Brett's Holmes

[Peter T. Daniels]

After the five two-hour episodes from near the end of the run, last night they
went back to the second and third episodes of the first season -- The Dancing
Men and The Naval Treaty. Clearly they had a much lower budget in the early days!
But Jeremy Brett was far more credible. (The second Watson was better than the
original Watson.)

The first of them, set in Derbyshire, was filmed in a Stately Home in Lancashire
-- how much damage does that do to the appearance of the landscape?

And there were, as could be expected, two perfectly atrocious "American" accents,
and the most strange pronunciation of "Chicago" with a "ch" instead of a "sh."
Please tell me that isn't rampant in BrE.

[Don Phillipson]

Post by Peter T. Daniels
After the five two-hour episodes from near the end of the run, last night they
went back to the second and third episodes of the first season -- The Dancing
Men and The Naval Treaty. Clearly they had a much lower budget in the early days!
But Jeremy Brett was far more credible. (The second Watson was better than the
original Watson.)
The first of them, set in Derbyshire, was filmed in a Stately Home in Lancashire
-- how much damage does that do to the appearance of the landscape?

This varies with each TV production. Notoriously Downton Abbey did much
"damage" to the building used for so many years (Highclere) but little to
the
"landscape:" but other locations (e.g. Bampton, Oxfordshire) were used for
this TV series (set in Yorkshire, i.e. northern England,actually filmed in
Hampshire, i.e. southern England.) There are books about the making of
Downton Abbey if not the Brett Sherlock Holmes series.

Post by Peter T. Daniels
And there were, as could be expected, two perfectly atrocious "American" accents,
and the most strange pronunciation of "Chicago" with a "ch" instead of a "sh."
Please tell me that isn't rampant in BrE.

The Sherlock Holmes stories are set in roughly 1900 i.e. before radio and
talkies
brought actual American accents to the English ear. The USA has so many
fascinating place names (Coeur d'Alene, Schenectady, Pensacola etc.) that we
should not be surprised at uninformed pronunciations at that date.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Don Phillipson

Post by Peter T. Daniels
After the five two-hour episodes from near the end of the run, last night they
went back to the second and third episodes of the first season -- The Dancing
Men and The Naval Treaty. Clearly they had a much lower budget in the early days!
But Jeremy Brett was far more credible. (The second Watson was better than the
original Watson.)
The first of them, set in Derbyshire, was filmed in a Stately Home in Lancashire
-- how much damage does that do to the appearance of the landscape?

This varies with each TV production. Notoriously Downton Abbey did much
"damage" to the building used for so many years (Highclere) but little to
the
"landscape:" but other locations (e.g. Bampton, Oxfordshire) were used for
this TV series (set in Yorkshire, i.e. northern England,actually filmed in
Hampshire, i.e. southern England.) There are books about the making of
Downton Abbey if not the Brett Sherlock Holmes series.

I'm sorry, but that doesn't tell me how much Lancashire does or doesn't look like Derbyshire.

Post by Don Phillipson

Post by Peter T. Daniels
And there were, as could be expected, two perfectly atrocious "American" accents,
and the most strange pronunciation of "Chicago" with a "ch" instead of a "sh."
Please tell me that isn't rampant in BrE.

The Sherlock Holmes stories are set in roughly 1900

Rather earlier than that, for the most part

Post by Don Phillipson
i.e. before radio and
talkies
brought actual American accents to the English ear.

(Most significantly, before fingerprints were discovered.)

Actual Americans actually could be heard by, e.g., Conan Doyle. The failings of
the Grenada TV production are not to be laid at 19th-century doors.

Post by Don Phillipson
The USA has so many
fascinating place names (Coeur d'Alene, Schenectady, Pensacola etc.) that we
should not be surprised at uninformed pronunciations at that date.

Of "Chicago" by THE TWO CHARACTERS WHO WERE FROM CHICAGO? (One of whose accent fluctuated
between Texan and Mid-Atlantic.)

The program was not made in (your) "1900," but in 1985.

[Janet]

In article <om76dk$elq$***@news.albasani.net>, ***@SPAMBLOCK.ncf.ca
says...

Post by Don Phillipson
This varies with each TV production. Notoriously Downton Abbey did much
"damage" to the building used for so many years (Highclere)

Did it? Haven't seen that reported.

Downton has generated a huge much needed income to restore the building.

Janet

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

Post by Janet
says...

Post by Don Phillipson
This varies with each TV production. Notoriously Downton Abbey did much
"damage" to the building used for so many years (Highclere)

Did it? Haven't seen that reported.
Downton has generated a huge much needed income to restore the building.
Janet

Perhaps someone misunderstood the restoration as the repair of damage
caused by the use of the building for Downton.

[Whiskers]

Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]

Post by Janet
says...

Post by Don Phillipson
This varies with each TV production. Notoriously Downton Abbey did much
"damage" to the building used for so many years (Highclere)

Did it? Haven't seen that reported.
Downton has generated a huge much needed income to restore the building.
Janet

Perhaps someone misunderstood the restoration as the repair of damage
caused by the use of the building for Downton.

Or perhaps someone used 'damage' to mean 'made the place look on TV
different from the way it really looks', ie the camera and lighting
people and perhaps the set dressers too managed to make the place they
were filming in resemble more closely on screen, the appearance of the
place as described in the book. They can do that with landscapes as
well as with street scenes and individual buildings or rooms.

Or the inverse of that, 'damaging' the scenery described in the book by
showing on screen scenery that looks different. Such as bits of
Lancashire instead of bits of Derbyshire, or vice versa.

[GordonD]

Post by Whiskers

Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]

Post by Janet
says...

Post by Don Phillipson
This varies with each TV production. Notoriously Downton Abbey did much
"damage" to the building used for so many years (Highclere)

Did it? Haven't seen that reported.
Downton has generated a huge much needed income to restore the building.
Janet

Perhaps someone misunderstood the restoration as the repair of damage
caused by the use of the building for Downton.

Or perhaps someone used 'damage' to mean 'made the place look on TV
different from the way it really looks', ie the camera and lighting
people and perhaps the set dressers too managed to make the place they
were filming in resemble more closely on screen, the appearance of the
place as described in the book. They can do that with landscapes as
well as with street scenes and individual buildings or rooms.
Or the inverse of that, 'damaging' the scenery described in the book by
showing on screen scenery that looks different. Such as bits of
Lancashire instead of bits of Derbyshire, or vice versa.

What book?

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by GordonD

Post by Whiskers

Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]

Post by Janet
says...

Post by Don Phillipson
This varies with each TV production. Notoriously Downton Abbey did much
"damage" to the building used for so many years (Highclere)

Did it? Haven't seen that reported.
Downton has generated a huge much needed income to restore the building.

Perhaps someone misunderstood the restoration as the repair of damage
caused by the use of the building for Downton.

Or perhaps someone used 'damage' to mean 'made the place look on TV
different from the way it really looks', ie the camera and lighting
people and perhaps the set dressers too managed to make the place they
were filming in resemble more closely on screen, the appearance of the
place as described in the book. They can do that with landscapes as
well as with street scenes and individual buildings or rooms.
Or the inverse of that, 'damaging' the scenery described in the book by
showing on screen scenery that looks different. Such as bits of
Lancashire instead of bits of Derbyshire, or vice versa.

What book?

Conan Doyle's stories. He's reverted to the original question of whether filming
a story set in Derbyshire in Lincolnshire spoiled the ambiance of the landscape.

[GordonD]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by GordonD

Post by Whiskers

Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]

Post by Janet
says...

Post by Don Phillipson
This varies with each TV production. Notoriously Downton Abbey did much
"damage" to the building used for so many years (Highclere)

Did it? Haven't seen that reported.
Downton has generated a huge much needed income to restore the building.

Perhaps someone misunderstood the restoration as the repair of damage
caused by the use of the building for Downton.

Or perhaps someone used 'damage' to mean 'made the place look on TV
different from the way it really looks', ie the camera and lighting
people and perhaps the set dressers too managed to make the place they
were filming in resemble more closely on screen, the appearance of the
place as described in the book. They can do that with landscapes as
well as with street scenes and individual buildings or rooms.
Or the inverse of that, 'damaging' the scenery described in the book by
showing on screen scenery that looks different. Such as bits of
Lancashire instead of bits of Derbyshire, or vice versa.

What book?

Conan Doyle's stories. He's reverted to the original question of whether filming
a story set in Derbyshire in Lincolnshire spoiled the ambiance of the landscape.

Right. I thought we were still talking about Downton Abbey, which wasn't
based on a book.

[Lewis]

Post by Janet
says...

Post by Don Phillipson
This varies with each TV production. Notoriously Downton Abbey did much
"damage" to the building used for so many years (Highclere)

Did it? Haven't seen that reported.
Downton has generated a huge much needed income to restore the building.

Before my wife started teaching she worked at a historic home here in
Denver that was rented out by a movie for a key scene.

They did a lot of work and constructed a stage in the ballroom and
painted and pulled p bits of the floor and a whole lot of other work,
but after they finished shooting the crew redid everything back to the
way it was, except the stage with the State Historical society requested
be left, as it fit within the original plan of the house.

The movie was never completed. I think it involved something about a man
"inventing" a 4 legged chicken.

[RH Draney]

Post by Lewis
The movie was never completed. I think it involved something about a man
"inventing" a 4 legged chicken.

I think I remember this one...let me see if I've got it right:

First farmer: "We crossed a chicken with a centipede."
Second farmer: "Why would you want to do something like that?"
First farmer: "Well, you know how many kids I've got. Every time we
had chicken they'd fight over who was gonna get the drumsticks."
Second farmer: "And what happened?"
First farmer: "Got a chicken with sixteen legs. Enough for everyone."
Second farmer: "How does it taste?"
First farmer: "No idea. We've never been able to catch one."

....r

[charles]

Post by Lewis

Post by Janet
says...

Post by Don Phillipson
This varies with each TV production. Notoriously Downton Abbey did
much "damage" to the building used for so many years (Highclere)

Did it? Haven't seen that reported.
Downton has generated a huge much needed income to restore the building.

Before my wife started teaching she worked at a historic home here in
Denver that was rented out by a movie for a key scene.
They did a lot of work and constructed a stage in the ballroom and
painted and pulled p bits of the floor and a whole lot of other work, but
after they finished shooting the crew redid everything back to the way it
was, except the stage with the State Historical society requested be
left, as it fit within the original plan of the house.
The movie was never completed. I think it involved something about a man
"inventing" a 4 legged chicken.

trouble with those is that they run so fast, you can never catch them.

[Mack A. Damia]

On Sun, 6 Aug 2017 06:00:32 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels
After the five two-hour episodes from near the end of the run, last night they
went back to the second and third episodes of the first season -- The Dancing
Men and The Naval Treaty. Clearly they had a much lower budget in the early days!
But Jeremy Brett was far more credible. (The second Watson was better than the
original Watson.)
The first of them, set in Derbyshire, was filmed in a Stately Home in Lancashire
-- how much damage does that do to the appearance of the landscape?
And there were, as could be expected, two perfectly atrocious "American" accents,
and the most strange pronunciation of "Chicago" with a "ch" instead of a "sh."
Please tell me that isn't rampant in BrE.

It is.

After we emigrated, I had difficulty with "Michigan".

I pronounced it "Mitchigan" for a long time.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

Post by Mack A. Damia
On Sun, 6 Aug 2017 06:00:32 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels
After the five two-hour episodes from near the end of the run, last night they
went back to the second and third episodes of the first season -- The Dancing
Men and The Naval Treaty. Clearly they had a much lower budget in the early days!
But Jeremy Brett was far more credible. (The second Watson was better than the
original Watson.)
The first of them, set in Derbyshire, was filmed in a Stately Home in Lancashire
-- how much damage does that do to the appearance of the landscape?
And there were, as could be expected, two perfectly atrocious
"American" accents,
and the most strange pronunciation of "Chicago" with a "ch" instead of a "sh."
Please tell me that isn't rampant in BrE.

It is.
After we emigrated, I had difficulty with "Michigan".
I pronounced it "Mitchigan" for a long time.

Why does it bother him how we pronounce "Chicago"? Do all American
pronounce "Birmingham" correctly (with [əm] at the end)?

[David Kleinecke]

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Mack A. Damia
On Sun, 6 Aug 2017 06:00:32 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels
After the five two-hour episodes from near the end of the run, last night they
went back to the second and third episodes of the first season -- The Dancing
Men and The Naval Treaty. Clearly they had a much lower budget in the early days!
But Jeremy Brett was far more credible. (The second Watson was better than the
original Watson.)
The first of them, set in Derbyshire, was filmed in a Stately Home in Lancashire
-- how much damage does that do to the appearance of the landscape?
And there were, as could be expected, two perfectly atrocious "American" accents,
and the most strange pronunciation of "Chicago" with a "ch" instead of a "sh."
Please tell me that isn't rampant in BrE.

It is.
After we emigrated, I had difficulty with "Michigan".
I pronounced it "Mitchigan" for a long time.

Why does it bother him how we pronounce "Chicago"? Do all American
pronounce "Birmingham" correctly (with [əm] at the end)?

Come on! PTD's bitch is that actors portraying USans do not
speak as USans, I think a USan must pronounce Birmingham
like the US B not the one in England.

Conversely actors portraying Brits should not speak USE.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

Post by David Kleinecke

Post by Mack A. Damia
On Sun, 6 Aug 2017 06:00:32 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels
After the five two-hour episodes from near the end of the run, last night they
went back to the second and third episodes of the first season -- The Dancing
Men and The Naval Treaty. Clearly they had a much lower budget in the>

Post by Peter T. Daniels
early days!

But Jeremy Brett was far more credible. (The second Watson was better than the
original Watson.)
The first of them, set in Derbyshire, was filmed in a Stately Home in>

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Lancashire

-- how much damage does that do to the appearance of the landscape?
And there were, as could be expected, two perfectly atrocious> >>
"American" accents,
and the most strange pronunciation of "Chicago" with a "ch" instead of a "sh."
Please tell me that isn't rampant in BrE.

It is.
After we emigrated, I had difficulty with "Michigan".
I pronounced it "Mitchigan" for a long time.

Why does it bother him how we pronounce "Chicago"? Do all American>
pronounce "Birmingham" correctly (with [əm] at the end)?

Come on! PTD's bitch is that actors portraying USans do not
speak as USans,

OK. I didn't read the post carefully enough, but a little bit of PTD
goes a long way.

Post by David Kleinecke
I think a USan must pronounce Birmingham
like the US B not the one in England.

Well, I was thinking of England's second city, not the USA's 104th. I
thought that was clear enough from the context not to need underlining.

Post by David Kleinecke
Conversely actors portraying Brits should not speak USE.

Dare I mention Dick Van Dyke?

[David Kleinecke]

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by David Kleinecke

Post by Mack A. Damia
On Sun, 6 Aug 2017 06:00:32 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels
After the five two-hour episodes from near the end of the run, last night they
went back to the second and third episodes of the first season -- The Dancing
Men and The Naval Treaty. Clearly they had a much lower budget in the>

Post by Peter T. Daniels
early days!

But Jeremy Brett was far more credible. (The second Watson was better than the
original Watson.)
The first of them, set in Derbyshire, was filmed in a Stately Home in>

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Lancashire

-- how much damage does that do to the appearance of the landscape?
And there were, as could be expected, two perfectly atrocious> >>
"American" accents,
and the most strange pronunciation of "Chicago" with a "ch" instead of a "sh."
Please tell me that isn't rampant in BrE.

