The English Lisp

[Jasper]

Is the OP really serious with this suggestion? Apologies as I haven't read the whole thread but the original post iritated me lol. I've lived in England 1 year (Irish originally) and I can genuinely say of the many hundreds of english people I've met not one had a lisp.

 

 

I sidestepped "that" part of the question and focussed on language development. I thought that was more helpful .

[keelanz]

i kinda feel insulted by this post lol

 

i can pronounce antidisestablishmentarianism so what?

anybody who thinks in "english" is "english", i dont give 2 damns about nationality but the language you speak dictates who you are as you are constrained by it. essentially whatever language you "think" in determines your nationality, accent's really have nothing to do with mentality or trying to be a baby. 1 out of 10 english people mumble they dont have a lisp

[Marat]

I suggested in post #6 above that the English lisp might arise from the historical effort to appear upper-class by speaking English with a French accent to imitate the way English was spoken by the Norman nobility rather than by the Saxon peasantry. The Compact Oxford English Dictionary (1971), vol. 1, p. 1636, offers two sources which lend support to this theory:

 

John Fletcher and Philip Massinger, 'The Elder Brother' (1625) Act II, Scene iii:

 

... they much admire 'm that speake the lispe of court,/

Oh 'tis great learning!

 

Sir George Etheredge, 'The Man of Mode' (1676) Act I, Scene i:

 

Bell: What a pretty lisp he has!

Dor.: Ho, that he affects in imitation of the people of quality of France.

 

The lisp also seems to have long had an association with childishness as well, as I suggested in post #1 above:

 

Frederick Meyers, 'Catholic Thoughts on the Bible' (1841), pt. III, v. 17:

 

The father who should impose the obligations of manhood on a yet lisping son ... would be as unjust as he would be unwise.

[pete gee]

English Rhotacism: traditional dialect,speech disorder,linguistic phenomenon

 

I am a retired (Australian) English lecturer with an Ma (Hons) in Literature & Linguistics. I have spent some of my life as a journalist and features writer, part of it based in London in the early 1980's.

 

It was at that time, travelling widely through the U.K,. that I became fascinated by the asymmetric preponderance of rhotacism.

 

I wish to avoid the amusing competitive internationalism which has developed in this thread, but I do not shy away from any controversy the following may stimulate in those equally fascinated by this issue.

 

In line with some, I would agree that it is a 10/90 percentile split, far greater than in other english speaking countries.

Significantly, the issue is concentrated far more with the English (as opposed to the Scottish,Cornish & Welsh - and I discount the claim that it actually begins with the specific burred Welsh 'r'). And the interesting percentile tends to suggest this to be far more than just normal speech impediment . Nor is it "just an accent".

 

And as a linguist, I discount much of the technical phonic argument while recognising that the difficult 'trilled R' is often the last sound a child masters (or NOT).

 

Furthermore, I would assert that - on a male/female basis - the rhotacism split is about 80/20, and between the higher educated/lesser educated, the split returns to to something like 90/10.

I stress the above figures are assertions/guesstimations based only upon 30 years of personal observation/fascination.

 

As a linguist and historian, I am doubly interested in the suggestion from this thread that English rhotacism (as opposed to true speech impediment) may have been initiated by the Norman conquest & in particular the centuries long 'cringe factor' among the English upper & business classes to be seen to 'fit' the imposed dialect/lifestyle.

 

As a French speaker & teacher, I can attest to the english speaker's difficulty in mastering the gallic 'trilled uvula R', and to the resultant rhotacization compromise. It is at least a credible supposition that this could become partially embedded in the ongoing aristocratic system.

 

But how to explain it's evolution into the 'apparently' classless twentieth & twenty first centuries?

With the demise of the old aristocracy came the rise of the new : a more than proportional increase in the highly educated (the ongoing Oxbridge influence), and in the rise of the articulate media presenter/celebrity.

 

Here I would refer to another element raised in this thread - the nature/nurture suggestion.

A parental affectation which engenders an atmosphere of security and comfort will inevitably appeal to infantile needs for such to be mimicked/copied.

 

It does at least serve to illustrate the possibility that once a significant portion of society develops an idiosyncracy, it may be passed on/communicated to the following generation by way of benign imitation.And so forth ...

 

The argument that England is a more nurturing (viz. "softer") society than others, i will leave alone as unworthy of this thread.

 

A further area of perhaps controversial interest might be to ask what proportion of the gay population ( & it has always been notable there, has developed the rhotacism. If greater, would this suggest it makes for an appealing affectation, over and above the 'incentives' already explored.

 

As for my earlier assertion that rhotacism is a predominantly (English?) male idiosyncrasy ... "Go figure!", as our American contributors might put it.

 

So, I certainly do view English rhotacism as more idiosyncratic than the other recognised ( & partially valid) explanations. If it is not fake, it is not exactly a speech impediment. More perhaps a self-perpetuating affectation, part hereditary, part learned, part mimicked.

 

I hope these propositions I have put forward will continue to stimulate discussion and I would be more than pleased to be challenged/updated/set straight. This is no life & death issue but one of pure academic interest. It is a topic that has fascinated me for decades, as much because the English are the depository of the language but seem to be in denial ("too close to the source to hear it") of the peccadillo.

[esbo]

It is mainly an upper class public school thing, I see so many who cannot pronounce an 'r', you often

see them on the BBC when they are interviewing an 'expect' on something, experts are nearly always

upper class as they can afford the education.

They look Widiculous!!

