Slashdot Mirror
'Vocal Fry' Creeping Into US Speech
sciencehabit writes "A curious vocal pattern has crept into the speech of young adult women who speak American English: low, creaky vibrations, also called vocal fry. Pop singers, such as Britney Spears, slip vocal fry into their music as a way to reach low notes and add style. Now, a new study of young women in New York state shows that the same guttural vibration — once considered a speech disorder — has become a language fad."
Next we'll be hearing autotune in everyday speech.
http://alternatives.rzero.com/
The article isn't about old people being grumpy about the change, or about change in general. The article is about the change itself.
"Language changes" isn't new, but "This language is changing in this way" is.
Brushing their teeth with a bottle of Jack?
Remember the 'valley girl' speech pattern of the 80's? You don't really hear that much anymore. Humans of a common demographic need things like this to identify with each other and distinguish themselves from other groups. It's part of our social nature.
Marge Simpson did it first
As for the backgrounds of the students they do not provide a geographical range in the article. It is not in the abstract of the paper either. Without reading the paper it is not clear what kind of backgrounds the students came from. If they all came from the same college then that is a bigger issue than the sample size and is clearly not a "random sample."
Yeah, and well rehearsed "duck face" poses used whenever a camera comes out. Really, if this becomes the common theme for women, I'd be hanging on to heterosexuality by my finger nails.
I'm 53, I remember girls that sounded like this all my life. And I can jokingly say "For an example of vocal fry head on down to the casino and find an old lady by a slot machine". So, my personal life experience tells me there's nothing new here.
Concerning the comments about people not using proper English: What is important is that words are used properly, that their meanings preserved so that communication can be meaningful. Confucius covered this long ago,
And, yeah, I was hoping for Futurama Fry too :)
There was an eloquent and impassioned talk given by Stephen Fry (in fact, one could argue it was Vocal, by Fry) that discussed this very thing. Here it is. It's one of the few things that's transcended the "that's nice" and "oh, cool" barriers and actually changed the way I think about language. Anyone I work with can attest to the fact that I no longer correct "less problems" to "fewer", or "should of" to "should have".
Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
"Yup. This is why it seems like a waste of time to obsess over "proper" English. Words are like clothes, you mix and match and there isn't any right answer."
I don't obsess over it, but exceptionally sloppy speech is not a plus during job interviews. The purpose of speech is to communicate, and if you can only speak "trailer" or "ghetto" then I'll place you (or not) appropriately.
It's fine to be able to SWITCH between speaking styles to suit your audience. That's different than having an accent that's a self-inflicted speech impediment.
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
I once worked with an Arab guy who grew up in the USA who went back to Bahrain for a year during high school. He went to an exclusive public school, and when his British educated teacher had him stand to read Shakespeare, after the teacher heard a few lines the teacher ordered him to sit down, saying, "your accent is offensive to my ears."
The irony is that while North American and British English have diverged over the centuries, the accent in North America has changed far less, and thus remains closer to how Elizabethan English would have been spoken. In the eighteenth century, visitors to the American colonies remarked on how "correctly" English was spoken by all classes, even slaves. In the early 19th centuries the shifts in pronunciation which characterize "correct" ("Oxford" or "received") pronunciation were decried by language purists in England.
I once read a complaint by an English reviewer of George C. Scott's performance as Scrooge in "A Christmas Carol". The reviewer was put off by Scott's American accent. However if we take the story to occur around 1840, and Scrooge to be about 60 and not a native Londoner, the difference between Scrooge's accent and that of younger characters like Bob Cratchit would have been rather accurate.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
This. More specifically, I have heard that the "Southern Bell" accent is the closest accent to the original, proper 18th century English, and that "ain't" was a desirable word by the upper class.
For those not familiar, the Southern Bell accent is the kind of accent you might here from upper class white folk in the Deep South. It's almost gone, now, but maybe still exists sparsely. Most commonly, you hear it in movies set in the old South.
I recall reading a piece by Michael Montgomery (the linguistics professor, not the football player) explaining that this has never actually been true.
I believe it was in a book called "Language Myths", an interesting read if you're into that sort of thing.
Disclaimer: IANALA (I am not a linguistic anthropologist)
A self-professed pedant who uses the non-word "irregardless"? Turn in your card, it's time to retire.
:x