It is.
After we emigrated, I had difficulty with "Michigan".
I pronounced it "Mitchigan" for a long time.

Why does it bother him how we pronounce "Chicago"? Do all American>
pronounce "Birmingham" correctly (with [əm] at the end)?

Come on! PTD's bitch is that actors portraying USans do not
speak as USans,

OK. I didn't read the post carefully enough, but a little bit of PTD
goes a long way.

Post by David Kleinecke
I think a USan must pronounce Birmingham
like the US B not the one in England.

Well, I was thinking of England's second city, not the USA's 104th. I
thought that was clear enough from the context not to need underlining.

Post by David Kleinecke
Conversely actors portraying Brits should not speak USE.

Dare I mention Dick Van Dyke?

Mary Poppins is far enough away from reality that we can
think of it - if we try hard enough - as taking place in
Disneyland. And in Disneyland any accent is allowed. That
is, DVD was playing a character in Cloud Cuckoo Land and
not a Brit.

Same applies to almost all movies and TV. Which, of course,
destroys my original argument. Oh Well.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

Post by David Kleinecke

Post by David Kleinecke

Post by Mack A. Damia
On Sun, 6 Aug 2017 06:00:32 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels
After the five two-hour episodes from near the end of the run, last night they
went back to the second and third episodes of the first season -- The Dancing
Men and The Naval Treaty. Clearly they had a much lower budget in the>>

Post by Peter T. Daniels
early days!

But Jeremy Brett was far more credible. (The second Watson was better than the
original Watson.)
The first of them, set in Derbyshire, was filmed in a Stately Home in>>

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Lancashire

-- how much damage does that do to the appearance of the landscape?
And there were, as could be expected, two perfectly atrocious> >>> >>>>
"American" accents,
and the most strange pronunciation of "Chicago" with a "ch" instead of a "sh."
Please tell me that isn't rampant in BrE.

It is.
After we emigrated, I had difficulty with "Michigan".
I pronounced it "Mitchigan" for a long time.

Why does it bother him how we pronounce "Chicago"? Do all American>> >>
pronounce "Birmingham" correctly (with [əm] at the end)?

Come on! PTD's bitch is that actors portraying USans do not
speak as USans,

OK. I didn't read the post carefully enough, but a little bit of PTD>
goes a long way.

I think I conceded too readily. Although he had mentioned actors
earlier, PTD said "the most strange pronunciation of "Chicago" with a
"ch" instead of a "sh." Please tell me that isn't rampant in BrE."

He was bitching about how he thought British people in general might
pronounce "Chicago", not just actors.

Post by David Kleinecke

Post by David Kleinecke
I think a USan must pronounce Birmingham
like the US B not the one in England.

Well, I was thinking of England's second city, not the USA's 104th. I>
thought that was clear enough from the context not to need underlining.

Post by David Kleinecke
Conversely actors portraying Brits should not speak USE.

Dare I mention Dick Van Dyke?

Mary Poppins is far enough away from reality that we can
think of it - if we try hard enough - as taking place in
Disneyland. And in Disneyland any accent is allowed. That
is, DVD was playing a character in Cloud Cuckoo Land and
not a Brit.
Same applies to almost all movies and TV. Which, of course,
destroys my original argument. Oh Well.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Mack A. Damia
On Sun, 6 Aug 2017 06:00:32 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
After the five two-hour episodes from near the end of the run, last night they
went back to the second and third episodes of the first season -- The Dancing
Men and The Naval Treaty. Clearly they had a much lower budget in the>> >>>> >> early days!
But Jeremy Brett was far more credible. (The second Watson was better than the
original Watson.)
The first of them, set in Derbyshire, was filmed in a Stately Home in>> >>>> >> Lancashire
-- how much damage does that do to the appearance of the landscape?
And there were, as could be expected, two perfectly atrocious> >>> >>>> "American" accents,
and the most strange pronunciation of "Chicago" with a "ch" instead of a "sh."
Please tell me that isn't rampant in BrE.
It is.
After we emigrated, I had difficulty with "Michigan".
I pronounced it "Mitchigan" for a long time.
Why does it bother him how we pronounce "Chicago"? Do all American>> >> pronounce "Birmingham" correctly (with [əm] at the end)?
Come on! PTD's bitch is that actors portraying USans do not
speak as USans,
OK. I didn't read the post carefully enough, but a little bit of PTD> goes a long way.
I think I conceded too readily. Although he had mentioned actors earlier, PTD said "the most strange pronunciation of "Chicago" with a "ch" instead of a "sh." Please tell me that isn't rampant in BrE."
He was bitching about how he thought British people in general might pronounce "Chicago", not just actors.

Even when he condescends to read what I write, he STILL cannot comprehend it?

How does "Please tell me that [the error in question] is not rampant in BrE"
amount to "bitching about how he thought"?

AND he throws in hundreds of blank lines to make his message almost unreadable.

Post by Mack A. Damia
I think a USan must pronounce Birmingham
like the US B not the one in England.
Well, I was thinking of England's second city, not the USA's 104th. I> thought that was clear enough from the context not to need underlining.
Conversely actors portraying Brits should not speak USE.
Dare I mention Dick Van Dyke?
Mary Poppins is far enough away from reality that we can
think of it - if we try hard enough - as taking place in
Disneyland. And in Disneyland any accent is allowed. That
is, DVD was playing a character in Cloud Cuckoo Land and
not a Brit.
Same applies to almost all movies and TV. Which, of course,
destroys my original argument. Oh Well.
-- 
athel

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by David Kleinecke

Post by Mack A. Damia
On Sun, 6 Aug 2017 06:00:32 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels
After the five two-hour episodes from near the end of the run, last night they
went back to the second and third episodes of the first season -- The Dancing
Men and The Naval Treaty. Clearly they had a much lower budget in the>

Post by Peter T. Daniels
early days!

But Jeremy Brett was far more credible. (The second Watson was better than the
original Watson.)
The first of them, set in Derbyshire, was filmed in a Stately Home in>

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Lancashire

-- how much damage does that do to the appearance of the landscape?
And there were, as could be expected, two perfectly atrocious> >>
"American" accents,
and the most strange pronunciation of "Chicago" with a "ch" instead of a "sh."
Please tell me that isn't rampant in BrE.

It is.
After we emigrated, I had difficulty with "Michigan".
I pronounced it "Mitchigan" for a long time.

Why does it bother him how we pronounce "Chicago"? Do all American>
pronounce "Birmingham" correctly (with [əm] at the end)?

Come on! PTD's bitch is that actors portraying USans do not
speak as USans,

OK. I didn't read the post carefully enough, but a little bit of PTD
goes a long way.

Post by David Kleinecke
I think a USan must pronounce Birmingham
like the US B not the one in England.

Never mind: it was Athelstan Cornish-Bowden's attempt to distract from the
bog-standard failing of English actors, directors, producers, and dialect coaches.

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Well, I was thinking of England's second city, not the USA's 104th. I
thought that was clear enough from the context not to need underlining.

I, however, was thinking of the USA's Second City. (In population, but not in
stature, it has yielded to L.A.)

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by David Kleinecke
Conversely actors portraying Brits should not speak USE.

Dare I mention Dick Van Dyke?

ONE performance -- more than fifty years ago -- approved by P. L. Travers herself
-- and you still hold a grudge? And I complain about his five-year-old grudges against me!

[Lewis]

Post by David Kleinecke

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Mack A. Damia
On Sun, 6 Aug 2017 06:00:32 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels
After the five two-hour episodes from near the end of the run, last night they
went back to the second and third episodes of the first season -- The Dancing
Men and The Naval Treaty. Clearly they had a much lower budget in the early days!
But Jeremy Brett was far more credible. (The second Watson was better than the
original Watson.)
The first of them, set in Derbyshire, was filmed in a Stately Home in Lancashire
-- how much damage does that do to the appearance of the landscape?
And there were, as could be expected, two perfectly atrocious "American" accents,
and the most strange pronunciation of "Chicago" with a "ch" instead of a "sh."
Please tell me that isn't rampant in BrE.

It is.
After we emigrated, I had difficulty with "Michigan".
I pronounced it "Mitchigan" for a long time.

Why does it bother him how we pronounce "Chicago"? Do all American
pronounce "Birmingham" correctly (with [əm] at the end)?

Come on! PTD's bitch is that actors portraying USans do not
speak as USans, I think a USan must pronounce Birmingham
like the US B not the one in England.
Conversely actors portraying Brits should not speak USE.

I've discovered over the years that the vast majority of people
complaining about accents have no idea what they are talking about.

I've heard many people complain about Hugh Laurie's fake British accent,
for example.

[Janet]

Post by Lewis
I've discovered over the years that the vast majority of people
complaining about accents have no idea what they are talking about.
I've heard many people complain about Hugh Laurie's fake British accent,
for example.

LOL

Janet.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

Post by Janet

Post by Lewis
I've discovered over the years that the vast majority of people
complaining about accents have no idea what they are talking about.
I've heard many people complain about Hugh Laurie's fake British accent,
for example.

Hmm. I'm still cross about a review I read on Amazon a couple of days
ago that complained about the author's notion that Australians rhyme
"aunt" with "ant", because, in the reviewer's opinion, only Americans
do that. Setting aside the fact that even if true it would be a trivial
point not worth mentioning, I don't think it's even true. For what it's
worth, do some Australians rhyme "aunt" with "ant"? Do all Americans do
it?

Post by Janet
LOL
Janet.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Lewis
I've discovered over the years that the vast majority of people
complaining about accents have no idea what they are talking about.
I've heard many people complain about Hugh Laurie's fake British accent,
for example.

Hmm. I'm still cross about a review I read on Amazon a couple of days
ago that complained about the author's notion that Australians rhyme
"aunt" with "ant", because, in the reviewer's opinion, only Americans
do that. Setting aside the fact that even if true it would be a trivial
point not worth mentioning, I don't think it's even true. For what it's
worth, do some Australians rhyme "aunt" with "ant"? Do all Americans do
it?

The two pronunciations of "aunt" are in free variation.

[Ross]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Lewis
I've discovered over the years that the vast majority of people
complaining about accents have no idea what they are talking about.
I've heard many people complain about Hugh Laurie's fake British accent,
for example.

Hmm. I'm still cross about a review I read on Amazon a couple of days
ago that complained about the author's notion that Australians rhyme
"aunt" with "ant", because, in the reviewer's opinion, only Americans
do that. Setting aside the fact that even if true it would be a trivial
point not worth mentioning, I don't think it's even true. For what it's
worth, do some Australians rhyme "aunt" with "ant"? Do all Americans do
it?

The two pronunciations of "aunt" are in free variation.

Final results from PTD's household, then.

Kenyon and Knott (1944) report aunt = ant for America generally, BUT
non-homophonous pronunciations are found in the "East" and "sporadically"
in the "North" and "South".

As for the UK, mostly non-homophonous, BUT there is a large area in the
North where the TRAP-BATH split never took place, and where consequently
aunt = ant, also father rhymes with lather etc etc.

[Richard Tobin]

Post by Ross
As for the UK, mostly non-homophonous, BUT there is a large area in the
North where the TRAP-BATH split never took place, and where consequently
aunt = ant, also father rhymes with lather etc etc.

Father rhymes with lather for me too (lA:D@). The OED has a quotation
describing that as "non-U".

-- Richard

[Peter Moylan]

Post by Richard Tobin

Post by Ross
As for the UK, mostly non-homophonous, BUT there is a large area in the
North where the TRAP-BATH split never took place, and where consequently
aunt = ant, also father rhymes with lather etc etc.

describing that as "non-U".

That's an excellent illustration of why "A rhymes with B" is not a
sufficient description of the sound of a word. Some father/lather
rhymers have [A:], and some have [&], and you won't know that unless
they include some form of phonetic transcription.

I have lived in Newcastle (NSW) for almost 50 years now, and I still
have problems pronouncing the name of the city. The locals say
[njukA:sl], but I grew up in a region where we said [njuk&sl]. I have
acclimatised to the extent of saying [njuka:sl], but I find it difficult
to take that final step. Most of the time my vowel sounds do adapt to
the local rules of the place I'm visiting, but the [A:] versus [a:]
distinction is a bit too subtle for me unless I really concentrate.

(I probably also pronounce pasta differently from the way Novocastrians
say it, but that's a case where most people won't notice the difference.
Well, they do notice the difference between English pasta and Australian
pasta, but they don't notice the difference between Italian pasta and
Australian pasta.)

[GordonD]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Lewis
I've discovered over the years that the vast majority of
people complaining about accents have no idea what they are
talking about. I've heard many people complain about Hugh
Laurie's fake British accent, for example.

Hmm. I'm still cross about a review I read on Amazon a couple of
days ago that complained about the author's notion that Australians
rhyme "aunt" with "ant", because, in the reviewer's opinion, only
Americans do that. Setting aside the fact that even if true it
would be a trivial point not worth mentioning, I don't think it's
even true. For what it's worth, do some Australians rhyme "aunt"
with "ant"? Do all Americans do it?

The two pronunciations of "aunt" are in free variation.

There was an episode of 'Monk' where he spotted that the woman he was
talking to was actually the twin sister of the lady he'd met earlier
because they pronounced 'aunt' differently.

[Cheryl]

Post by GordonD

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Lewis
I've discovered over the years that the vast majority of
people complaining about accents have no idea what they are
talking about. I've heard many people complain about Hugh
Laurie's fake British accent, for example.

Hmm. I'm still cross about a review I read on Amazon a couple of
days ago that complained about the author's notion that Australians
rhyme "aunt" with "ant", because, in the reviewer's opinion, only
Americans do that. Setting aside the fact that even if true it
would be a trivial point not worth mentioning, I don't think it's
even true. For what it's worth, do some Australians rhyme "aunt"
with "ant"? Do all Americans do it?

The two pronunciations of "aunt" are in free variation.

There was an episode of 'Monk' where he spotted that the woman he was
talking to was actually the twin sister of the lady he'd met earlier
because they pronounced 'aunt' differently.

Would twins be likely to have different pronunciations unless they were
raised apart? I'm not sure, although I did once read an article about
several families having members with different accents, and I've seen
similar things myself. It seems like such a specific, minor difference,
though - not like cases where the family moved at some point, and the
younger generation picked up a different accent than that maintained by
older relatives.

I think there's an Agatha Christie story that turns on different
spellings of some word used by sisters, one of whom is impersonating the
other.

[charles]

Post by Cheryl

Post by GordonD

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Lewis
I've discovered over the years that the vast majority of
people complaining about accents have no idea what they are
talking about. I've heard many people complain about Hugh
Laurie's fake British accent, for example.

Hmm. I'm still cross about a review I read on Amazon a couple of
days ago that complained about the author's notion that Australians
rhyme "aunt" with "ant", because, in the reviewer's opinion, only
Americans do that. Setting aside the fact that even if true it
would be a trivial point not worth mentioning, I don't think it's
even true. For what it's worth, do some Australians rhyme "aunt"
with "ant"? Do all Americans do it?

The two pronunciations of "aunt" are in free variation.

There was an episode of 'Monk' where he spotted that the woman he was
talking to was actually the twin sister of the lady he'd met earlier
because they pronounced 'aunt' differently.

