The Development of American English

(The video Pioneers, O Pioneers!, from the series The Story of English, will be
screened: here is a guide sheet. You should try to fill in the right-hand column whilst
viewing the video.)

The spread of English to other parts of the world can be seen as a very important first
step towards globalisation. In general, the spread has been
through settlement and colonisation. Salikoko Mufwene considers both of these
falling under the label colonisation, so he talks ofsettlement
colonies and exploitation colonies. English was spread through both kinds of
colonies, producing different resultant varieties. In settlement colonies, large numbers
of English speakers moved to places like North
America (the USA and Canada), Australia, New Zealandand (to a certain extent)
South Africa. (Some might also want to consider the case
of Scotland, Wales and Ireland as well.) In exploitation colonies, English use filtered
down slowly as education in the English language began to be introduced, initially to
train a portion of the local population to be clerks in the colonial administration where
the working language was English this is true of the nations in the former British
Empire, including Asian (Singapore, Malaysia, Brunei, Burma, Hong Kong, India,
Pakistan, Bangladesh), African (Nigeria, Sierra Leone, Ghana, Kenya, Malawi,
Zimbabwe) and Central American (Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago, Belize, Guyana)
nations. We also need to include the Philippines which was a former colony not
of Britain but of the USA.

The imperialist enterprise from around the 16th century signals the beginning of a
whole new economy where the aim wasnt self-sufficiency but surplus and profit.
Goods and labour were sought from all over the globe and all the Western European
nations were involved in this. We have already mentioned Britain; the Spanish took
over almost all of South America (which accounts for the spread of the Spanish
language); the Portuguese controlled Brazil (which is why Portuguese is spoken
there), and were in India, Sri Lanka and Malacca for a time; the French were in Indo-
china, Africa and North America (which is why French continues to be spoken in
Quebec and a few other places in North America); the Dutch were in Indonesia, Sri
Lanka and Malacca; and the Belgians were in parts of Africa.

Here, though, we will focus on North America (particularly the USA) as our case
study for English spread through settlement colonies.

The first expedition of the
British to North America in
1584 proved to be a failure,
given that they were ill
prepared for the new
environment. In 1607 the first
colony was established
in Jamestown in Virginia (the
state was named after Elizabeth
I, the virgin queen). (It might
also be useful to remember that
this is around the time of
Shakespeares writing, so the English that the settlers would have used then would be
a kind of Shakespearian English.) Others followed, notably the group on board
the Mayflower, who became known as the pilgrim fathers of America, and settled
in Plymouth in Massachusetts in 1620. New colonies were being added until there
were 13 colonies in 1733 all on the east coast of the continent.

Many of the early English settlers were trying to escape various forms of religious
persecution in Europe as a result of the Reformation, so that there were many Puritans
and Catholics.

The English were
not the only
Europeans there
at that time. The
French were
already there in
the north and
north-west and
the Dutch were in
the west.
Subsequently,
other groups
began to
enter North
America:
black
slaves were brought in by force to work the plantations in the South
the Irish moved to America, particularly after the potato famine (184650)
photo on the right
the Scots
the Germans, Italians and Scandinavians
the Jews (from Russia and Central Europe, particularly when they faced
persecution)
the Hispanics (Spanish-speaking immigrants from Mexico, Puerto Rico, etc.
who were escaping bad economic conditions)

And of course it must be remembered that when America was discovered and
settled, the continent was not completely devoid of people the so-called (Red)
Indians (the proper term these days is Native Americans) were already there.

We must, however, remember that before the 19th century, the majority of immigrants
to North America were English-speakers. This was the pattern to be repeated
in Australia where British immigration continued under the White Australia policy,
despite the obvious proximity of Asian nations.

For a fuller account of the patterns of immigration to the US, go to this
webpage: http://usinfo.state.gov/journals/itsv/0699/ijse/portrait.htm. (This is, of
course, a celebratory account from the USIS perspective.)

