The census taker often had a difficult time recording names. One of my favorite names in a
census is the given name of "Analiser." Here are a few examples of who she might have been: Ann
Eliza; Anna Louise/Louiza; Susannah/Susan Elizabeth; Hannah Elizabeth; Eliza; Lizzie; Lizabeth,
etc.
It has been a common practice for mountain folk to end words with the letter "r." How was
the mountain dialect formed? Why is the 'intrusive R' in so many words? Some examples
are:
Hannah=Hanner; Leila=Leiler; Lula=Luler; Stella=Steller; Etta=Etter; Ida=Ider; squash=squarsh;
wash=warsh.
One definition given for Cockney (a native of the East End of London, Eng.): "this dialect,
characterized by loss of initial 'h', use of an intrusive 'r', etc." It has been noted that Paul
McCartney calls his wife "Linder" instead of Linda.
Names ending in "a" are many times given and "ie" or "y" sound and spelling: Amanda= Mandy;
Ida=Idie; Nova=Novie, etc.
How-sa-come that 'r' thang snuck into so many of ourn words when they war'nt spelt
that-a-way? Perhaps others have had the same curiosity. My Scots-Irish ancestors came through
the Appalachian Mountain migration route and across the southern states into Tennessee,
Arkansas, Oklahoma and Texas. I can still recall the 'mountain dialect' that was used by the older
generations and I love to hear it, for it makes me feel right at home. I still go and 'warsh' the
car.
>From the linguist list of Ask-a-Linguist service, we have found a very helpful linguist, James L.
Fidelholtz, who is a teaching and research professor [in the Language Sciences Area of the Social
Sciences and Humanities Institute] at the Autonomous University of Puebla, Mexico. James is a
Tennessee product, attending high school in Nashville. He has graciously taken the time and effort
to give us an explanation. It seems there is not a simple answer, as hoped. He states that the
added (intrusive) 'r' should be studied along with the linking 'r' and the dropped 'r'. (He explains
that the '@' represents the shwa sound (like the 'a' on both ends of 'America'.) If anyone has the
same curiosity, just delve right into the following explanation which he has approved for use on
this site. The first couple of paragraphs are intended to be a summary, but for the serious student,
jest wade on through.
The English 'r' is a rather complex sound phonetically, and, for example, is one of the last sounds
mastered by children acquiring the language. This also means that it is more subject to changes in
its pronunciation over time than many other sounds. There are serious arguments about whether
or not this sort of thing developed independently in the US. But the so-called 'r-dropping' is, in
any case, a very normal sort of phenomenon. Even though linking 'r' and inserted 'r' are not the
same phenomenon, they are very closely related, and have also a lot to do with social factors. I
would say that the main difference is that the 'r' drops originally because it's 1) similar enough to a
vowel to 'change into one'; and 2) relatively difficult enough to pronounce (articulatorily
complicated) that there exists a certain inherent tendency to get rid of it one way or another.
Well, the linking r is just the other side of the coin from what we might call an 'intrusive r' (like
holler or warsh). That is, a real 'r' shows up when before a vowel (butteR is..., but buttuh does
...). But then some (then many, then all) people start putting in an 'r' also in words like 'sofa'.
With the intrusive 'r', first people start eliminating at least some r's, as in marsh ---> mahsh. Now,
if these people are in an area where r'dropping is frowned upon, they will try to put them back:
mahsh ---> maRsh. Now here they will be in great shape.
The problem arises, because the r-less mahsh sounds exactly like the regular pronunciation of
wahsh. So for many people, the two are lumped together, and r's get inserted in BOTH, giving
the correct maRsh, but incorrect waRsh. It also should be mentioned that the social value of
dropping r's varies according to the region: in New York City, for example, it is relatively 'low
class' to drop too many r's, while in many areas of Southern United States English, it is relatively
'low class' to drop too few r's. In the areas where dropping is relatively 'bad', speakers who wish
to appear more refined often add r's at the end of words like 'sofa' and 'Cuba', and in some cases,
this later becomes the normal way to pronounce such words. That is why Kennedy said 'Cuber'
(especially when the word was followed by another word beginning with a vowel).
British English has remained at the stage of eliminating the r's. As far as I know, standard British
English virtually never has words pronounced with a final 'r', and virtually always has a 'linking r'
when the 'r' appears before a vowel. This is not the situation in many varieties, especially in those
where there is variation in whether the speaker pronounces the 'r' at the end of the word or not.