Would twins be likely to have different pronunciations unless they were
raised apart? I'm not sure, although I did once read an article about
several families having members with different accents, and I've seen
similar things myself. It seems like such a specific, minor difference,
though - not like cases where the family moved at some point, and the
younger generation picked up a different accent than that maintained by
older relatives.

In Victorian/Edwardian England, village girls who worked as ladies maids in
the "big house" quickly adopted th accent of their mistresses; their
brothers, who might work in the grounds, kept their local accent.

Post by Cheryl
I think there's an Agatha Christie story that turns on different
spellings of some word used by sisters, one of whom is impersonating the
other.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by charles
In Victorian/Edwardian England, village girls who worked as ladies maids in
the "big house" quickly adopted th accent of their mistresses; their

(unconsciously)

Post by charles
brothers, who might work in the grounds, kept their local accent.

It would be interesting if *Downton Abbey* had depicted such dialectal
assimilation by a new recruit to the household, or a girl who was promoted.
Did they even depict a difference in dialect between the ladies' maids and
the kitchen staff who would have had little interaction with the people? (I
think butlers are standardly depicted as speaking Standard even when
addressing staff. It would be _infra dig_ to reveal their common origin.)

[LFS]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by charles
In Victorian/Edwardian England, village girls who worked as ladies maids in
the "big house" quickly adopted th accent of their mistresses; their

(unconsciously)

Post by charles
brothers, who might work in the grounds, kept their local accent.

It would be interesting if *Downton Abbey* had depicted such dialectal
assimilation by a new recruit to the household, or a girl who was promoted.
Did they even depict a difference in dialect between the ladies' maids and
the kitchen staff who would have had little interaction with the people? (I
think butlers are standardly depicted as speaking Standard even when
addressing staff. It would be _infra dig_ to reveal their common origin.)

IIRC the kitchen maid, who bettered herself through education and
marriage, did change her style of speech slightly over the several series.

But it would of course be unwise to assume that Downton Abbey is a
truthful depiction of historical fact.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by LFS

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by charles
In Victorian/Edwardian England, village girls who worked as ladies maids in
the "big house" quickly adopted th accent of their mistresses; their

(unconsciously)

Post by charles
brothers, who might work in the grounds, kept their local accent.

It would be interesting if *Downton Abbey* had depicted such dialectal
assimilation by a new recruit to the household, or a girl who was promoted.
Did they even depict a difference in dialect between the ladies' maids and
the kitchen staff who would have had little interaction with the people? (I
think butlers are standardly depicted as speaking Standard even when
addressing staff. It would be _infra dig_ to reveal their common origin.)

IIRC the kitchen maid, who bettered herself through education and
marriage, did change her style of speech slightly over the several series.

But that's not the situation described by charles and that I asked about!

Post by LFS
But it would of course be unwise to assume that Downton Abbey is a
truthful depiction of historical fact.

They claimed to have tried to be. They seem to have taken seriously the
complaints about anachronisms.

At least they probably didn't have American characters played by dialectally
incompetent actors. It might have been worth watching a showdown between
Maggie Smith and Shirley MacLaine ...

One of the actors (I think on Letterman, so referring to an early series)
complained that the very first image of every episode was of a dog's butt.
Was there ever an explanation for that choice?

(If you'd like, substitute *Upstairs Downstairs*. Were there any other long-
running sagas depicting the two cultures?)

[Tony Cooper]

On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 07:34:32 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
<***@verizon.net> wrote:

Re: Downton Abbey

Post by Peter T. Daniels
One of the actors (I think on Letterman, so referring to an early series)
complained that the very first image of every episode was of a dog's butt.
Was there ever an explanation for that choice?

It doesn't need an explanation. The dog's butt is part of the opening
credits where a man and a dog are walking towards "Downton Abbey"
(Highclere Castle) and shot from behind them. Only the leg of the man
is shown, but most of the dog from the legs up is shown. It's not a
butt close-up.

I don't consider the opening credits to be part of the episode. The
opening credits are footage shot once to be used to display the titles
and cast credits. That footage was used in every season, but the cast
credits changed as characters were added.

The dog in the shot was a favorite of the cast and crew. As in most
long-running series, animals are re-cast and Pharaoh - the white Lab
that played the part of "Isis" - was replaced but the filmmaker's
wanted to keep the original in the opening credits.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Tony Cooper
On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 07:34:32 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Re: Downton Abbey

Post by Peter T. Daniels
One of the actors (I think on Letterman, so referring to an early series)
complained that the very first image of every episode was of a dog's butt.
Was there ever an explanation for that choice?

It doesn't need an explanation. The dog's butt is part of the opening
credits where a man and a dog are walking towards "Downton Abbey"
(Highclere Castle) and shot from behind them. Only the leg of the man
is shown, but most of the dog from the legs up is shown. It's not a
butt close-up.
I don't consider the opening credits to be part of the episode. The
opening credits are footage shot once to be used to display the titles
and cast credits. That footage was used in every season, but the cast
credits changed as characters were added.
The dog in the shot was a favorite of the cast and crew. As in most
long-running series, animals are re-cast and Pharaoh - the white Lab
that played the part of "Isis" - was replaced but the filmmaker's
wanted to keep the original in the opening credits.

How does that explain why they opened every episode with the dog's butt and not
the dog's face?

[Janet]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Tony Cooper
On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 07:34:32 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Re: Downton Abbey

Post by Peter T. Daniels
One of the actors (I think on Letterman, so referring to an early series)
complained that the very first image of every episode was of a dog's butt.
Was there ever an explanation for that choice?

It doesn't need an explanation. The dog's butt is part of the opening
credits where a man and a dog are walking towards "Downton Abbey"
(Highclere Castle) and shot from behind them. Only the leg of the man
is shown, but most of the dog from the legs up is shown. It's not a
butt close-up.
I don't consider the opening credits to be part of the episode. The
opening credits are footage shot once to be used to display the titles
and cast credits. That footage was used in every season, but the cast
credits changed as characters were added.
The dog in the shot was a favorite of the cast and crew. As in most
long-running series, animals are re-cast and Pharaoh - the white Lab
that played the part of "Isis" - was replaced but the filmmaker's
wanted to keep the original in the opening credits.

How does that explain why they opened every episode with the dog's butt and not
the dog's face?

Dogs don't walk backwards.

Janet.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

Post by Tony Cooper
On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 07:34:32 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Re: Downton Abbey

Post by Peter T. Daniels
One of the actors (I think on Letterman, so referring to an early series)
complained that the very first image of every episode was of a dog's butt.
Was there ever an explanation for that choice?

It doesn't need an explanation. The dog's butt is part of the opening
credits where a man and a dog are walking towards "Downton Abbey"
(Highclere Castle) and shot from behind them. Only the leg of the man
is shown, but most of the dog from the legs up is shown. It's not a
butt close-up.
I don't consider the opening credits to be part of the episode. The
opening credits are footage shot once to be used to display the titles
and cast credits. That footage was used in every season, but the cast
credits changed as characters were added.
The dog in the shot was a favorite of the cast and crew. As in most
long-running series, animals are re-cast and Pharaoh - the white Lab
that played the part of "Isis" - was replaced but the filmmaker's
wanted to keep the original in the opening credits.

That's the thing about dogs. They mostly don't wear clothes, so if you
see a dog walking away from you you see things you might not want to
see.

I wonder what the complainer thinks about baboons.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Tony Cooper
On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 07:34:32 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Re: Downton Abbey

Post by Peter T. Daniels
One of the actors (I think on Letterman, so referring to an early series)
complained that the very first image of every episode was of a dog's butt.
Was there ever an explanation for that choice?

It doesn't need an explanation. The dog's butt is part of the opening
credits where a man and a dog are walking towards "Downton Abbey"
(Highclere Castle) and shot from behind them. Only the leg of the man
is shown, but most of the dog from the legs up is shown. It's not a
butt close-up.
I don't consider the opening credits to be part of the episode. The
opening credits are footage shot once to be used to display the titles
and cast credits. That footage was used in every season, but the cast
credits changed as characters were added.
The dog in the shot was a favorite of the cast and crew. As in most
long-running series, animals are re-cast and Pharaoh - the white Lab
that played the part of "Isis" - was replaced but the filmmaker's
wanted to keep the original in the opening credits.

That's the thing about dogs. They mostly don't wear clothes, so if you
see a dog walking away from you you see things you might not want to
see.
I wonder what the complainer thinks about baboons.

But you don't wonder why the director chose to show a dog walking away -- at
dog's-eye level, no less?

[Tony Cooper]

Post by LFS

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by charles
In Victorian/Edwardian England, village girls who worked as ladies maids in
the "big house" quickly adopted th accent of their mistresses; their

(unconsciously)

Post by charles
brothers, who might work in the grounds, kept their local accent.

It would be interesting if *Downton Abbey* had depicted such dialectal
assimilation by a new recruit to the household, or a girl who was promoted.
Did they even depict a difference in dialect between the ladies' maids and
the kitchen staff who would have had little interaction with the people? (I
think butlers are standardly depicted as speaking Standard even when
addressing staff. It would be _infra dig_ to reveal their common origin.)

IIRC the kitchen maid, who bettered herself through education and
marriage, did change her style of speech slightly over the several series.
But it would of course be unwise to assume that Downton Abbey is a
truthful depiction of historical fact.

Hah! The idea that a play, movie, or TV show could include a plot
line of someone's dialectal assimilation is preposterous. When pyg's
fly!

Just shaw me where this has ever been tried. Screen writers do little
to encourage development along these lines. The studio moguls would
be pickering on them if they wasted any time on this.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Tony Cooper

Post by LFS

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by charles
In Victorian/Edwardian England, village girls who worked as ladies maids in
the "big house" quickly adopted th accent of their mistresses; their

(unconsciously)

Post by charles
brothers, who might work in the grounds, kept their local accent.

It would be interesting if *Downton Abbey* had depicted such dialectal
assimilation by a new recruit to the household, or a girl who was promoted.
Did they even depict a difference in dialect between the ladies' maids and
the kitchen staff who would have had little interaction with the people? (I
think butlers are standardly depicted as speaking Standard even when
addressing staff. It would be _infra dig_ to reveal their common origin.)

IIRC the kitchen maid, who bettered herself through education and
marriage, did change her style of speech slightly over the several series.
But it would of course be unwise to assume that Downton Abbey is a
truthful depiction of historical fact.

Hah! The idea that a play, movie, or TV show could include a plot
line of someone's dialectal assimilation is preposterous. When pyg's
fly!

Who said anything about a "plot line"???????

God you're dumb.

Movies and TV shows can incorporate details without even bringing them to
any viewer's consciousness (that's what a lot of film criticism is about).

I've frequently mentioned the use of Bertoia sculptures in *Wolfen*. No one
in the movie so much as looks at them, let alone mentions one or plays with
a desktop-sized one.

In a *Frasier* episode I saw last week, he was depressed about something and
went out on the foggy streets of Seattle for some air -- and in the background
of the montage were billboards and marquees advertising all sorts of tragic
plays and operas -- and he took no notice of them.

*The Big Bang Theory* is rewatchable because it's full of tiny details like
that. It's not just that we've gotten to know the characters over ten seasons
(that should be about 250 episodes), it's that there's always something subtle
to pick up.

Post by Tony Cooper
Just shaw me where this has ever been tried. Screen writers do little
to encourage development along these lines. The studio moguls would
be pickering on them if they wasted any time on this.

ObAUE: "pickering"?

[Tony Cooper]

On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 08:08:22 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Tony Cooper

Post by LFS

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by charles
In Victorian/Edwardian England, village girls who worked as ladies maids in
the "big house" quickly adopted th accent of their mistresses; their

(unconsciously)

Post by charles
brothers, who might work in the grounds, kept their local accent.

It would be interesting if *Downton Abbey* had depicted such dialectal
assimilation by a new recruit to the household, or a girl who was promoted.
Did they even depict a difference in dialect between the ladies' maids and
the kitchen staff who would have had little interaction with the people? (I
think butlers are standardly depicted as speaking Standard even when
addressing staff. It would be _infra dig_ to reveal their common origin.)

IIRC the kitchen maid, who bettered herself through education and
marriage, did change her style of speech slightly over the several series.
But it would of course be unwise to assume that Downton Abbey is a
truthful depiction of historical fact.

Hah! The idea that a play, movie, or TV show could include a plot
line of someone's dialectal assimilation is preposterous. When pyg's
fly!

Who said anything about a "plot line"???????
God you're dumb.
Movies and TV shows can incorporate details without even bringing them to
any viewer's consciousness (that's what a lot of film criticism is about).
I've frequently mentioned the use of Bertoia sculptures in *Wolfen*. No one
in the movie so much as looks at them, let alone mentions one or plays with
a desktop-sized one.
In a *Frasier* episode I saw last week, he was depressed about something and
went out on the foggy streets of Seattle for some air -- and in the background
of the montage were billboards and marquees advertising all sorts of tragic
plays and operas -- and he took no notice of them.
*The Big Bang Theory* is rewatchable because it's full of tiny details like
that. It's not just that we've gotten to know the characters over ten seasons
(that should be about 250 episodes), it's that there's always something subtle
to pick up.

Post by Tony Cooper
Just shaw me where this has ever been tried. Screen writers do little
to encourage development along these lines. The studio moguls would
be pickering on them if they wasted any time on this.

ObAUE: "pickering"?

If you can't catch the references, don't call the person who tosses
them out "dumb".

Col. Pickering was the linguist in "Pygmalion" and "My Fair Lady" who
introduces Liza Doolittle to Henry Higgins.

This is why you don't fit in here, and will never fit in here. Instead
of recognizing the wordplay that is standard in this group, you grab
the wrong end of the stick and tear off on a rant involving unrelated
TV shows (which seem to be the lens through which you view
life-as-it-is) and embarrass yourself.

You are like that actor you referred to who appeared on Letterman and
complained about the view of the dog's butt. He sees a dog's butt
where the rest of us see an imposing vista that includes a man, a dog,
and a castle.

[LFS]

Post by Tony Cooper
On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 08:08:22 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Tony Cooper

Post by LFS

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by charles
In Victorian/Edwardian England, village girls who worked as ladies maids in
the "big house" quickly adopted th accent of their mistresses; their

(unconsciously)

Post by charles
brothers, who might work in the grounds, kept their local accent.

It would be interesting if *Downton Abbey* had depicted such dialectal
assimilation by a new recruit to the household, or a girl who was promoted.
Did they even depict a difference in dialect between the ladies' maids and
the kitchen staff who would have had little interaction with the people? (I
think butlers are standardly depicted as speaking Standard even when
addressing staff. It would be _infra dig_ to reveal their common origin.)

IIRC the kitchen maid, who bettered herself through education and
marriage, did change her style of speech slightly over the several series.
But it would of course be unwise to assume that Downton Abbey is a
truthful depiction of historical fact.

Hah! The idea that a play, movie, or TV show could include a plot
line of someone's dialectal assimilation is preposterous. When pyg's
fly!

Who said anything about a "plot line"???????
God you're dumb.
Movies and TV shows can incorporate details without even bringing them to
any viewer's consciousness (that's what a lot of film criticism is about).
I've frequently mentioned the use of Bertoia sculptures in *Wolfen*. No one
in the movie so much as looks at them, let alone mentions one or plays with
a desktop-sized one.
In a *Frasier* episode I saw last week, he was depressed about something and
went out on the foggy streets of Seattle for some air -- and in the background
of the montage were billboards and marquees advertising all sorts of tragic
plays and operas -- and he took no notice of them.
*The Big Bang Theory* is rewatchable because it's full of tiny details like
that. It's not just that we've gotten to know the characters over ten seasons
(that should be about 250 episodes), it's that there's always something subtle
to pick up.

