Talk:California English

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject California, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

Archives
March 2005 – June 2006

Contents 1 Article title 1.1 Requested move 2 Comments on History and Accent 3 Northern vs. Southern 4 Pitch range 5 Hapa 6 Vowel Raising before ŋ 7 Hella 8 Place names

[edit] Article title

Why is this "California English" rather than "Californian English"? It's a very awkward wording. "Californian English" would be much more suitable in my opinion. -Branddobbe 06:20, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

I agree. No one else seems to object, I guess. Maybe we can go ahead with a move then? I suspect Californian English already exists though, in which case an admin will have to do it. Theshibboleth 14:09, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, I object. To my ear "California English" sounds much more natural than "Californian English". Notice how [1] is labeled "California English", not "Californian English". Also compare 57 Google hits for "California English" for Stanford University websites vs. only 2 hits for "Californian English". (I restricted it to Standford sites to make sure we were getting mostly scholarly pages; other California universities could be checked too.) User:Angr 14:20, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

I also object. It is not at all unusual in English for a noun to function as an adjective in a combined form. older ≠ wiser 15:53, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

California is indeed both a noun and an adjective - "California Girls" for example. The page is fine where it is. — sjorford++ 16:26, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

See also the Guardian style guide. — sjorford++ 16:27, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

I actually can't think of one single thing I would trust the Guardian on. And they are most certainly incorrect when they write "the adjective is California" (my emphasis). That represents a grotesque misunderstanding of English. California in "California Girls" is no more an adjective than is music in "music theory" ("musical theory" would mean something else). (Yeah, I know, it's tricky; but "the adjective..." is wrong.) Putting two nouns together (even with a space between them) is absolutely no prob in English.

What I've read by the experts (that I recall) suggests that both suggested titles for this article would be correct. I've seen both "California English" and "Californian English." It's almost a question of feel. "New York English" would be correct because "New Yorkian" isn't a word (or, rather, New York, unlike California, can be an adjective). And "America English" would clearly be wrong, same with "Canada English." But "Boston English," or "Bostonian English"? That's as tricky a question as "California English" vs. "Californian English." Tricky. --Cultural Freedom talk 2006-07-04 22:10 (UTC)

I agree that Californian can be an adjective as well as a noun referring to an inhabitant, but there really aren't many examples. Besides California Girls and California English, I can think of the California Raisins (thought up by the California Raisin Advisory Board and California oranges, and in none of these examples would "Californian" sound right. Special:Allpages reveals the California barberry, California beer and breweries, California buttercup, California cheeseburger, California Cuisine, California wine and many, many more examples. Sequoia says an alternative name is California Redwood. The only articles using Californian as an adjective are Californian Australian Football League, Californian Hindu textbook controversy, Californian Stakes, and Californian rabbit. User:Angr 07:48, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

After reflecting on this a bit, I think "California English" is the correct title, if we mean the English of California, the English spoken in California. Californian English would be English with Californian properties, or characteristics. This would of course characterize California English, but it would also characterize the speaking habits of a New Yorker who said "that is, like, gnarly." By way of analogy: musical theory is a theory with musical properties. The theory itself could be a theory about linguistics. Music theory, on the other hand, is a theory of music. Likewise, California English is the English of California. --Cultural Freedom talk 2006-07-05 08:07 (UTC)

As many of the other regional variations on American English regional differences have noun-noun constructions I suppose I can overcome my grammatical reservations and accept the title as California English. Still though, it bothers me that there is inconsistency in the titles, for example with the article on English in the South being titled Southern American English. Theshibboleth 10:45, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

If there's an inconsistency, it's the term "American English" instead of *"America English", but that's a real inconsistency in usage; no one would say *"America English". And Southern American English just follows that pattern: it's [Southern [American English]]. User:Angr 10:54, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

There's a strange rule (which I believe may be codified in a style guide, the MLA or some other) regarding the use of states' names as adjectives. Whereas one can freely use the adjective form of countries' names with nouns -- Japanese beef, French wine, American cheese -- one cannot do so for states. Usually, the adjective form (Californian, Washingtonian, New Yorker, etc.) can only be used to refer specifically to people from that state. When you want to speak, for example, of wine from California, apples from Washington, or the politics of New York State, you would refer to "California wines", "Washington apples" and "New York politics". Most people would probably agree that the phrases "Californian wines", "Washingtonian apples" and "New Yorker politics" just don't sound right. Strangely enough, however, British English seems fond of using "Californian" (and possibly other state adjective forms also) with nouns -- a simple search of the word "Californian" in the BBC News website will show you many strange combinations. Among them: "Californian condor", known obviously on this side of the pond as the California Condor. Maybe it just sounds better to them, or maybe they adhere more strictly to the rules of grammar at the expense of comfort on the ears. (Just to prove how wonderfully inconsistent American English is, one could reasonably speak of "Washingtonian politics", assuming one was referring to politics in the age of George Washington.)--75.11.161.197 04:36, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Requested move