Because of the insecurity in many speakers, in some varieties almost no words can end in a vowel
anymore, but rather the speaker adds an 'r' if the word would otherwise end in a vowel, and this is
generalized even when the 'r' is not followed by a vowel (again: in SOME varieties). Then we can
get 'Hanner' from 'Hannah' and 'holler' from 'hollow'.
Indeed, in many positions in the word (eg, at the end of the word), the 'r' has lost its peculiar
'retroflexion' (that is, the curling back of the tongue) in many different varieties of English, and, in
at least some cases, apparently independently. This has happened, among other places, in British
standard English, New England English, Southern (United) States English, etc. Now, notice that I
said 'in many positions'. Between vowels, the 'r' is never lost, so far as I know, in any variety of
English. So everybody everywhere pronounces 'sorrow' with a retroflex (normal) 'r'. However,
the vowels surrounding the 'r' do not (in most varieties) have to be in the same word.
So, again in nearly all the varieties which sometimes eliminate or change 'r', we would find, for
example: {transcription note: 'v' is the vowel sound of 'but(t)'; '@' is the shwa, the last sound
of 'sofa'; 'r' is the retroflex (sulcal) pronunciation typical of most varieties of English} 'butter is ...'
[bvt@riz...] '... butter.'.......[...bvt@] Thus, 'butter is butter':.........[bvt@rizbvt@], and the 'r'
shows up in one case of the word, and doesn't in the other case.
Well, many varieties (like British English) nearly ALWAYS 'discolor' the 'r' (make it into a simple
shwa vowel sound) when it is eg at the end of the word &/or before another consonant; but when
the following word begins with a vowel, the 'r' shows up. However, there are many words like
'sofa', 'Cuba', et cetera, that historically never had an 'r'. But when pronounced in isolation by a
speaker of one of these varieties, 'sofa' rhymes exactly with 'gopher'. So we would get:
I saw a sofa .................[...@sof@]
I saw a gopher..............[...@gof@]
Now, in many of these varieties (and probably also in the first historical stages of eg British
cultured speech, called Received Pronunciation), we would still find a distinction between these
two words, eg in the following context:
A sofa is ... (over there) .......[@sof@iz...]
A gopher is ..........................[@gof@riz...]
But many speakers are insecure in their use of the language. They now know that [gof@] must
take an 'r' at the end in the second context, and if they leave it off, then they may get corrected by
their teacher, their boss, etc. So, to be safe, they stick in an 'r' in the same context in 'sofa', giving
[@sof@riz ...]. In some varieties, such as Received Pronunciation, this insecurity then became
generalized, and now even the most cultured Brits say [@sof@riz...], and this is called a 'linking
r'. It appears even where historically there was never an 'r' in the word."
Marshel Roy Cunningham says, "Yep, Southern English is quite
different. My folks have been here in the heart of Alabama for about 200 years, so I am a talker of
it alright. The academics say that Southerners, being an agrarian society, retained the old speech
pattens, etc., whereas other parts of the country were affected by immigration and therefore
speech was affected. Southern English still retains some of the old Elizabethian traits. Since the
King James Bible was translated in 1611, and in "perfect English" of the day, just like
Shakespeare's plays that were writtten at the same time, we can look at them and today's
southern speaker and see the similarities. Such as in the King James 1611 version, Peter says: "I
go a fishing...." 1 Peter 3:20 says: "...while the ark was a preparing..." Many southern speakers
still use the "a" before a verb..." Come arunning!" "I'm agoing to town" " I'm afixing to do
that."
Shakespeare shows that the "double comparison" was correct in his day. Mark Antony in Julius
Caesar points to Brutus's stab wound as "the most unkindest cut of all". Southerns today use
double comparisions, but are told that it is ungrammatical. The use of "be" is passing out of
southern white English, but is maintained by Blacks... " I be going now," etc. Remember that
Jesus is quoted in King James English as saying, "If I be lifted up, I will draw all men unto
me."
Git back
ta Franklin County Genealogy
Git back ta Mountain Talk Dikshanery
This TNGenWeb Project website is hosted by USGenNet, a nonprofit web-hosting service solely supported by tax-deductible donations. If this website has provided you with useful information, please consider making a donation to USGenNet to help keep websites like this online.