Post by Tony Cooper
Just shaw me where this has ever been tried. Screen writers do little
to encourage development along these lines. The studio moguls would
be pickering on them if they wasted any time on this.

ObAUE: "pickering"?

If you can't catch the references, don't call the person who tosses
them out "dumb".
Col. Pickering was the linguist in "Pygmalion" and "My Fair Lady" who
introduces Liza Doolittle to Henry Higgins.
This is why you don't fit in here, and will never fit in here. Instead
of recognizing the wordplay that is standard in this group, you grab
the wrong end of the stick and tear off on a rant involving unrelated
TV shows (which seem to be the lens through which you view
life-as-it-is) and embarrass yourself.
You are like that actor you referred to who appeared on Letterman and
complained about the view of the dog's butt. He sees a dog's butt
where the rest of us see an imposing vista that includes a man, a dog,
and a castle.

A pity you had to explain...

[Peter Moylan]

Post by Peter T. Daniels
God you're dumb.

I've seen that comment here before, and it always turns out to be a
signal that the person who said it was seriously whooshed.

I've forgotten the exact saying that applies to this case, but it's
something like "It's better to remain silent and sound stupid, than to
open your mouth and remove all doubt".

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Peter Moylan

Post by Peter T. Daniels
God you're dumb.

I've seen that comment here before, and it always turns out to be a
signal that the person who said it was seriously whooshed.
I've forgotten the exact saying that applies to this case, but it's
something like "It's better to remain silent and sound stupid, than to
open your mouth and remove all doubt".

If you can't see where Tony Cooper goes awry each time I point out his stupidity,
then you're just as bad.

[charles]

Post by LFS

Post by Tony Cooper
On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 08:08:22 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Tony Cooper

Post by LFS

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by charles
In Victorian/Edwardian England, village girls who worked as ladies maids in
the "big house" quickly adopted th accent of their mistresses; their

(unconsciously)

Post by charles
brothers, who might work in the grounds, kept their local accent.

It would be interesting if *Downton Abbey* had depicted such dialectal
assimilation by a new recruit to the household, or a girl who was promoted.
Did they even depict a difference in dialect between the ladies' maids and
the kitchen staff who would have had little interaction with the people? (I
think butlers are standardly depicted as speaking Standard even when
addressing staff. It would be _infra dig_ to reveal their common origin.)

IIRC the kitchen maid, who bettered herself through education and
marriage, did change her style of speech slightly over the several series.
But it would of course be unwise to assume that Downton Abbey is a
truthful depiction of historical fact.

Hah! The idea that a play, movie, or TV show could include a plot
line of someone's dialectal assimilation is preposterous. When pyg's
fly!

Who said anything about a "plot line"???????
God you're dumb.
Movies and TV shows can incorporate details without even bringing them to
any viewer's consciousness (that's what a lot of film criticism is about).
I've frequently mentioned the use of Bertoia sculptures in *Wolfen*. No one
in the movie so much as looks at them, let alone mentions one or plays with
a desktop-sized one.
In a *Frasier* episode I saw last week, he was depressed about something and
went out on the foggy streets of Seattle for some air -- and in the background
of the montage were billboards and marquees advertising all sorts of tragic
plays and operas -- and he took no notice of them.
*The Big Bang Theory* is rewatchable because it's full of tiny details like
that. It's not just that we've gotten to know the characters over ten seasons
(that should be about 250 episodes), it's that there's always something subtle
to pick up.

Post by Tony Cooper
Just shaw me where this has ever been tried. Screen writers do little
to encourage development along these lines. The studio moguls would
be pickering on them if they wasted any time on this.

ObAUE: "pickering"?

If you can't catch the references, don't call the person who tosses
them out "dumb".
Col. Pickering was the linguist in "Pygmalion" and "My Fair Lady" who
introduces Liza Doolittle to Henry Higgins.
This is why you don't fit in here, and will never fit in here. Instead
of recognizing the wordplay that is standard in this group, you grab
the wrong end of the stick and tear off on a rant involving unrelated
TV shows (which seem to be the lens through which you view
life-as-it-is) and embarrass yourself.
You are like that actor you referred to who appeared on Letterman and
complained about the view of the dog's butt. He sees a dog's butt
where the rest of us see an imposing vista that includes a man, a dog,
and a castle.

A pity you had to explain...

I first saw the play in 1956 - I saw it again about 8 years ago.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by charles

Post by LFS

Post by Tony Cooper
On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 08:08:22 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Tony Cooper

Post by LFS

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by charles
In Victorian/Edwardian England, village girls who worked as ladies maids in
the "big house" quickly adopted th accent of their mistresses; their

(unconsciously)

Post by charles
brothers, who might work in the grounds, kept their local accent.

It would be interesting if *Downton Abbey* had depicted such dialectal
assimilation by a new recruit to the household, or a girl who was promoted.
Did they even depict a difference in dialect between the ladies' maids and
the kitchen staff who would have had little interaction with the people? (I
think butlers are standardly depicted as speaking Standard even when
addressing staff. It would be _infra dig_ to reveal their common origin.)

IIRC the kitchen maid, who bettered herself through education and
marriage, did change her style of speech slightly over the several series.
But it would of course be unwise to assume that Downton Abbey is a
truthful depiction of historical fact.

Hah! The idea that a play, movie, or TV show could include a plot
line of someone's dialectal assimilation is preposterous. When pyg's
fly!

Who said anything about a "plot line"???????
God you're dumb.
Movies and TV shows can incorporate details without even bringing them to
any viewer's consciousness (that's what a lot of film criticism is about).
I've frequently mentioned the use of Bertoia sculptures in *Wolfen*. No one
in the movie so much as looks at them, let alone mentions one or plays with
a desktop-sized one.
In a *Frasier* episode I saw last week, he was depressed about something and
went out on the foggy streets of Seattle for some air -- and in the background
of the montage were billboards and marquees advertising all sorts of tragic
plays and operas -- and he took no notice of them.
*The Big Bang Theory* is rewatchable because it's full of tiny details like
that. It's not just that we've gotten to know the characters over ten seasons
(that should be about 250 episodes), it's that there's always something subtle
to pick up.

Post by Tony Cooper
Just shaw me where this has ever been tried. Screen writers do little
to encourage development along these lines. The studio moguls would
be pickering on them if they wasted any time on this.

ObAUE: "pickering"?

If you can't catch the references, don't call the person who tosses
them out "dumb".
Col. Pickering was the linguist in "Pygmalion" and "My Fair Lady" who
introduces Liza Doolittle to Henry Higgins.
This is why you don't fit in here, and will never fit in here. Instead
of recognizing the wordplay that is standard in this group, you grab
the wrong end of the stick and tear off on a rant involving unrelated
TV shows (which seem to be the lens through which you view
life-as-it-is) and embarrass yourself.
You are like that actor you referred to who appeared on Letterman and
complained about the view of the dog's butt. He sees a dog's butt
where the rest of us see an imposing vista that includes a man, a dog,
and a castle.

A pity you had to explain...

I first saw the play in 1956 - I saw it again about 8 years ago.

Can _you_ explain what Tony Cooper meant by "to picker"?

Note also that he asked for "examples where this has been tried" (scil. subtle
background details that subconsciously enhance the expressiveness of the
program) and then bitched that the very examples he requested were "unrelated" distractions from the point.

[charles]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by charles

Post by LFS

Post by Tony Cooper
On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 08:08:22 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"

On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 15:06:31 +0100, LFS

Post by LFS

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by charles
In Victorian/Edwardian England, village girls who worked as
ladies maids in the "big house" quickly adopted th accent of
their mistresses; their

(unconsciously)

Post by charles
brothers, who might work in the grounds, kept their local accent.

It would be interesting if *Downton Abbey* had depicted such
dialectal assimilation by a new recruit to the household, or a
girl who was promoted. Did they even depict a difference in
dialect between the ladies' maids and the kitchen staff who
would have had little interaction with the people? (I think
butlers are standardly depicted as speaking Standard even when
addressing staff. It would be _infra dig_ to reveal their
common origin.)

IIRC the kitchen maid, who bettered herself through education
and marriage, did change her style of speech slightly over the
several series. But it would of course be unwise to assume that
Downton Abbey is a truthful depiction of historical fact.

Hah! The idea that a play, movie, or TV show could include a
plot line of someone's dialectal assimilation is preposterous.
When pyg's fly!

Who said anything about a "plot line"??????? God you're dumb.
Movies and TV shows can incorporate details without even bringing
them to any viewer's consciousness (that's what a lot of film
criticism is about). I've frequently mentioned the use of Bertoia
sculptures in *Wolfen*. No one in the movie so much as looks at
them, let alone mentions one or plays with a desktop-sized one. In
a *Frasier* episode I saw last week, he was depressed about
something and went out on the foggy streets of Seattle for some
air -- and in the background of the montage were billboards and
marquees advertising all sorts of tragic plays and operas -- and
he took no notice of them. *The Big Bang Theory* is rewatchable
because it's full of tiny details like that. It's not just that
we've gotten to know the characters over ten seasons (that should
be about 250 episodes), it's that there's always something subtle
to pick up.

Just shaw me where this has ever been tried. Screen writers do
little to encourage development along these lines. The studio
moguls would be pickering on them if they wasted any time on this.

ObAUE: "pickering"?

If you can't catch the references, don't call the person who tosses
them out "dumb". Col. Pickering was the linguist in "Pygmalion" and
"My Fair Lady" who introduces Liza Doolittle to Henry Higgins.
This is why you don't fit in here, and will never fit in here.
Instead of recognizing the wordplay that is standard in this group,
you grab the wrong end of the stick and tear off on a rant
involving unrelated TV shows (which seem to be the lens through
which you view life-as-it-is) and embarrass yourself. You are like
that actor you referred to who appeared on Letterman and complained
about the view of the dog's butt. He sees a dog's butt where the
rest of us see an imposing vista that includes a man, a dog, and a
castle.

A pity you had to explain...

I first saw the play in 1956 - I saw it again about 8 years ago.

Can _you_ explain what Tony Cooper meant by "to picker"?

He wrote "pickering". - the name of a character. so - doing what the
character did.

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Note also that he asked for "examples where this has been tried" (scil.
subtle background details that subconsciously enhance the expressiveness
of the program) and then bitched that the very examples he requested
were "unrelated" distractions from the point.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by charles

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by charles

Post by LFS

Post by Tony Cooper
On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 08:08:22 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"

On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 15:06:31 +0100, LFS

Post by LFS

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by charles
In Victorian/Edwardian England, village girls who worked as
ladies maids in the "big house" quickly adopted th accent of
their mistresses; their

(unconsciously)

Post by charles
brothers, who might work in the grounds, kept their local accent.

It would be interesting if *Downton Abbey* had depicted such
dialectal assimilation by a new recruit to the household, or a
girl who was promoted. Did they even depict a difference in
dialect between the ladies' maids and the kitchen staff who
would have had little interaction with the people? (I think
butlers are standardly depicted as speaking Standard even when
addressing staff. It would be _infra dig_ to reveal their
common origin.)

IIRC the kitchen maid, who bettered herself through education
and marriage, did change her style of speech slightly over the
several series. But it would of course be unwise to assume that
Downton Abbey is a truthful depiction of historical fact.

Hah! The idea that a play, movie, or TV show could include a
plot line of someone's dialectal assimilation is preposterous.
When pyg's fly!

Who said anything about a "plot line"??????? God you're dumb.
Movies and TV shows can incorporate details without even bringing
them to any viewer's consciousness (that's what a lot of film
criticism is about). I've frequently mentioned the use of Bertoia
sculptures in *Wolfen*. No one in the movie so much as looks at
them, let alone mentions one or plays with a desktop-sized one. In
a *Frasier* episode I saw last week, he was depressed about
something and went out on the foggy streets of Seattle for some
air -- and in the background of the montage were billboards and
marquees advertising all sorts of tragic plays and operas -- and
he took no notice of them. *The Big Bang Theory* is rewatchable
because it's full of tiny details like that. It's not just that
we've gotten to know the characters over ten seasons (that should
be about 250 episodes), it's that there's always something subtle
to pick up.

Just shaw me where this has ever been tried. Screen writers do
little to encourage development along these lines. The studio
moguls would be pickering on them if they wasted any time on this.

ObAUE: "pickering"?

If you can't catch the references, don't call the person who tosses
them out "dumb". Col. Pickering was the linguist in "Pygmalion" and
"My Fair Lady" who introduces Liza Doolittle to Henry Higgins.
This is why you don't fit in here, and will never fit in here.
Instead of recognizing the wordplay that is standard in this group,
you grab the wrong end of the stick and tear off on a rant
involving unrelated TV shows (which seem to be the lens through
which you view life-as-it-is) and embarrass yourself. You are like
that actor you referred to who appeared on Letterman and complained
about the view of the dog's butt. He sees a dog's butt where the
rest of us see an imposing vista that includes a man, a dog, and a
castle.

A pity you had to explain...

I first saw the play in 1956 - I saw it again about 8 years ago.

Can _you_ explain what Tony Cooper meant by "to picker"?

He wrote "pickering". - the name of a character. so - doing what the
character did.

He used it as a present participle ("the moguls would be pickering"), so the
verb is "to picker."

Col Pickering's function is to represent the ordinary person, contrasting with
Prof. Higgins's obsessiveness. He is not a "linguist" -- the profession did not
exist a century ago, especially in England -- nor the contemporary equivalent,
a philologist; he is a phonetician. In England, the two have always been
distinct, in large part because of the rivalry at the University of London
between Daniel Jones, the celebrated phonetician whose biographers believe he,
and not Henry Sweet, was the model for Higgins and his much younger colleague
the linguist J. R. Firth. Jones excluded Firth from the Department of Phonetics,
so a Department of Linguistics was established for him.

That Col Pickering wrote a book "Spoken Sanskrit" shows that he was a conlang
enthusiast, akin to today's speakers of Klingon, Vulcan, or Quenya.

This throws no light on what he might have intended to say about the moguls.

Post by charles

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Note also that he asked for "examples where this has been tried" (scil.
subtle background details that subconsciously enhance the expressiveness
of the program) and then bitched that the very examples he requested
were "unrelated" distractions from the point.

So often, Tony starts fights by failing to comprehend what is right in front of
him. I'm then compelled to respond individually to each attack that builds on
his unstable foundation.

[CDB]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by charles

Post by LFS

Post by Tony Cooper

Post by Tony Cooper

Post by LFS

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by charles
In Victorian/Edwardian England, village girls who
worked as ladies maids in the "big house" quickly
adopted th accent of their mistresses; their

(unconsciously)

Post by charles
brothers, who might work in the grounds, kept their
local accent.

It would be interesting if *Downton Abbey* had
depicted such dialectal assimilation by a new recruit
to the household, or a girl who was promoted. Did they
even depict a difference in dialect between the
ladies' maids and the kitchen staff who would have had
little interaction with the people? (I think butlers
are standardly depicted as speaking Standard even when
addressing staff. It would be _infra dig_ to reveal
their common origin.)

IIRC the kitchen maid, who bettered herself through
education and marriage, did change her style of speech
slightly over the several series. But it would of course
be unwise to assume that Downton Abbey is a truthful
depiction of historical fact.