Given the various influences on and inputs into English in America, we might be
forgiven in thinking that English America would become very divergent. There were
so many different social groups with their own distinct cultures and languages
(French, German, Dutch, Italian, Yiddish, African languages, Native American
languages). In addition, as a result of American English (AmE) becoming different
from British English (BrE), it would also become distinct. There were differences in
the landscape, in the make-up of the population, in the political systems, in the
economic activities.

But these do not seem to have been the case. Why not?

Lack of diversity

Randolph Quirk states: the image of a uniform American English sharply contrasting as a whole
with any part of the extremely heterogeneous English of Britain is one that has seemed soundly
based for more than two centuries by observers in both communities (The English Language
and Images of Matter)


And here is Baugh & Cable: It has repeatedly been observed, in the past as well as at the present
day, especially by travellers from abroad, that the English spoken in America shows a high
degree of uniformity. Those who are familiar with the pronounced dialectal differences that mark
the popular speech of different parts of England will know that there is nothing comparable to
these differences in the United States (A History of the English Language, 1993, p. 350).

There are three broad varieties corresponding with 3 broad areas:
East - clipped (whatever that means)
West - broader (whatever that means)
South - influenced by Black speech

(If youd like to explore American dialects, go
to: http://www.evolpub.com/Americandialects/AmDialhome.html, or for a more
technical site, try http://www.ling.upenn.edu/phono_atlas/.

If youd like to listen to different accents of American English,
try http://www.uta.fi/FAST/US8/REF/samples.html.)

Given that the initial Puritan settlers from England were mainly middle class people,
who aspired:
(a) to rid themselves of the controls of the old order of society, with its aristocracy
based on birth, inherited privilege, etc.
(b) to have free rein to pursue their economic goals, self-advancement, etc.
they had anti-litist and individualistic attitudes, and could be expected not to want to conform to
the ways of the old country.

Lack of divergence
Here is Quick again: extraordinary unanimity . . . exists over the bulk of the language
(p. 30). And Marckwardt: AmE shows great similarities with British English in
grammatical structure and syntax essentially the operational machinery of the
language (A.H. Marckwardt, American English).

The divergences are minor. [T]here has been little divergence of British and
American English. Many of the indubitable linguistic differences between a given
American and a given Briton are individual differences, social differences, or
differences that reflect dialectal variation within one or other community: they often
do not, in other words, reflect differences between British and American English as
such (Quirk, p. 26).

Compare this also to the differences in the various Chinese dialects that are not
mutually intelligible. We might, arguably, also claim that the divergence between
Malaysian Malay and Indonesian Malay are greater than that between BrE and AmE.
And the communities who speak these varieties of Malay and varieties of Chinese are
not a geographically separated as Britatin and North America!

Try the following websites devoted to detailing the differences between British and
American English. Some are really quite comprehensive!
Jeremy Peaks American British British American Dictionary for English
Speaking People
The Best of British: The American's guide to speaking British
And heres wikipedia

We can look at some of the usual lists of vocabulary differences
between AmE (bottom) and BrE (top).
anticlockwise anywhere aubergine autumn bath beige bill
counter-clockwise anyplace eggplant fall bathtub tan check

biscuits bookshop boot Bowler hat braces car caretaker
cookies bookstore trunk Derby hat suspenders automobile janitor

chemists, pharmacy chips crisps dustbin ground floor hire out
drugstore French fries chips trash can ground floor, first
floor
rent out

lift luggage note petrol post postcode pram
elevator baggage bill gas(oline) mail zip code baby carriage

rubber railway line spanner suspenders towards
eraser railroad tracks wrench garters toward

But note that many of the items are transparent to the other users (eg towards v.
toward; bookshop v. bookstore). In some others, the distinctions are not that clear cut
for example, in the UK, there are the Automobile Association (AA) and the Royal
Automobile Club (RAC), and the general word in America is still car. Americans use
biscuit for a kind of savoury bread (a more buttery version of scone), and the British
use cookies to refer to soft, sweet biscuits. Americans use aubergine to refer to the
colour purple in clothes. Americans talk about the parcelpost and the British talk
about airmail letters.

