of a word to stand for a conceptual meaning (Chimerica for instance) can lead to tremendous insight.

Now before you dash off to make profound prognostications using this newfound factoid, be aware of an important caveat. In order for this melding of interests concept to work, the meldees must exhibit at least a modicum of common interest.

So in the USA, that most definitely precludes the notion of a Republocrat (or, if you prefer, a Demican) concept as a crystal ball for our political future, I’m sure you’ll agree.

–Arjay–

* In this blog, the word “issue” will always mean issue. It will never be used as a politically correct euphemism for the word “problem.” Those confused by these two sentences are urged to consult an actually reliable dictionary – like any one made of paper. We should not eliminate perfectly good words merely to obfuscate, even if the obfuscation is just about an attitude. Ooops!… About the meaning of that word “attitude…”

A New and Improved Lord’s Prayer

The answer to our prayers

Prayers represent, or perhaps should represent, the most fervent words that humankind can muster.

The Lord’s Prayer (or the “Our Father” to you Catholics out there) is the one prayer that pretty much all Christian sects use and endorse. The Christian bible has it that Jesus Christ taught his disciples this prayer and admonished them to pray it. And that it was really pretty much all they needed in the way of beseeching the Almighty.

For those of you who are not Christians or those of you who are but need a little refresher, here is the original version:

Our Father,
Who art in Heaven,
Hallowed be Thy name.
Thy Kingdom come.
Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven.
Give us this day our daily bread,
And forgive us our trespasses,
As we forgive those who trespass against us,
And lead us not into temptation,
But deliver us from evil.
For thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory, forever,

           Amen.

Please do not comment about how these words do not exactly match your sect’s version or your personal recollection. They constitute the Catholic version (from my 1957 Copyright Saint Joseph Daily Missal). Additionally the increasingly popular Protestant differentiator has been grafted on after the word “evil.” Perhaps it was originally penned so that evil itself did not get to have the last word in the prayer. Who knows? In any event, I am not a religious scholar and I am not looking to start a religious debate here, so let’s just agree that this is the prayer in question, please.

Now, it is clear from the very vocabulary that this prayer is a bit out of date. But really, words like “thy” and “art” are hardly in question as to meaning. No, it is the meaning of the prayer – what is actually hoped or prayed for – that has changed. So perhaps the words should be updated to address the shift.

It is supposed to be an easy prayer that everyone can pray that accomplishes a plea to the deity to help us in certain ways. For instance starting at the end, today in the USA we go to great lengths to get specific about “evil.” Hours and hours of media time are devoted exclusively to vilification. This needs specific attention in our updating efforts, don’t you think?

Then, backing up further, truly in this country it is not a great worry that one will literally starve to death, right? Certainly not to the extent when this prayer was call the “Pater Noster” written out in Latin in the middle ages. So perhaps we can ask for what we really want most today, since it is no longer bread.

And there is that tacky bit about temptation. With Internet porn on demand, government sanctioned gambling, abundant alcohol and the like, the very nature of temptation has changed, no? In our society, do we really not want a few preferred temptations?

And what about political correctness? And politeness? And scientific principality? And individualism? My goodness but the old version is starting to look pretty out of date, don’t you think?

So perhaps we might undertake to rewrite this most famous of Christian prayers and update not merely the vocabulary, but also the intent… the mores it strives to define, the pleas it seeks to make.

And so, for your approbation here is the Wordmudgeon’s version:

The New and Improved Lord’s Prayer,
The One Size Nearly Fits Most, Modernized, Made in the USA Version 1.0

Our Parent of intentionally unspecified gender,
Who art in, most likely, a parallel dimension,
Hallowed be thy Name, except when:
a. We are really angry and/or
b. We are trying to be cool
Our Kingdom come.
Our will be done,
On earth, and we mean everywhere and all the time.
Give us this day a huge personal net worth,
And forgive us for not practicing what we preach,
As we forgive everything done by producers who give us whatever we want, priced as we want, and when we want it,
And lead us into temptation please,
But deliver us from (Muslims/Jews),* (Gays/Homophobes),* and especially (Conservatives/Liberals),*
For ours is the Kingdom, and the power, and the glory, forever,

          Wooo!**

 * One word in each of these parenthetical groups may be selected by the prayor at the time of praying to customize the prayer for his or her particular Personal Belief System.

 ** The prayor may find it particularly satisfying to raise and vigorously brandish a clenched fist with an extended index finger at this dramatic climax of the New and Improved Lord’s Prayer.

Try out this prayer free for 30 days. If by then you are not completely satisfied, have a go at writing your own.

But do give the words and their meanings some thought, eh?

–Arjay–

Welcome

Welcome to Wordmudgeon, a decidedly curmudgeonly blog about words, meanings and the rapidly changing nature of both.

As you can tell by that header up there, a lot of glib sayings have been created over the years. One of the things we will explore here is the question of are they in need of updating. Such explorations will be found in the “Updated Words” category of posts.

Much less frequently, we will have a look at absolutely new words. Really, there are not many, but is blog categorizes such posts under the category “Truly New Words.” It is necessary to add that adverb in there because most words that widely perceived as “new” are really just bastardizations of pre-existing words. Such words are treated in the third category.

The “Retreaded Words” category deals with words that have recently come to have changed or additional definitions or meanings.

So that, for now, t is the organization of this blog. It may change from time to time as I think of more ways to look at the delightful morass of modern (and modernized!) written expression.

–Arjay–