Hah! The idea that a play, movie, or TV show could
include a plot line of someone's dialectal assimilation is
preposterous. When pyg's fly!

Who said anything about a "plot line"??????? God you're dumb.
Movies and TV shows can incorporate details without even
bringing them to any viewer's consciousness (that's what a
lot of film criticism is about). I've frequently mentioned
the use of Bertoia sculptures in *Wolfen*. No one in the
movie so much as looks at them, let alone mentions one or
plays with a desktop-sized one. In a *Frasier* episode I saw
last week, he was depressed about something and went out on
the foggy streets of Seattle for some air -- and in the
background of the montage were billboards and marquees
advertising all sorts of tragic plays and operas -- and he
took no notice of them. *The Big Bang Theory* is rewatchable
because it's full of tiny details like that. It's not just
that we've gotten to know the characters over ten seasons
(that should be about 250 episodes), it's that there's
always something subtle to pick up.

Post by Tony Cooper
Just shaw me where this has ever been tried. Screen
writers do little to encourage development along these
lines. The studio moguls would be pickering on them if
they wasted any time on this.

ObAUE: "pickering"?

If you can't catch the references, don't call the person who
tosses them out "dumb". Col. Pickering was the linguist in
"Pygmalion" and "My Fair Lady" who introduces Liza Doolittle
to Henry Higgins. This is why you don't fit in here, and will
never fit in here. Instead of recognizing the wordplay that is
standard in this group, you grab the wrong end of the stick
and tear off on a rant involving unrelated TV shows (which seem
to be the lens through which you view life-as-it-is) and
embarrass yourself. You are like that actor you referred to who
appeared on Letterman and complained about the view of the
dog's butt. He sees a dog's butt where the rest of us see an
imposing vista that includes a man, a dog, and a castle.

A pity you had to explain...

I first saw the play in 1956 - I saw it again about 8 years ago.

[The studio moguls would be pickering on them if they wasted any time on
this.]

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Can _you_ explain what Tony Cooper meant by "to picker"?

It's a portmanteau. Their faces would get all scrunched-up and
sour-looking.

Why'z ev'rbody allus pick'rin' on me?

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Note also that he asked for "examples where this has been tried"
(scil. subtle background details that subconsciously enhance the
expressiveness of the program) and then bitched that the very
examples he requested were "unrelated" distractions from the point.

[aborted attempt to apply reasoned argument to a
behavioral problem.]

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by LFS

Post by Tony Cooper
On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 08:08:22 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Tony Cooper

Post by LFS

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by charles
In Victorian/Edwardian England, village girls who worked as ladies maids in
the "big house" quickly adopted th accent of their mistresses; their

(unconsciously)

Post by charles
brothers, who might work in the grounds, kept their local accent.

It would be interesting if *Downton Abbey* had depicted such dialectal
assimilation by a new recruit to the household, or a girl who was promoted.
Did they even depict a difference in dialect between the ladies' maids and
the kitchen staff who would have had little interaction with the people? (I
think butlers are standardly depicted as speaking Standard even when
addressing staff. It would be _infra dig_ to reveal their common origin.)

IIRC the kitchen maid, who bettered herself through education and
marriage, did change her style of speech slightly over the several series.
But it would of course be unwise to assume that Downton Abbey is a
truthful depiction of historical fact.

Hah! The idea that a play, movie, or TV show could include a plot
line of someone's dialectal assimilation is preposterous. When pyg's
fly!

Who said anything about a "plot line"???????
God you're dumb.
Movies and TV shows can incorporate details without even bringing them to
any viewer's consciousness (that's what a lot of film criticism is about).
I've frequently mentioned the use of Bertoia sculptures in *Wolfen*. No one
in the movie so much as looks at them, let alone mentions one or plays with
a desktop-sized one.
In a *Frasier* episode I saw last week, he was depressed about something and
went out on the foggy streets of Seattle for some air -- and in the background
of the montage were billboards and marquees advertising all sorts of tragic
plays and operas -- and he took no notice of them.
*The Big Bang Theory* is rewatchable because it's full of tiny details like
that. It's not just that we've gotten to know the characters over ten seasons
(that should be about 250 episodes), it's that there's always something subtle
to pick up.

Post by Tony Cooper
Just shaw me where this has ever been tried. Screen writers do little
to encourage development along these lines. The studio moguls would
be pickering on them if they wasted any time on this.

ObAUE: "pickering"?

If you can't catch the references, don't call the person who tosses
them out "dumb".
Col. Pickering was the linguist in "Pygmalion" and "My Fair Lady" who
introduces Liza Doolittle to Henry Higgins.
This is why you don't fit in here, and will never fit in here. Instead
of recognizing the wordplay that is standard in this group, you grab
the wrong end of the stick and tear off on a rant involving unrelated
TV shows (which seem to be the lens through which you view
life-as-it-is) and embarrass yourself.
You are like that actor you referred to who appeared on Letterman and
complained about the view of the dog's butt. He sees a dog's butt
where the rest of us see an imposing vista that includes a man, a dog,
and a castle.

A pity you had to explain...

A _SECOND_ encomium for utterly avoiding the issue?

That he thought that incorporating a gradual subtle dialect assimilation into
an actor's performance would be a "plot point"???? As opposed to a demonstration
of her skill and a "show runner"'s canniness?

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Tony Cooper
On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 08:08:22 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Tony Cooper

Post by LFS

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by charles
In Victorian/Edwardian England, village girls who worked as ladies maids in
the "big house" quickly adopted th accent of their mistresses; their

(unconsciously)

Post by charles
brothers, who might work in the grounds, kept their local accent.

It would be interesting if *Downton Abbey* had depicted such dialectal
assimilation by a new recruit to the household, or a girl who was promoted.
Did they even depict a difference in dialect between the ladies' maids and
the kitchen staff who would have had little interaction with the people? (I
think butlers are standardly depicted as speaking Standard even when
addressing staff. It would be _infra dig_ to reveal their common origin.)

IIRC the kitchen maid, who bettered herself through education and
marriage, did change her style of speech slightly over the several series.
But it would of course be unwise to assume that Downton Abbey is a
truthful depiction of historical fact.

Hah! The idea that a play, movie, or TV show could include a plot
line of someone's dialectal assimilation is preposterous. When pyg's
fly!

Who said anything about a "plot line"???????
God you're dumb.
Movies and TV shows can incorporate details without even bringing them to
any viewer's consciousness (that's what a lot of film criticism is about).
I've frequently mentioned the use of Bertoia sculptures in *Wolfen*. No one
in the movie so much as looks at them, let alone mentions one or plays with
a desktop-sized one.
In a *Frasier* episode I saw last week, he was depressed about something and
went out on the foggy streets of Seattle for some air -- and in the background
of the montage were billboards and marquees advertising all sorts of tragic
plays and operas -- and he took no notice of them.
*The Big Bang Theory* is rewatchable because it's full of tiny details like
that. It's not just that we've gotten to know the characters over ten seasons
(that should be about 250 episodes), it's that there's always something subtle
to pick up.

Post by Tony Cooper
Just shaw me where this has ever been tried. Screen writers do little
to encourage development along these lines. The studio moguls would
be pickering on them if they wasted any time on this.

ObAUE: "pickering"?

If you can't catch the references, don't call the person who tosses
them out "dumb".
Col. Pickering was the linguist in "Pygmalion" and "My Fair Lady" who
introduces Liza Doolittle to Henry Higgins.
This is why you don't fit in here, and will never fit in here. Instead
of recognizing the wordplay that is standard in this group, you grab
the wrong end of the stick and tear off on a rant involving unrelated
TV shows (which seem to be the lens through which you view
life-as-it-is) and embarrass yourself.

I probably know the play, the movies, the text, and the screenplay better than
you do.

How is arbitrarily stealing the name of a character in a play "wordplay"?

What do you propose that "to picker" means? How does it relate to the character
Col Pickering?

Post by Tony Cooper
You are like that actor you referred to who appeared on Letterman and
complained about the view of the dog's butt. He sees a dog's butt
where the rest of us see an imposing vista that includes a man, a dog,
and a castle.

You couldn't see the butt for the castle?

It isn't overlooked that you chose to pickering on an irrelevant afterthought
so as to misdirect the readership from the fact that you completely misinterpreted
the entire point of my message.

[Tony Cooper]

On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 10:13:02 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Tony Cooper
On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 08:08:22 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Tony Cooper

Post by LFS

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by charles
In Victorian/Edwardian England, village girls who worked as ladies maids in
the "big house" quickly adopted th accent of their mistresses; their

(unconsciously)

Post by charles
brothers, who might work in the grounds, kept their local accent.

It would be interesting if *Downton Abbey* had depicted such dialectal
assimilation by a new recruit to the household, or a girl who was promoted.
Did they even depict a difference in dialect between the ladies' maids and
the kitchen staff who would have had little interaction with the people? (I
think butlers are standardly depicted as speaking Standard even when
addressing staff. It would be _infra dig_ to reveal their common origin.)

IIRC the kitchen maid, who bettered herself through education and
marriage, did change her style of speech slightly over the several series.
But it would of course be unwise to assume that Downton Abbey is a
truthful depiction of historical fact.

Hah! The idea that a play, movie, or TV show could include a plot
line of someone's dialectal assimilation is preposterous. When pyg's
fly!

Who said anything about a "plot line"???????
God you're dumb.
Movies and TV shows can incorporate details without even bringing them to
any viewer's consciousness (that's what a lot of film criticism is about).
I've frequently mentioned the use of Bertoia sculptures in *Wolfen*. No one
in the movie so much as looks at them, let alone mentions one or plays with
a desktop-sized one.
In a *Frasier* episode I saw last week, he was depressed about something and
went out on the foggy streets of Seattle for some air -- and in the background
of the montage were billboards and marquees advertising all sorts of tragic
plays and operas -- and he took no notice of them.
*The Big Bang Theory* is rewatchable because it's full of tiny details like
that. It's not just that we've gotten to know the characters over ten seasons
(that should be about 250 episodes), it's that there's always something subtle
to pick up.

Post by Tony Cooper
Just shaw me where this has ever been tried. Screen writers do little
to encourage development along these lines. The studio moguls would
be pickering on them if they wasted any time on this.

ObAUE: "pickering"?

If you can't catch the references, don't call the person who tosses
them out "dumb".
Col. Pickering was the linguist in "Pygmalion" and "My Fair Lady" who
introduces Liza Doolittle to Henry Higgins.
This is why you don't fit in here, and will never fit in here. Instead
of recognizing the wordplay that is standard in this group, you grab
the wrong end of the stick and tear off on a rant involving unrelated
TV shows (which seem to be the lens through which you view
life-as-it-is) and embarrass yourself.

I probably know the play, the movies, the text, and the screenplay better than
you do.
How is arbitrarily stealing the name of a character in a play "wordplay"?
What do you propose that "to picker" means? How does it relate to the character
Col Pickering?

"to picker" was not used.

You don't see how "The studio moguls would be pickering on them..." is
wordplay? Similar to "When pygs fly!", "Just shaw me..." and "Screen
writers do little...".

You are *so* out of your element here. The problem isn't that you are
not clever enough to catch the wordplay or references, but that you
make such an ass of yourself when you defend your obliviousness.

[Mack A. Damia]

On Wed, 09 Aug 2017 14:45:01 -0400, Tony Cooper

Post by Tony Cooper
On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 10:13:02 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Tony Cooper
On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 08:08:22 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Tony Cooper

Post by LFS

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by charles
In Victorian/Edwardian England, village girls who worked as ladies maids in
the "big house" quickly adopted th accent of their mistresses; their

(unconsciously)

Post by charles
brothers, who might work in the grounds, kept their local accent.

It would be interesting if *Downton Abbey* had depicted such dialectal
assimilation by a new recruit to the household, or a girl who was promoted.
Did they even depict a difference in dialect between the ladies' maids and
the kitchen staff who would have had little interaction with the people? (I
think butlers are standardly depicted as speaking Standard even when
addressing staff. It would be _infra dig_ to reveal their common origin.)

IIRC the kitchen maid, who bettered herself through education and
marriage, did change her style of speech slightly over the several series.
But it would of course be unwise to assume that Downton Abbey is a
truthful depiction of historical fact.

Hah! The idea that a play, movie, or TV show could include a plot
line of someone's dialectal assimilation is preposterous. When pyg's
fly!

Who said anything about a "plot line"???????
God you're dumb.
Movies and TV shows can incorporate details without even bringing them to
any viewer's consciousness (that's what a lot of film criticism is about).
I've frequently mentioned the use of Bertoia sculptures in *Wolfen*. No one
in the movie so much as looks at them, let alone mentions one or plays with
a desktop-sized one.
In a *Frasier* episode I saw last week, he was depressed about something and
went out on the foggy streets of Seattle for some air -- and in the background
of the montage were billboards and marquees advertising all sorts of tragic
plays and operas -- and he took no notice of them.
*The Big Bang Theory* is rewatchable because it's full of tiny details like
that. It's not just that we've gotten to know the characters over ten seasons
(that should be about 250 episodes), it's that there's always something subtle
to pick up.

Post by Tony Cooper
Just shaw me where this has ever been tried. Screen writers do little
to encourage development along these lines. The studio moguls would
be pickering on them if they wasted any time on this.

ObAUE: "pickering"?

If you can't catch the references, don't call the person who tosses
them out "dumb".
Col. Pickering was the linguist in "Pygmalion" and "My Fair Lady" who
introduces Liza Doolittle to Henry Higgins.
This is why you don't fit in here, and will never fit in here. Instead
of recognizing the wordplay that is standard in this group, you grab
the wrong end of the stick and tear off on a rant involving unrelated
TV shows (which seem to be the lens through which you view
life-as-it-is) and embarrass yourself.

I probably know the play, the movies, the text, and the screenplay better than
you do.
How is arbitrarily stealing the name of a character in a play "wordplay"?
What do you propose that "to picker" means? How does it relate to the character
Col Pickering?

"to picker" was not used.
You don't see how "The studio moguls would be pickering on them..." is
wordplay? Similar to "When pygs fly!", "Just shaw me..." and "Screen
writers do little...".
You are *so* out of your element here. The problem isn't that you are
not clever enough to catch the wordplay or references, but that you
make such an ass of yourself when you defend your obliviousness.

Methinks he plays the ignorance card, but it doesn't work; it is far
too obvious.

[Richard Heathfield]

Post by Mack A. Damia
On Wed, 09 Aug 2017 14:45:01 -0400, Tony Cooper

[On PTD]

Post by Mack A. Damia

Post by Tony Cooper
You are *so* out of your element here. The problem isn't that you are
not clever enough to catch the wordplay or references, but that you
make such an ass of yourself when you defend your obliviousness.

Methinks he plays the ignorance card, but it doesn't work; it is far
too obvious.

Besides which, that's *my* card. I wondered where it had got to, and I'd
like it back, please.

Thank *you*!

*
***
*****
***
*

Ah! Bliss!

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Tony Cooper
On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 10:13:02 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels
What do you propose that "to picker" means? How does it relate to the character
Col Pickering?

"to picker" was not used.

God you're dumb. "To picker" is the citation form of the verb whose participle,
"pickering," you used in writing "the moguls would be pickering."

[LFS]

Post by Tony Cooper

Post by LFS

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by charles
In Victorian/Edwardian England, village girls who worked as ladies maids in
the "big house" quickly adopted th accent of their mistresses; their

(unconsciously)

Post by charles
brothers, who might work in the grounds, kept their local accent.