The argument for (and mostly against) this move is made in the section above. I oppose this move as unidiomatic. Next we will be speaking of someone's "New English home", instead of "New England home" (I have actually seen this: in the works of an Englishman who spent a few months in the United States.) Septentrionalis 19:39, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

The result of the nomination was Not moved -- Kim van der Linde ^{at venus} 04:38, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Comments on History and Accent

DISCLAIMER: I am neither a liguistic nor a historian so please interpret these comments accordingly.

The linguistic history on this page I found a bit curious. My understanding is that the original anglophone visitors/settlers in California (even before it was annexed by the U.S.) were predominantly Texans (and others from the southern areas of the U.S.). The Gold Rush, of course, changed things substantially but I have always understood from what I've read that this early history was still influential in California's development. I lived in the SF Bay Area for 4 years back in the 90s. Although most of the people I encountered had fairly neutral accents, most of the people I actually dealt with regularly were actually from other parts of the U.S. To the extent that I did meet people who actually were from families that had lived in California for some generations I tended to hear traits in their speech that are not described here. In particular I had two friends, one from the north bay and one from the Eureka area, both with similar accents (and similar to others I had met in California). Their accents although not "thick" by my standards were very much what I've always thought of as the "western" accent. That is, an accent that has a lot of similarities to the "southern" accents although not quite as distinct (notably these friends grew up saying "y'all" but stopped as they grew into their professional lives). These aspects of the accent and the dialect (and their history) don't seem to be discussed here. I was curious why.

Your experience might be fairly anecdotal. Scholorly sources find more generalized traits but there will always be exceptions to the tendencies. Basically what you're saying is that California English is influenced from multiple regions, which the article already states. AEuSoes1 04:11, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

I think that there should be some audio samples of what is meant by a California accent. Would this be the thick sort of Southern California dialect we've heard from, say, Keanu Reeves and Alicia Silverstone, or is more of a Northern California accent I'm not especially aware of? Daniel M. Laenker 08:44, 22 November 2006 (GMT)

[edit] Northern vs. Southern

User:A Doon just removed without explanation a bunch of facts about the difference between Northern and Southern California, most notably the fact that "the" is not used with highway numbers in Northern California ("the 5" and so on) and the Northern-California shibboleth "hella". Why? These are both well-known and notable facts about California English.

On the other hand, the fact that San Franciscans don't refer to their city by cute nicknames doesn't seem to me to be a particularly interesting or notable fact. Lots of cities are referred to as "the city". AJD 23:36, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I think that's a meaningful statement about the Bay Area, particularly when Sacramentoans and San Jose residents refer to San Francisco as The City, even as their cities are technically larger. It defers to the urban primacy of San Francisco in Northern CA even from the Gold Rush days. Daniel M. Laenker 08:47, 22 November 2006 (GMT)

The Golden State Warriors, while playing in San Francisco, actually had "the City" on their jerseys and logo, rather than "San Francisco". This shows the extent to which San Francisco is referred to as "the city"—they could print that without any ambiguities. ¿ςפקιДИτς! ☺ ☻ 02:43, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Were the facts he removed verifiable by means of cited sources? If not, he was quite right to remove them. The same goes for the lack of cute nicknames for San Francisco. User:Angr 05:00, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Let's see... A Doon removed the citation for "the" with freeways along with removing the fact itself (Geyer 2001: "'The' freeway in southern California"). "Hella" was not cited in the article as it stood, but Bucholtz et al. (2005: "Hella Nor Cal or Totally So Cal?") report that "hella" is stereotypically associated with northern California by Californians. AJD 05:14, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I strongly protest A Doon's deletion of "bucket" and "trippy," based on his/her not hearing these in 8 years California experience. I have lived in California about six times that long, and I know these terms to be correct, especially "trippy," which I would even say is common and ordinary. "Bucket" is also correct, but I will concede, less common. Fluffbrain 28 August

I also protest, at least, the removal of "trippy". I've never heard anyone say bucket, but "trippy" has definitely been around for a while (and I've lived in SoCal my entire life). -Branddobbe 08:08, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

It's "boo-kay". —ptk✰fgs 03:15, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

