Over brunch, I told my
roommate about a stand-up routine that included the comedian lost in Paris and stopping
a French man to ask him how to get to the Eiffel Tower.
“Aifel Towah? Wat eez dis Aifel
Towah? Ah have nevah ’eard oof dis Aifel Towah you speak oof,” the man scoffed.
“Stoopeed American peepel!”
My attempt to imitate the
comedian imitate the Frenchman led to my roommate attempting a British accent,
which was hilarious because she sounded exactly the same as normal, except she also
made these vaguely constipated facial expressions.
From this we talked about
how and why certain accents can be imitated and others cannot. For example, we
can imitate a British or French accent without a second thought but once we try
to imitate an Indian or Ghanaian or Chinese accent, the act could easily become
problematic or offensive. We thought a possible reason for this is that the
latter accents have stigmas attached to them and that these accents have grown
to label their speakers unwelcome foreigners and as a result, by “making fun”
of the accents, one perpetuates the groups’ outside statuses.
I remembered this
conversation when I read “The Social Weight of Spoken Words” and its discussion
of “prestigious” accents, as the latter group of accents mentioned above may be
perceived as less prestigious. As mentioned in “The social weight of spoken
words” and explored in the experiment in “Effects of phonetically-cued talker
variation in semantic coding,” the New York City accent is perceived to be less
prestigious than the Southern Standard British English (Sumner and Kataoka
2013). I wonder if there are certain patterns in less prestigious accents, like
dropped vowels or shortened words or shorter/faster speech speeds.
One thing that helps people
“get into character” when they attempt a British accent is to talk about tea or
the Queen. Whenever my freshman year RA talks about anything related to the
Caribbean, where he’s from, he slips from his adopted American accent to his
Caribbean accent. These phenomena remind me of King and Sumner’s semantic
association article that explains that “listeners are sensitive to the
probability of a word given a specific voice in a specific sentence” (1). The voices of British people and Caribbean
people are associated with their respective contexts; whatever characterizes
either society is reflected in perceptions of their accents.
I’d like to know - what
makes an accent prestigious? Is it related to class or race or both?
Killing it with the title. Also wanted to say that I appreciate you looking for the topics' social relevance, in this case with the tie to stigmatization. It becomes really interesting and scary when you become aware of the ways simple linguistic behaviors interact with social perceptions to contribute to the stigmatization and classification of a whole group of people. In terms of your last question my instinct would be that the prestige of an accent is inherently tied to social status and stereotypes (whether they be positive or negative) of people whom the accent belongs to but now that I we're learning more about socio-linguists I also wonder if there are speech characteristics that we might associate with greater or lesser prestige and whether or not this is innate or a result of learning to associate a speech trait with a certain group of people and then projecting one or any of those groups perceived social traits onto another group who share's any of the same speech traits.
ReplyDelete