It would be interesting if *Downton Abbey* had depicted such dialectal
assimilation by a new recruit to the household, or a girl who was promoted.
Did they even depict a difference in dialect between the ladies' maids and
the kitchen staff who would have had little interaction with the people? (I
think butlers are standardly depicted as speaking Standard even when
addressing staff. It would be _infra dig_ to reveal their common origin.)

IIRC the kitchen maid, who bettered herself through education and
marriage, did change her style of speech slightly over the several series.
But it would of course be unwise to assume that Downton Abbey is a
truthful depiction of historical fact.

Hah! The idea that a play, movie, or TV show could include a plot
line of someone's dialectal assimilation is preposterous. When pyg's
fly!
Just shaw me where this has ever been tried. Screen writers do little
to encourage development along these lines. The studio moguls would
be pickering on them if they wasted any time on this.

Nicely done, Mr C.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by LFS

Post by Tony Cooper

Post by LFS

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by charles
In Victorian/Edwardian England, village girls who worked as ladies maids in
the "big house" quickly adopted th accent of their mistresses; their

(unconsciously)

Post by charles
brothers, who might work in the grounds, kept their local accent.

It would be interesting if *Downton Abbey* had depicted such dialectal
assimilation by a new recruit to the household, or a girl who was promoted.
Did they even depict a difference in dialect between the ladies' maids and
the kitchen staff who would have had little interaction with the people? (I
think butlers are standardly depicted as speaking Standard even when
addressing staff. It would be _infra dig_ to reveal their common origin.)

IIRC the kitchen maid, who bettered herself through education and
marriage, did change her style of speech slightly over the several series.
But it would of course be unwise to assume that Downton Abbey is a
truthful depiction of historical fact.

Hah! The idea that a play, movie, or TV show could include a plot
line of someone's dialectal assimilation is preposterous. When pyg's
fly!
Just shaw me where this has ever been tried. Screen writers do little
to encourage development along these lines. The studio moguls would
be pickering on them if they wasted any time on this.

Nicely done, Mr C.

You call complete evasion of his boneheaded error "nicely done"?

[LFS]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by LFS

Post by Tony Cooper

Post by LFS

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by charles
In Victorian/Edwardian England, village girls who worked as ladies maids in
the "big house" quickly adopted th accent of their mistresses; their

(unconsciously)

Post by charles
brothers, who might work in the grounds, kept their local accent.

It would be interesting if *Downton Abbey* had depicted such dialectal
assimilation by a new recruit to the household, or a girl who was promoted.
Did they even depict a difference in dialect between the ladies' maids and
the kitchen staff who would have had little interaction with the people? (I
think butlers are standardly depicted as speaking Standard even when
addressing staff. It would be _infra dig_ to reveal their common origin.)

IIRC the kitchen maid, who bettered herself through education and
marriage, did change her style of speech slightly over the several series.
But it would of course be unwise to assume that Downton Abbey is a
truthful depiction of historical fact.

Hah! The idea that a play, movie, or TV show could include a plot
line of someone's dialectal assimilation is preposterous. When pyg's
fly!
Just shaw me where this has ever been tried. Screen writers do little
to encourage development along these lines. The studio moguls would
be pickering on them if they wasted any time on this.

Nicely done, Mr C.

You call complete evasion of his boneheaded error "nicely done"?

You have a tin ear for wordplay. And irony. And if only you had a sense
of humour you might be quite good company.

[Katy Jennison]

Post by LFS

Post by Tony Cooper

Post by LFS

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by charles
In Victorian/Edwardian England, village girls who worked as ladies maids in
the "big house" quickly adopted th accent of their mistresses; their

(unconsciously)

Post by charles
brothers, who might work in the grounds, kept their local accent.

It would be interesting if *Downton Abbey* had depicted such dialectal
assimilation by a new recruit to the household, or a girl who was promoted.
Did they even depict a difference in dialect between the ladies' maids and
the kitchen staff who would have had little interaction with the people? (I
think butlers are standardly depicted as speaking Standard even when
addressing staff. It would be _infra dig_ to reveal their common origin.)

IIRC the kitchen maid, who bettered herself through education and
marriage, did change her style of speech slightly over the several series.
But it would of course be unwise to assume that Downton Abbey is a
truthful depiction of historical fact.

Hah! The idea that a play, movie, or TV show could include a plot
line of someone's dialectal assimilation is preposterous. When pyg's
fly!
Just shaw me where this has ever been tried. Screen writers do little
to encourage development along these lines. The studio moguls would
be pickering on them if they wasted any time on this.

Nicely done, Mr C.

+1.

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

Post by LFS

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by charles
In Victorian/Edwardian England, village girls who worked as ladies maids in
the "big house" quickly adopted th accent of their mistresses; their

(unconsciously)

Post by charles
brothers, who might work in the grounds, kept their local accent.

It would be interesting if *Downton Abbey* had depicted such dialectal
assimilation by a new recruit to the household, or a girl who was promoted.
Did they even depict a difference in dialect between the ladies' maids and
the kitchen staff who would have had little interaction with the people? (I
think butlers are standardly depicted as speaking Standard even when
addressing staff. It would be _infra dig_ to reveal their common origin.)

IIRC the kitchen maid, who bettered herself through education and
marriage, did change her style of speech slightly over the several series.

There is also the point that in real life an individual will often speak
in a register appropriate to context. This is usually a difference in
vocabulary and phrasing, and sometimes a difference in pronunciation.

Post by LFS
But it would of course be unwise to assume that Downton Abbey is a
truthful depiction of historical fact.

[Janet]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by charles
In Victorian/Edwardian England, village girls who worked as ladies maids in
the "big house" quickly adopted th accent of their mistresses; their

(unconsciously)

No, purposely. "Speaking nicely" was a career requirement for any who
wanted to work above stairs as a personal servant.

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by charles
brothers, who might work in the grounds, kept their local accent.

It would be interesting if *Downton Abbey* had depicted such dialectal
assimilation by a new recruit to the household, or a girl who was promoted.

Branson, the chauffeur who married Lady Sybil, is an example. In
series one his speech places him as an Irish servant. He never loses the
Irish accent but it's diluted and refined as he becomes socially
integrated into her family. By series 5 he has acquired the speech of an
educated Irish gentleman.

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Did they even depict a difference in dialect between the ladies' maids and
the kitchen staff who would have had little interaction with the people?

Yes, of course. The Downton kitchen staff have stronger regional
accents dialects and vocabulary than those of the above-stairs staff.
There's a class distinction in their speech.


(I

Post by Peter T. Daniels
think butlers are standardly depicted as speaking Standard even when
addressing staff. It would be _infra dig_ to reveal their common origin.)

None of the butlers in Downton speak the RP of their upperclass
employers. The servants always retain a hint of regional speech. Carson
carefully avoids any native Yorkshire regional dialect or accent but his
intonation still identifies his origin.

He has honed an over-formal slightly mannered imitation of upperclass
grammar and vocabulary but one is always aware it's a conscious act; (
a classic British class marker of one who can never quite be mistaken
for the class he aspires to).

Janet.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Janet

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by charles
In Victorian/Edwardian England, village girls who worked as ladies maids in
the "big house" quickly adopted th accent of their mistresses; their

(unconsciously)

No, purposely. "Speaking nicely" was a career requirement for any who
wanted to work above stairs as a personal servant.

Sorry, but a basic sociolinguistic finding (as reported just above with Peter
Moylan's description of his and his siblings' speech) is that people's speech
_unconsciously_ changes to adapt to that of their surroundings.

Your personal servant could learn new vocabulary, could learn not to mumble,
etc., but could not be taught the subtleties of the different vowel systems
(for instance) between Upstairs and Downstairs speech -- (a) because they had
not yet been described by phoneticians and (b) because they're incredibly
hard to teach -- precisely because they are _unconscious_ attributes of
behavior. They assimilate _unconsciously_ to the speech heard around them.

Post by Janet

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by charles
brothers, who might work in the grounds, kept their local accent.

It would be interesting if *Downton Abbey* had depicted such dialectal
assimilation by a new recruit to the household, or a girl who was promoted.

Branson, the chauffeur who married Lady Sybil, is an example. In
series one his speech places him as an Irish servant. He never loses the
Irish accent but it's diluted and refined as he becomes socially
integrated into her family. By series 5 he has acquired the speech of an
educated Irish gentleman.

So long as he isn't shown deliberately trying to imitate his betters (which
would lead to disastrous parody and perhaps dismissal if a servant tried it in
real life), that's _exactly_ what I was talking about.

Post by Janet

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Did they even depict a difference in dialect between the ladies' maids and
the kitchen staff who would have had little interaction with the people?

Yes, of course. The Downton kitchen staff have stronger regional
accents dialects and vocabulary than those of the above-stairs staff.
There's a class distinction in their speech.

Good!

Post by Janet
(I

Post by Peter T. Daniels
think butlers are standardly depicted as speaking Standard even when
addressing staff. It would be _infra dig_ to reveal their common origin.)

None of the butlers in Downton speak the RP of their upperclass
employers. The servants always retain a hint of regional speech. Carson
carefully avoids any native Yorkshire regional dialect or accent but his
intonation still identifies his origin.
He has honed an over-formal slightly mannered imitation of upperclass
grammar and vocabulary but one is always aware it's a conscious act; (
a classic British class marker of one who can never quite be mistaken
for the class he aspires to).

That unnaturalness wouldn't happen with genuine assimilation. It would seem to
be a British-class-thing.

What about Steven Fry's Jeeves?

[Janet]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Janet

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by charles
In Victorian/Edwardian England, village girls who worked as ladies maids in
the "big house" quickly adopted th accent of their mistresses; their

(unconsciously)

No, purposely. "Speaking nicely" was a career requirement for any who
wanted to work above stairs as a personal servant.

Sorry, but a basic sociolinguistic finding (as reported just above with Peter
Moylan's description of his and his siblings' speech) is that people's speech
_unconsciously_ changes to adapt to that of their surroundings.

Residential servants ate and slept with the other servants and a
lady's maid would undertake much of her work in service rooms in the
company of other servants.

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Your personal servant could learn new vocabulary, could learn not to mumble,
etc., but could not be taught the subtleties of the different vowel systems
(for instance) between Upstairs and Downstairs speech -- (a) because they had
not yet been described by phoneticians and (b) because they're incredibly
hard to teach

British social history suggests otherwise.

Nobody "taught" wannabee ladies maids, footmen, valets and butlers
more refined speech; they copied it from employers. The incentive to do
so, was to work indoors and above stairs which provided better pay and
working conditions than outdoor rough labour or kitchen skivvy.

Janet.

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Janet

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by charles
brothers, who might work in the grounds, kept their local accent.

It would be interesting if *Downton Abbey* had depicted such dialectal
assimilation by a new recruit to the household, or a girl who was promoted.

Branson, the chauffeur who married Lady Sybil, is an example. In
series one his speech places him as an Irish servant. He never loses the
Irish accent but it's diluted and refined as he becomes socially
integrated into her family. By series 5 he has acquired the speech of an
educated Irish gentleman.

So long as he isn't shown deliberately trying to imitate his betters (which
would lead to disastrous parody and perhaps dismissal if a servant tried it in
real life), that's _exactly_ what I was talking about.

Post by Janet

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Did they even depict a difference in dialect between the ladies' maids and
the kitchen staff who would have had little interaction with the people?

Yes, of course. The Downton kitchen staff have stronger regional
accents dialects and vocabulary than those of the above-stairs staff.
There's a class distinction in their speech.

Good!

Post by Janet
(I

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Janet

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Janet

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by charles
In Victorian/Edwardian England, village girls who worked as ladies maids in
the "big house" quickly adopted th accent of their mistresses; their

(unconsciously)

No, purposely. "Speaking nicely" was a career requirement for any who
wanted to work above stairs as a personal servant.

Sorry, but a basic sociolinguistic finding (as reported just above with Peter
Moylan's description of his and his siblings' speech) is that people's speech
_unconsciously_ changes to adapt to that of their surroundings.

Residential servants ate and slept with the other servants and a
lady's maid would undertake much of her work in service rooms in the
company of other servants.

She would therefore (unconsciously) code-switch when in her different speech-
communities -- just as Peter Moylan described in several anecdotes about himself
and his wife.

Post by Janet

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Your personal servant could learn new vocabulary, could learn not to mumble,
etc., but could not be taught the subtleties of the different vowel systems
(for instance) between Upstairs and Downstairs speech -- (a) because they had
not yet been described by phoneticians and (b) because they're incredibly
hard to teach

British social history suggests otherwise.
Nobody "taught" wannabee ladies maids, footmen, valets and butlers
more refined speech; they copied it from employers. The incentive to do
so, was to work indoors and above stairs which provided better pay and
working conditions than outdoor rough labour or kitchen skivvy.

That is EXACTLY what I said (so long as you recognize that the "copying" was
unconscious).

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

Post by Janet

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Janet

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by charles
In Victorian/Edwardian England, village girls who worked as ladies maids in
the "big house" quickly adopted th accent of their mistresses; their

(unconsciously)

No, purposely. "Speaking nicely" was a career requirement for any who
wanted to work above stairs as a personal servant.

Sorry, but a basic sociolinguistic finding (as reported just above with Peter
Moylan's description of his and his siblings' speech) is that people's speech
_unconsciously_ changes to adapt to that of their surroundings.

Residential servants ate and slept with the other servants and a
lady's maid would undertake much of her work in service rooms in the
company of other servants.

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Your personal servant could learn new vocabulary, could learn not to mumble,
etc., but could not be taught the subtleties of the different vowel systems
(for instance) between Upstairs and Downstairs speech -- (a) because they had
not yet been described by phoneticians and (b) because they're incredibly
hard to teach

British social history suggests otherwise.
Nobody "taught" wannabee ladies maids, footmen, valets and butlers
more refined speech; they copied it from employers. The incentive to do
so, was to work indoors and above stairs which provided better pay and
working conditions than outdoor rough labour or kitchen skivvy.
Janet.

There might have been a form of teaching. I imagine that a newbie ladies
maid would accompany an experienced ladies maid in her contacts with
employers so as to see how things were done, including how to speak to
the employers.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]

Post by Janet

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Janet

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by charles
In Victorian/Edwardian England, village girls who worked as ladies maids in
the "big house" quickly adopted th accent of their mistresses; their

(unconsciously)

No, purposely. "Speaking nicely" was a career requirement for any who
wanted to work above stairs as a personal servant.

Sorry, but a basic sociolinguistic finding (as reported just above with Peter
Moylan's description of his and his siblings' speech) is that people's speech
_unconsciously_ changes to adapt to that of their surroundings.

Residential servants ate and slept with the other servants and a
lady's maid would undertake much of her work in service rooms in the
company of other servants.

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Your personal servant could learn new vocabulary, could learn not to mumble,
etc., but could not be taught the subtleties of the different vowel systems
(for instance) between Upstairs and Downstairs speech -- (a) because they had
not yet been described by phoneticians and (b) because they're incredibly
hard to teach

British social history suggests otherwise.
Nobody "taught" wannabee ladies maids, footmen, valets and butlers
more refined speech; they copied it from employers. The incentive to do
so, was to work indoors and above stairs which provided better pay and
working conditions than outdoor rough labour or kitchen skivvy. .