I’ll second bucket —Wiki Wikardo 11:18, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

The burden of finding sources falls on those wishing to include material, not those wishing to remove it. Find a source and it's appropriate to put it back in, otherwise not. Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 20:51, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pitch range

Not being a linguist, I'll post this for discussion rather than edit directly: one of the most recognizable features of California English is that its speakers use a broader pitch range than most other U.S. speakers. The Valley Girl song is an extreme example of this (which still occurs in the San Fernando Valley). That is, Californians begin sentences at a higher pitch and end them at a lower pitch than (for example) Midwesterners. Durova 20:41, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hapa

Is this a SoCal thing? I ain’t never heard it —Wiki Wikardo 11:18, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

• Me neither, and I am from SoCal. Danny Lilithborne 08:49, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
• This is a California Asian-American thing; both NorCal and SoCal AAs use it. Rin Tohsaka 18:28, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Really? As a Northern California Asian-American in a predominantly Asian-American community, I would think I would have heard it at least once. ¿ςפקιДИτς! ☺ ☻ 02:21, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
• I don't think it is as wide-spread as it is being made out to be. You probably have to be part-Hawaiian to understand it. I've only seen the term used in media. For example: Part Asian, 100% Hapa - http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0811849597 --Stacey Doljack Borsody 07:47, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

'Hapa' is certainly catching on in the SF Bay area. It's tied in part to the frequent use of race-specific census and fill-out-this-form questions, when so many respondents are now of mixed race. Also with the celebrity of various mixed-race individuals.

Overall, I agree with the article's linguistic contentions, but must admit I am not familiar with the scientific symbols. This may be anecdotal, but it's based upon my family living in the SF Bay Area for a full century. -Paul Carlson

[edit] Vowel Raising before ŋ

This happens to me, and I live in NW Kansas, isn't this just a General American thing?Cameron Nedland 17:42, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

• As a Bay Area life-long resident, I've always used the raised I (as in keen) for words like king and sing; I've never known any other pronunciation until a few years ago. I can, however say and hear the differences, though they are very slight to me.

[edit] Hella

the overwhelming majority of written work regarding "hella", both by linguists and casual observers of popular culture alike, describe "hella" as characteristic of the Northern California lexicon, and describe the San Francisco Bay Area as it's place of birth. In so far as this word has entered the vocabulary of speakers outside the Bay Area, it has been through diffusion--and the further from the epicenter, the less frequent the usage. Thus, recent deletions of the passage referring to the word hella are not justified, nor has anyone, to my knowledge, referenced a source that would contradict the preponderance of referrable works (including those already cited) which support it's continued inclusion. Triggtay 06:25, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

• Nevertheless, the part saying "hella" is seldom, if ever, used in SoCal is patently false, as I can give you no less than two popular artists from SoCal that have used it. JuJube 06:29, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

'K. As I noted in my last edit summary, I put in a {{fact}} just to get someone (you?) to actually connect the statements regarding "hella" with the references at the bottom.

By the way, you might want to do something about those greengrocer's apostrophes of yours. +ILike2BeAnonymous 06:31, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

I've also heard (and used) "hell of" (said as one word: "hel-love") as a strictly ironic replacement for "hella" (I've been a Bay Area resident all my life).

[edit] Place names

The text about Norcal, Socal and Frisco is relevant and factually correct. There was no reason to delete it. Similarly, there was no reason to substitute "Sactown" for "Sacto", since the list says explicitly, "and other nicknames. I've heard Sacto, but not Sactown - how about a cite? Until then, I'm putting it back the way it was. I'm using the revert procedure because it's easier, not because I'm accusing anyone of vandalism. And no, I'm not one of the no-revert-rule people.

Cbdorsett 07:43, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Actually, even the California State Anthem itself refers to Sacramento as "Sactown", not "Sacto". Observe,

From Oakland to Sactown

The Bay Area and back down

Cali is where they put they mack down

Give me love!

Triggtay 09:01, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Okay, so it's used in a rap song - that doesn't make it the State Anthem :). Just for the record, I noticed the nickname on a list of city nicknames on Wikipedia. That list includes both of the nicknames we're talking about here. I still see no reason to prefer one over the other. Cbdorsett 09:05, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Are you sure that's the state anthem? I believe you're referring to I Love You, California. Hachiko 18:36, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

I've lived in the Bay Area all my life, and I think I've heard 'Sacto' once or twice, but mostly just as 'Sac'. I sometimes call it Sakuramento, after an anime club from there. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.23.166.38 (talk) 06:41, 1 March 2007 (UTC).