[John Cuthber]

"It is mainly an upper class public school thing, I see so many who cannot pronounce an 'r',"

Or, at least as likely, you see people who do not pronounce that r (or, at least, not the way you would).

 

You are assuming an inability, rather than a choice.

[Acme]

_{English Rhotacism: traditional dialect,speech disorder,linguistic phenomenon}

I am a retired (Australian) English lecturer with an Ma (Hons) in Literature & Linguistics. I have spent some of my life as a journalist and features writer, part of it based in London in the early 1980's.

_{It was at that time, travelling widely through the U.K,. that I became fascinated by the asymmetric preponderance of rhotacism.}

_{I wish to avoid the amusing competitive internationalism which has developed in this thread, but I do not shy away from any controversy the following may stimulate in those equally fascinated by this issue.}

 

_{In line with some, I would agree that it is a 10/90 percentile split, far greater than in other english speaking countries.}

_{Significantly, the issue is concentrated far more with the English (as opposed to the Scottish,Cornish & Welsh - and I discount the claim that it actually begins with the specific burred Welsh 'r'). And the interesting percentile tends to suggest this to be far more than just normal speech impediment . Nor is it "just an accent".}

 

_{And as a linguist, I discount much of the technical phonic argument while recognising that the difficult 'trilled R' is often the last sound a child masters (or NOT).}

 

_{Furthermore, I would assert that - on a male/female basis - the rhotacism split is about 80/20, and between the higher educated/lesser educated, the split returns to to something like 90/10.}

_{I stress the above figures are assertions/guesstimations based only upon 30 years of personal observation/fascination.}

 

_{As a linguist and historian, I am doubly interested in the suggestion from this thread that English rhotacism (as opposed to true speech impediment) may have been initiated by the Norman conquest & in particular the centuries long 'cringe factor' among the English upper & business classes to be seen to 'fit' the imposed dialect/lifestyle.}

 

_{As a French speaker & teacher, I can attest to the english speaker's difficulty in mastering the gallic 'trilled uvula R', and to the resultant rhotacization compromise. It is at least a credible supposition that this could become partially embedded in the ongoing aristocratic system.}

 

_{But how to explain it's evolution into the 'apparently' classless twentieth & twenty first centuries?}

_{With the demise of the old aristocracy came the rise of the new : a more than proportional increase in the highly educated (the ongoing Oxbridge influence), and in the rise of the articulate media presenter/celebrity.}

 

_{Here I would refer to another element raised in this thread - the nature/nurture suggestion.}

_{A parental affectation which engenders an atmosphere of security and comfort will inevitably appeal to infantile needs for such to be mimicked/copied.}

 

_{It does at least serve to illustrate the possibility that once a significant portion of society develops an idiosyncracy, it may be passed on/communicated to the following generation by way of benign imitation.And so forth ...}

 

_{The argument that England is a more nurturing (viz. "softer") society than others, i will leave alone as unworthy of this thread.}

 

_{A further area of perhaps controversial interest might be to ask what proportion of the gay population ( & it has always been notable there, has developed the rhotacism. If greater, would this suggest it makes for an appealing affectation, over and above the 'incentives' already explored.}

 

_{As for my earlier assertion that} rhotacism is a predominantly (English?) male idiosyncrasy ... "Go figure!", as our American contributors might put it.

 

So, I certainly do view English rhotacism as more idiosyncratic than the other recognised ( & partially valid) explanations. If it is not fake, it is not exactly a speech impediment. More perhaps a self-perpetuating affectation, part hereditary, part learned, part mimicked.

 

I hope these propositions I have put forward will continue to stimulate discussion and I would be more than pleased to be challenged/updated/set straight. This is no life & death issue but one of pure academic interest. It is a topic that has fascinated me for decades, as much because the English are the depository of the language but seem to be in denial ("too close to the source to hear it") of the peccadillo.

 

I enjoyed reading that! I read the rest of the thread too and as an American I have something of a tongue-in-cheek contribution. Call it the 'Elmer Fudd Effect'. Having many of us Yanks gwown up with Elmer for the past 70 or so years, and Elmer having a pwonounced whotacism, and Elmer being a portwayal of a fool of sorts, Americans associate such a speak affectation negatively and practice not to exhibit it. Do Brit's share the Fudd exposure with Americans? If so, is Elmer held in higher or lower regard by the Brits than us Yanks?

Enqwiring minds want to know.

Edited September 21, 2013 by Acme

[khasab]

There are people who actually can't pronounce the 'r' sound properly. A famous example being Jonathon Ross. There are also people who lisp and make a 'th' sound instead of an 's'. I don't know what the cause is but I doubt very much if the incidence is any less in America.

 

However, an uninformed American coming to Britain may think people who have NO problem still 'mispronounce' their 'r's depending on what area he/she visits. Why? Because some English accents are rhotic, like American English and some are not.

 

Rhotic speakers pronounce the 'r' strongly , it is especially noticeable on word endings such as 'father' mother' and of course 'cider'. Other English accents are non-rhotic. The 'r' isn't pronounced and words such as 'father' 'mother' etc end in a schwa, represented by the phonetic symbol /ə/.

In a non-rhotic English accent a word like 'hard' is pronounced /ha:d/ and 'father' is pronounced /Fɑːðə/

 

Most accents in England are non-rhotic. However , despite how it may sound to an American, it is not a 'mispronunciation' but a perfectly normal phonetic feature of British English.

Edited May 31, 2014 by khasab