There might have been a form of teaching. I imagine that a newbie ladies
maid would accompany an experienced ladies maid in her contacts with
employers so as to see how things were done, including how to speak to
the employers.

In that way she would learn the forms of address and of general politeness.
She could only assimilate the dialect from those who spoke it natively.
Instruction might help her speak "like the radio," or whatever the equivalent
might have been in Edwardian times, but it would necessarily sound artificial
and like "putting on airs."

[Janet]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]

Post by Janet

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Janet

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by charles
In Victorian/Edwardian England, village girls who worked as ladies maids in
the "big house" quickly adopted th accent of their mistresses; their

(unconsciously)

No, purposely. "Speaking nicely" was a career requirement for any who
wanted to work above stairs as a personal servant.

Sorry, but a basic sociolinguistic finding (as reported just above with Peter
Moylan's description of his and his siblings' speech) is that people's speech
_unconsciously_ changes to adapt to that of their surroundings.

Residential servants ate and slept with the other servants and a
lady's maid would undertake much of her work in service rooms in the
company of other servants.

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Your personal servant could learn new vocabulary, could learn not to mumble,
etc., but could not be taught the subtleties of the different vowel systems
(for instance) between Upstairs and Downstairs speech -- (a) because they had
not yet been described by phoneticians and (b) because they're incredibly
hard to teach

British social history suggests otherwise.
Nobody "taught" wannabee ladies maids, footmen, valets and butlers
more refined speech; they copied it from employers. The incentive to do
so, was to work indoors and above stairs which provided better pay and
working conditions than outdoor rough labour or kitchen skivvy. .

There might have been a form of teaching. I imagine that a newbie ladies
maid would accompany an experienced ladies maid in her contacts with
employers so as to see how things were done, including how to speak to
the employers.

In that way she would learn the forms of address and of general politeness.
She could only assimilate the dialect from those who spoke it natively.
Instruction might help her speak "like the radio,"

Go away and learn some British social history, it might help you save
a bit of face.

Janet

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Janet

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]

Post by Janet

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Janet

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by charles
In Victorian/Edwardian England, village girls who worked as ladies maids in
the "big house" quickly adopted th accent of their mistresses; their

(unconsciously)

No, purposely. "Speaking nicely" was a career requirement for any who
wanted to work above stairs as a personal servant.

Sorry, but a basic sociolinguistic finding (as reported just above with Peter
Moylan's description of his and his siblings' speech) is that people's speech
_unconsciously_ changes to adapt to that of their surroundings.

Residential servants ate and slept with the other servants and a
lady's maid would undertake much of her work in service rooms in the
company of other servants.

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Your personal servant could learn new vocabulary, could learn not to mumble,
etc., but could not be taught the subtleties of the different vowel systems
(for instance) between Upstairs and Downstairs speech -- (a) because they had
not yet been described by phoneticians and (b) because they're incredibly
hard to teach

British social history suggests otherwise.
Nobody "taught" wannabee ladies maids, footmen, valets and butlers
more refined speech; they copied it from employers. The incentive to do
so, was to work indoors and above stairs which provided better pay and
working conditions than outdoor rough labour or kitchen skivvy. .

There might have been a form of teaching. I imagine that a newbie ladies
maid would accompany an experienced ladies maid in her contacts with
employers so as to see how things were done, including how to speak to
the employers.

In that way she would learn the forms of address and of general politeness.
She could only assimilate the dialect from those who spoke it natively.
Instruction might help her speak "like the radio,"

Go away and learn some British social history, it might help you save
a bit of face.

Again and again thou seem'st unwilling to learn anything about how language
works in society ("sociolinguistics"). It's simple fact that the sorts of
phenomena involved in sounding like the speakers in one's surroundings are
in most cases not available to the consciousness of speakers and not amenable
to explicit teaching. They change AUTOMATICALLY, and different varieties are
used when among different speech-communities (in this case, Upstairs and
Downstairs).

[Tony Cooper]

Post by Janet

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by charles
In Victorian/Edwardian England, village girls who worked as ladies maids in
the "big house" quickly adopted th accent of their mistresses; their

(unconsciously)

No, purposely. "Speaking nicely" was a career requirement for any who
wanted to work above stairs as a personal servant.

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by charles
brothers, who might work in the grounds, kept their local accent.

It would be interesting if *Downton Abbey* had depicted such dialectal
assimilation by a new recruit to the household, or a girl who was promoted.

Branson, the chauffeur who married Lady Sybil, is an example. In
series one his speech places him as an Irish servant. He never loses the
Irish accent but it's diluted and refined as he becomes socially
integrated into her family. By series 5 he has acquired the speech of an
educated Irish gentleman.

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Did they even depict a difference in dialect between the ladies' maids and
the kitchen staff who would have had little interaction with the people?

Yes, of course. The Downton kitchen staff have stronger regional
accents dialects and vocabulary than those of the above-stairs staff.
There's a class distinction in their speech.

This scene with Mrs Patmore (the cook), Daisy, and Sybil offers a
example of accents.

[Peter Moylan]

Post by charles

Post by Cheryl
Would twins be likely to have different pronunciations unless they were
raised apart? I'm not sure, although I did once read an article about
several families having members with different accents, and I've seen
similar things myself. It seems like such a specific, minor difference,
though - not like cases where the family moved at some point, and the
younger generation picked up a different accent than that maintained by
older relatives.

In Victorian/Edwardian England, village girls who worked as ladies maids in
the "big house" quickly adopted th accent of their mistresses; their
brothers, who might work in the grounds, kept their local accent.

My family is scattered, and one can indeed pick up that I have a NSW
accent, one of my sisters has a WA accent, the other sister has one
Victorian accent and my brother has a different Victorian accent. This
is despite the fact that we all grew up in the same small town. Of
course we do revert to our childhood accent when speaking together.

I didn't even notice this until my Belgian-born second wife pointed it
out. She could understand me most of the time, but she couldn't
understand me when I was speaking to my sister. I didn't even notice the
difference, but she did.

The opposite happened when we were in the north of Belgium. To my ear,
her accent when speaking Dutch changed radically when we crossed the
Dutch border, but she wasn't aware of any difference. This particularly
struck me when we visited Sluis, which is something like 1 km from the
border.

[Cheryl]

Post by Peter Moylan

Post by charles

Post by Cheryl
Would twins be likely to have different pronunciations unless they were
raised apart? I'm not sure, although I did once read an article about
several families having members with different accents, and I've seen
similar things myself. It seems like such a specific, minor difference,
though - not like cases where the family moved at some point, and the
younger generation picked up a different accent than that maintained by
older relatives.

In Victorian/Edwardian England, village girls who worked as ladies maids in
the "big house" quickly adopted th accent of their mistresses; their
brothers, who might work in the grounds, kept their local accent.

My family is scattered, and one can indeed pick up that I have a NSW
accent, one of my sisters has a WA accent, the other sister has one
Victorian accent and my brother has a different Victorian accent. This
is despite the fact that we all grew up in the same small town. Of
course we do revert to our childhood accent when speaking together.
I didn't even notice this until my Belgian-born second wife pointed it
out. She could understand me most of the time, but she couldn't
understand me when I was speaking to my sister. I didn't even notice the
difference, but she did.
The opposite happened when we were in the north of Belgium. To my ear,
her accent when speaking Dutch changed radically when we crossed the
Dutch border, but she wasn't aware of any difference. This particularly
struck me when we visited Sluis, which is something like 1 km from the
border.

I was wondering about the very specific difference noted in the
pronunciation of a single word. I've encountered lots of situations in
which people learn different accents as they move around, but they don't
involve single words. When I started University, my friends and I
commented on how we spoke differently among ourselves than in the
classroom - mostly much faster and informally. I initially stayed in a
student residence that kind of specialized in housing student in their
first year or so away from rural homes. We all understood each other -
but when one of the girls met another from the same community, I
couldn't understand them at all!

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

Post by Peter Moylan

Post by charles

Post by Cheryl
Would twins be likely to have different pronunciations unless they were
raised apart? I'm not sure, although I did once read an article about
several families having members with different accents, and I've seen
similar things myself. It seems like such a specific, minor difference,
though - not like cases where the family moved at some point, and the
younger generation picked up a different accent than that maintained by
older relatives.

In Victorian/Edwardian England, village girls who worked as ladies maids in
the "big house" quickly adopted th accent of their mistresses; their
brothers, who might work in the grounds, kept their local accent.

My family is scattered, and one can indeed pick up that I have a NSW
accent, one of my sisters has a WA accent, the other sister has one
Victorian accent and my brother has a different Victorian accent. This
is despite the fact that we all grew up in the same small town. Of
course we do revert to our childhood accent when speaking together.
I didn't even notice this until my Belgian-born second wife pointed it
out. She could understand me most of the time, but she couldn't
understand me when I was speaking to my sister. I didn't even notice the
difference, but she did.

When our daughter was born we wanted a name that would be easily
pronounceable (and to our ears approximately the same) in English and
Spanish. (That was before we lived in France.) When she was old enough
to speak English, Spanish and French I noticed that although for us our
pronunciation was the same in all three she herself pronounced in three
different ways according to who she was talking to.

Post by Peter Moylan
The opposite happened when we were in the north of Belgium. To my ear,
her accent when speaking Dutch changed radically when we crossed the
Dutch border, but she wasn't aware of any difference. This particularly
struck me when we visited Sluis, which is something like 1 km from the
border.

[Tak To]

Post by Cheryl
[...]
Would twins be likely to have different pronunciations unless they were
raised apart? I'm not sure, although I did once read an article about
several families having members with different accents, and I've seen
similar things myself. It seems like such a specific, minor difference,
though - not like cases where the family moved at some point, and the
younger generation picked up a different accent than that maintained by
older relatives.
I think there's an Agatha Christie story that turns on different
spellings of some word used by sisters, one of whom is impersonating the
other.

Twins might deliberately take on different pronunciations/spellings/
favorite colors/etc to assert individuality and/or for fun.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

Post by Tak To

Post by Cheryl
[...]
Would twins be likely to have different pronunciations unless they were
raised apart? I'm not sure, although I did once read an article about
several families having members with different accents, and I've seen
similar things myself. It seems like such a specific, minor difference,
though - not like cases where the family moved at some point, and the
younger generation picked up a different accent than that maintained by
older relatives.
I think there's an Agatha Christie story that turns on different
spellings of some word used by sisters, one of whom is impersonating the
other.

Twins might deliberately take on different pronunciations/spellings/
favorite colors/etc to assert individuality and/or for fun.

Many years ago I travelled deck-class in a boat from Venice to Haifa.
There were two young women on the same deck who looked very different.
They were actually identical twins, but one had bleached her hair
blonde and the other had dyed it black. Once one knew that, one could
see how similar they were, but it was remarkable how much the hair
colour affected one's perception.

[Cheryl]

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Tak To

Post by Cheryl
[...]
Would twins be likely to have different pronunciations unless they were
raised apart? I'm not sure, although I did once read an article about
several families having members with different accents, and I've seen
similar things myself. It seems like such a specific, minor difference,
though - not like cases where the family moved at some point, and the
younger generation picked up a different accent than that maintained by
older relatives.
I think there's an Agatha Christie story that turns on different
spellings of some word used by sisters, one of whom is impersonating the
other.

Twins might deliberately take on different pronunciations/spellings/
favorite colors/etc to assert individuality and/or for fun.

Many years ago I travelled deck-class in a boat from Venice to Haifa.
There were two young women on the same deck who looked very different.
They were actually identical twins, but one had bleached her hair blonde
and the other had dyed it black. Once one knew that, one could see how
similar they were, but it was remarkable how much the hair colour
affected one's perception.

I don't have a good memory for faces, and such changes often fool me.
Actors, in particular, I often find hard to spot when they're playing
different roles.

I think women have far more leeway than men when it comes to changing
their appearance through hair style, makeup and clothing. Men, however,
can make really drastic changes in their appearance by changing their
facial hair.

[Mark Brader]

Post by Cheryl

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
There were two young women on the same deck who looked very different.
They were actually identical twins, but one had bleached her hair blonde
and the other had dyed it black. Once one knew that, one could see how
similar they were, but it was remarkable how much the hair colour
affected one's perception.

I don't have a good memory for faces, and such changes often fool me.
Actors, in particular, I often find hard to spot when they're playing
different roles.

I'm like that too. And what Athel's story reminded me of was the 1998
movie "Sliding Doors". Gwyneth Paltrow plays a woman who goes into an
Underground station and her entire future depends on whether she just
misses or just catches a train. The audience sees *both* versions of
the story -- and conveniently for us, not far into one of the stories
she decides to have her hair dyed, so from then on we instantly know
which is which.

[Tony Cooper]

On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 19:32:04 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Lewis
I've discovered over the years that the vast majority of people
complaining about accents have no idea what they are talking about.
I've heard many people complain about Hugh Laurie's fake British accent,
for example.

Hmm. I'm still cross about a review I read on Amazon a couple of days
ago that complained about the author's notion that Australians rhyme
"aunt" with "ant", because, in the reviewer's opinion, only Americans
do that. Setting aside the fact that even if true it would be a trivial
point not worth mentioning, I don't think it's even true. For what it's
worth, do some Australians rhyme "aunt" with "ant"? Do all Americans do
it?

Based on a in-depth survey of this household, 50% of Americans
(represented by my wife) say it to rhyme with "font" and 50% of
Americans (represented by me) say it to rhyme with "rant".

As a cautionary note I should point out that the survey results cannot
be extrapolated to total US figures, but it does dispel the "all"
factor.

[Katy Jennison]

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Lewis
I've discovered over the years that the vast majority of people
complaining about accents have no idea what they are talking about.
I've heard many people complain about Hugh Laurie's fake British accent,
for example.

Hmm. I'm still cross about a review I read on Amazon a couple of days
ago that complained about the author's notion that Australians rhyme
"aunt" with "ant", because, in the reviewer's opinion, only Americans do
that. Setting aside the fact that even if true it would be a trivial
point not worth mentioning, I don't think it's even true. For what it's
worth, do some Australians rhyme "aunt" with "ant"? Do all Americans do it?

Even some Brits do it.

[musika]

Post by Katy Jennison

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Hmm. I'm still cross about a review I read on Amazon a couple of days
ago that complained about the author's notion that Australians rhyme
"aunt" with "ant", because, in the reviewer's opinion, only Americans do
that. Setting aside the fact that even if true it would be a trivial
point not worth mentioning, I don't think it's even true. For what it's
worth, do some Australians rhyme "aunt" with "ant"? Do all Americans do it?

Even some Brits do it.

Standard for me. It amuses me when people say can and cahnt.

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

Post by musika

Post by Katy Jennison

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Hmm. I'm still cross about a review I read on Amazon a couple of days
ago that complained about the author's notion that Australians rhyme
"aunt" with "ant", because, in the reviewer's opinion, only Americans do
that. Setting aside the fact that even if true it would be a trivial
point not worth mentioning, I don't think it's even true. For what it's
worth, do some Australians rhyme "aunt" with "ant"? Do all Americans do it?

Even some Brits do it.

Standard for me. It amuses me when people say can and cahnt.

I had a co-worker here in Northern Ireland who confused everyone with
his pronunciations of "can" and "can't". People were used to a short-a
in both or a short-a in "can" and an "ah" in "can't", but he used the
"ah" sound in both.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]

Post by musika

Post by Katy Jennison

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Hmm. I'm still cross about a review I read on Amazon a couple of days
ago that complained about the author's notion that Australians rhyme
"aunt" with "ant", because, in the reviewer's opinion, only Americans do
that. Setting aside the fact that even if true it would be a trivial
point not worth mentioning, I don't think it's even true. For what it's
worth, do some Australians rhyme "aunt" with "ant"? Do all Americans do it?

Even some Brits do it.

Standard for me. It amuses me when people say can and cahnt.

I had a co-worker here in Northern Ireland who confused everyone with
his pronunciations of "can" and "can't". People were used to a short-a
in both or a short-a in "can" and an "ah" in "can't", but he used the
"ah" sound in both.

Whereas in regions with sufficient low-front vowels, can is marry and can't is
Mary.

In the Midwest, where both are Mary, "cannot" is used to avoid problems.

Just as in areas that have merged "pin" and "pen," the latter is "inkpen."

[Peter Moylan]

Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]

Post by musika

Post by Katy Jennison

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Hmm. I'm still cross about a review I read on Amazon a couple of days
ago that complained about the author's notion that Australians rhyme
"aunt" with "ant", because, in the reviewer's opinion, only Americans do
that. Setting aside the fact that even if true it would be a trivial
point not worth mentioning, I don't think it's even true. For what it's
worth, do some Australians rhyme "aunt" with "ant"? Do all Americans do it?

Even some Brits do it.

Standard for me. It amuses me when people say can and cahnt.

I had a co-worker here in Northern Ireland who confused everyone with
his pronunciations of "can" and "can't". People were used to a short-a
in both or a short-a in "can" and an "ah" in "can't", but he used the
"ah" sound in both.

In northern California, I had to get used to the fact that "can" is
[kEn] and "can't" is [kE~]. The nasal vowel was sometimes followed by
[t], but often wasn't.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

Post by Peter Moylan

Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]

Post by musika

Post by Katy Jennison

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Hmm. I'm still cross about a review I read on Amazon a couple of days
ago that complained about the author's notion that Australians rhyme
"aunt" with "ant", because, in the reviewer's opinion, only Americans do
that. Setting aside the fact that even if true it would be a trivial
point not worth mentioning, I don't think it's even true. For what it's
worth, do some Australians rhyme "aunt" with "ant"? Do all Americans do it?

Even some Brits do it.

Standard for me. It amuses me when people say can and cahnt.

I had a co-worker here in Northern Ireland who confused everyone with
his pronunciations of "can" and "can't". People were used to a short-a
in both or a short-a in "can" and an "ah" in "can't", but he used the
"ah" sound in both.

In northern California, I had to get used to the fact that "can" is
[kEn] and "can't" is [kE~]

or they can be almost indistinguishable. A bit like French "dessus" and
"dessous" when spoken with an English accent.

Post by Peter Moylan
. The nasal vowel was sometimes followed by
[t], but often wasn't.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Peter Moylan
In northern California, I had to get used to the fact that "can" is
[kEn] and "can't" is [kE~]. The nasal vowel was sometimes followed by
[t], but often wasn't.

As I said, we don't have that problem in New York, Philadelphia, and environs.

[David Kleinecke]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Peter Moylan
In northern California, I had to get used to the fact that "can" is
[kEn] and "can't" is [kE~]. The nasal vowel was sometimes followed by
[t], but often wasn't.

As I said, we don't have that problem in New York, Philadelphia, and environs.

I wouldn't describe my Northern California speech thus. But I
am only a native speaker. The vowel in "can" and "can't" is the
vowel of "cat" (I don't what [E] symbolizes but that vowel seems
unlikely). And if "can't" ever ends in a nasalized vowel I am
unaware of it. I know only "-nt" except before a vowel where it
might end in a glottal stop instead of "t".

[Richard Bollard]

On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 22:49:41 +0100, Katy Jennison

Post by Katy Jennison

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Lewis
I've discovered over the years that the vast majority of people
complaining about accents have no idea what they are talking about.
I've heard many people complain about Hugh Laurie's fake British accent,
for example.

Hmm. I'm still cross about a review I read on Amazon a couple of days
ago that complained about the author's notion that Australians rhyme
"aunt" with "ant", because, in the reviewer's opinion, only Americans do
that. Setting aside the fact that even if true it would be a trivial
point not worth mentioning, I don't think it's even true. For what it's
worth, do some Australians rhyme "aunt" with "ant"? Do all Americans do it?

Even some Brits do it.

I don't think I have heard an Australian use "ant" for aunt. It sounds
very American to my ear. Victorians have the short a sound in "castle"
and "mall" but not in "aunt". We all (in my experience) say it as a
homophone for "aren't".

[Peter Moylan]

Post by Richard Bollard
I don't think I have heard an Australian use "ant" for aunt. It sounds
very American to my ear. Victorians have the short a sound in "castle"
and "mall" but not in "aunt". We all (in my experience) say it as a
homophone for "aren't".

"Mall" is regional. For example, the Hunter Street Mall in Newcastle is
a maul.

[Richard Bollard]

On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 16:56:58 +1000, Peter Moylan

Post by Peter Moylan

Post by Richard Bollard
I don't think I have heard an Australian use "ant" for aunt. It sounds
very American to my ear. Victorians have the short a sound in "castle"
and "mall" but not in "aunt". We all (in my experience) say it as a
homophone for "aren't".

"Mall" is regional. For example, the Hunter Street Mall in Newcastle is
a maul.

As is Monaro Mall in Fyshwick. Bourke Street is a "mal", which lens me
to think that the short A is more prevalent in Victoria.

[Janet]

In article <omdblk$vsg$***@news.albasani.net>, ***@spamtrap.kjennison.com
says...

Post by Katy Jennison

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Lewis
I've discovered over the years that the vast majority of people
complaining about accents have no idea what they are talking about.
I've heard many people complain about Hugh Laurie's fake British accent,
for example.

Hmm. I'm still cross about a review I read on Amazon a couple of days
ago that complained about the author's notion that Australians rhyme
"aunt" with "ant", because, in the reviewer's opinion, only Americans do
that. Setting aside the fact that even if true it would be a trivial
point not worth mentioning, I don't think it's even true. For what it's
worth, do some Australians rhyme "aunt" with "ant"? Do all Americans do it?

Even some Brits do it.

Some Brits did both.

As a child, I addressed my aunts as anti <name>.

Janet

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Janet
says...

Post by Katy Jennison

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Lewis
I've discovered over the years that the vast majority of people
complaining about accents have no idea what they are talking about.
I've heard many people complain about Hugh Laurie's fake British accent,
for example.

Hmm. I'm still cross about a review I read on Amazon a couple of days
ago that complained about the author's notion that Australians rhyme
"aunt" with "ant", because, in the reviewer's opinion, only Americans do
that. Setting aside the fact that even if true it would be a trivial
point not worth mentioning, I don't think it's even true. For what it's
worth, do some Australians rhyme "aunt" with "ant"? Do all Americans do it?

Even some Brits do it.

Some Brits did both.

Ross will now come along and tell you you're wrong.

Post by Janet
As a child, I addressed my aunts as anti <name>.

"Aunt Ann" (my grandmother's next older sister) had the same vowel in both.

[Janet]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Janet
says...

Post by Katy Jennison

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Lewis
I've discovered over the years that the vast majority of people
complaining about accents have no idea what they are talking about.
I've heard many people complain about Hugh Laurie's fake British accent,
for example.

Hmm. I'm still cross about a review I read on Amazon a couple of days
ago that complained about the author's notion that Australians rhyme
"aunt" with "ant", because, in the reviewer's opinion, only Americans do
that. Setting aside the fact that even if true it would be a trivial
point not worth mentioning, I don't think it's even true. For what it's
worth, do some Australians rhyme "aunt" with "ant"? Do all Americans do it?

Even some Brits do it.

Some Brits did both.

Ross will now come along and tell you you're wrong.

Post by Janet
As a child, I addressed my aunts as anti <name>.

"Aunt Ann" (my grandmother's next older sister) had the same vowel in both.

Aunt and auntie had different vowel sounds in my childhood.

Janet

[Peter Moylan]

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Lewis
I've discovered over the years that the vast majority of people
complaining about accents have no idea what they are talking about.
I've heard many people complain about Hugh Laurie's fake British accent,
for example.

Hmm. I'm still cross about a review I read on Amazon a couple of days
ago that complained about the author's notion that Australians rhyme
"aunt" with "ant", because, in the reviewer's opinion, only Americans do
that. Setting aside the fact that even if true it would be a trivial
point not worth mentioning, I don't think it's even true. For what it's
worth, do some Australians rhyme "aunt" with "ant"? Do all Americans do it?

As far as I know, all Australians have two separate vowels in "aunt" and
"ant".

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Mack A. Damia
On Sun, 6 Aug 2017 06:00:32 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels
After the five two-hour episodes from near the end of the run, last night they
went back to the second and third episodes of the first season -- The Dancing
Men and The Naval Treaty. Clearly they had a much lower budget in the early days!
But Jeremy Brett was far more credible. (The second Watson was better than the
original Watson.)
The first of them, set in Derbyshire, was filmed in a Stately Home in Lancashire
-- how much damage does that do to the appearance of the landscape?
And there were, as could be expected, two perfectly atrocious "American" accents,
and the most strange pronunciation of "Chicago" with a "ch" instead of a "sh."
Please tell me that isn't rampant in BrE.

It is.
After we emigrated, I had difficulty with "Michigan".
I pronounced it "Mitchigan" for a long time.

Why does it bother him how we pronounce "Chicago"? Do all American
pronounce "Birmingham" correctly (with [əm] at the end)?

Not if they're talking about the important one, the one in Alabama.

[Jack Campin]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Do all American pronounce "Birmingham" correctly (with [?m]
at the end)?

Not if they're talking about the important one, the one in Alabama.

It isn't just Americans. The brainless bigot Irish songwriter
Pete St John has managed to get everyone who covers his godawful
"Dublin in the Rare Ould Times" to pronounce the English one with
a pig's bum at the end. (He's presumably never been there because
he thinks it's full of niggers).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
e m a i l : j a c k @ c a m p i n . m e . u k
Jack Campin, 11 Third Street, Newtongrange, Midlothian EH22 4PU, Scotland
mobile [phone] <http://www.campin.me.uk> Twitter: JackCampin

[Tony Cooper]

On Sun, 6 Aug 2017 18:14:53 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Mack A. Damia
On Sun, 6 Aug 2017 06:00:32 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels
After the five two-hour episodes from near the end of the run, last night they
went back to the second and third episodes of the first season -- The Dancing
Men and The Naval Treaty. Clearly they had a much lower budget in the early days!
But Jeremy Brett was far more credible. (The second Watson was better than the
original Watson.)
The first of them, set in Derbyshire, was filmed in a Stately Home in Lancashire
-- how much damage does that do to the appearance of the landscape?
And there were, as could be expected, two perfectly atrocious "American" accents,
and the most strange pronunciation of "Chicago" with a "ch" instead of a "sh."
Please tell me that isn't rampant in BrE.

It is.
After we emigrated, I had difficulty with "Michigan".
I pronounced it "Mitchigan" for a long time.

Why does it bother him how we pronounce "Chicago"? Do all American
pronounce "Birmingham" correctly (with [?m] at the end)?

I think the point is that while we allow the British to pronounce our
cities in any manner they choose to, there is an expectation that
British *actors* playing the part of an American pronounce American
cities the way a native American would.

Don't counter with the Dick Van Dyke argument, though. There is a
higher bar for British actors.

While "Chicago" - with the "sh" sound - can be managed by just about
any American actor regardless of their own native accent, city names
like "New Orleans" are not replicated as natives would say them by all
actors. The American southern accent very difficult to represent
accurately by a non-southern-bred actor. They usually over-do it.

[Katy Jennison]

Post by Tony Cooper
While "Chicago" - with the "sh" sound - can be managed by just about
any American actor regardless of their own native accent, city names
like "New Orleans" are not replicated as natives would say them by all
actors. The American southern accent very difficult to represent
accurately by a non-southern-bred actor. They usually over-do it.

My recollection from the time of Hurricane Katrina is that we heard
reports from a range of Americans with a variety of ways of pronouncing
New Orleans, from "Noo Orleens" to "Narlns".

When I visited the city earlier this year I learnt to pronounce it with
the stress on the Or.

[Mack A. Damia]

On Mon, 7 Aug 2017 17:35:58 +0100, Katy Jennison

Post by Katy Jennison

Post by Tony Cooper
While "Chicago" - with the "sh" sound - can be managed by just about
any American actor regardless of their own native accent, city names
like "New Orleans" are not replicated as natives would say them by all
actors. The American southern accent very difficult to represent
accurately by a non-southern-bred actor. They usually over-do it.

My recollection from the time of Hurricane Katrina is that we heard
reports from a range of Americans with a variety of ways of pronouncing
New Orleans, from "Noo Orleens" to "Narlns".
When I visited the city earlier this year I learnt to pronounce it with
the stress on the Or.

"Bal-mer".

[Harrison Hill]

Post by Peter T. Daniels
After the five two-hour episodes from near the end of the run, last night they
went back to the second and third episodes of the first season -- The Dancing
Men and The Naval Treaty. Clearly they had a much lower budget in the early days!
But Jeremy Brett was far more credible. (The second Watson was better than the
original Watson.)
The first of them, set in Derbyshire, was filmed in a Stately Home in Lancashire
-- how much damage does that do to the appearance of the landscape?
And there were, as could be expected, two perfectly atrocious "American" accents,
and the most strange pronunciation of "Chicago" with a "ch" instead of a "sh."
Please tell me that isn't rampant in BrE.

Both Lancashire and Derby have a wide range of landscapes,
industrial and rural, hilly and flat. Derbyshire doesn't have
a coast. Apart from that you'd be hard-pressed to tell - by
scenery alone - one from the other :)

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Harrison Hill

Post by Peter T. Daniels
After the five two-hour episodes from near the end of the run, last night they
went back to the second and third episodes of the first season -- The Dancing
Men and The Naval Treaty. Clearly they had a much lower budget in the early days!
But Jeremy Brett was far more credible. (The second Watson was better than the
original Watson.)
The first of them, set in Derbyshire, was filmed in a Stately Home in Lancashire
-- how much damage does that do to the appearance of the landscape?
And there were, as could be expected, two perfectly atrocious "American" accents,
and the most strange pronunciation of "Chicago" with a "ch" instead of a "sh."
Please tell me that isn't rampant in BrE.

Both Lancashire and Derby have a wide range of landscapes,
industrial and rural, hilly and flat. Derbyshire doesn't have
a coast. Apart from that you'd be hard-pressed to tell - by
scenery alone - one from the other :)

Thank you. The terrain was hilly, the Home was Stately and surrounded by lots of lawn.

[LFS]

Post by Peter T. Daniels
After the five two-hour episodes from near the end of the run, last night they
went back to the second and third episodes of the first season -- The Dancing
Men and The Naval Treaty. Clearly they had a much lower budget in the early days!
But Jeremy Brett was far more credible. (The second Watson was better than the
original Watson.)
The first of them, set in Derbyshire, was filmed in a Stately Home in Lancashire
-- how much damage does that do to the appearance of the landscape?
And there were, as could be expected, two perfectly atrocious "American" accents,
and the most strange pronunciation of "Chicago" with a "ch" instead of a "sh."
Please tell me that isn't rampant in BrE.

I learned from one of the weekend papers that both Robert Stephens and
Jeremy Brett had nervous breakdowns while playing Holmes.