Some of the differences in tendencies are to do with changes over time it is not true
to say that BrE is always more conservative than AmE. The OED states that fall is In
N. Amer. the ordinary name for autumn; in England now rare in literary use, though
found in some dialect; the term was certainly available in Shakespeares time, but has
in general been replaced by the French loan-word autumn in the UK. And of course,
in North America, autumn is available as an alternative for fall. In the UK bathtub is
a little old fashioned; this never went out of fashion in North America. Other items
of AmE that are now considered old fashioned or dialectal in Britain
include deck (pack) of cards, mad (angry), pitcher (jug), platter (dish).

Reasons for the lack of diversity and divergence
Some of the reasons given can be in terms of natural tendencies in such
circumstances.
accent levelling could have occurred because of the mixed population; it was
less easy to preserve distinctive features
there was comparative uniformity in the early settlers speech, since it had a
larger than average proportion of educated use and reflected the tendency for
educated people to have a concept of standard English transcending regional
dialects (Quirk, p. 4)
there was a strong emphasis on education from the start and an
institutionalised education system began early and this discouraged diversity
AmE developed at a time when there was population mobility, facilitated by the rapid
growth of communications (railways, etc.), which made distinctive dialects and accents
difficult to maintain.

The Melting Pot ideology
In 1783, J Hector St John Crevecoeur asked, What, then, is the American, this new
man? and then proposed the following answer: He is neither a European nor the
descendant of a European Here individuals of all nations are melted into a new race
of men. Hence, the melting pot ideology. The idea was for immigrants to be
assimilated to the dominant culture to give rise to a new resultant culture. Yet,
interestingly, American culture and language contain a lot of Anglo-Saxon features.
There is therefore an interesting two-sidedness in the development of AmE, where
certain ideals are given in the rhetoric which do not quite match the reality.

For instance, we can think of the rhetoric of individual self-realisation, initiative,
opportunity, rights, open-endedness, pluralism, democracy, freedom, anti-litism, in
contrast to supposed British and/or European attitudes. Yet in spite of this, differences
were ironed out under the pressure of a common enterprise whose nature was
essentially determined by the original dominant New England settlers driven by
economic goals and interests. The Native American perspective, for example, is not
particularly central in general American consciousness; and apart from the inclusion
of some items like wigwam and totem pole, Native American languages have not
influenced American English and of course it is English that is the de facto national or
official language of the US.

From the beginning, there was an experience of struggle and difference which
needed to be erased in pursuit of an image of unity and solidarity for the survival of
which certain interests had to be excluded or co-opted (David Simpson, The Politics
of American English).

During the 150 years between settlement and Independence, the dominant groups at
the helm of the creation of this new society were afflicted by insecurities.
uncertain environment, challenges, dangers
difference and diversity were a major problem
These could constitute obstacles to the pursuit and achievement of their economic and
political goals. Therefore, they looked for a common language on national
principles to establish solidarity and unity and to preserve the socio-economic system,
within which they had the dominant role. This is sometimes referred to
as koinisation. (The term comes from koin which refers to the common Greek
language during the time of the Roman Empire when it because the lingua franca
within the empire. The original koin represents a convergence of different Greek
dialects.)

This represented a move towards homogeneity and uniformity based on the interests
of the powerful the melting pot concept, whereby individuals of all nations are
melted into a new race of men, and this was achieved through assimilation,
homogenisation, and also elimination of rivals.

The result then was the establishment of the hegemony of the powerful groups a
new kind of aristocracy, based now not on birth (as in the case of the old aristocracy
they had resisted), but on wealth, power, and individual initiative and enterprise.

Episodes in the history of America that support this perspective include the following.

1. Elimination and marginalisation of pre-existing populations: Many of the
Native Indian population were killed and their lands appropriated by force. The other
Europeans such as the French and Spanish who were already in some of the territories
which America incorporated, were marginalised or pushed out. We might also note
the present continuation of this process through the very recent English Only
Movement.

2. Political and linguistic independence from Britain: The American Revolution or
the War of American Independence (177583) was a challenge to the political and
economic hegemony of Britain. The dominant groups in America affirmed their
political dominance within the country, which showed itself linguistically in the
assertion of linguistic independence.

From very early times, there had been negative evaluations of American usage in
Britain: word forms such as bluff, lengthy, belittle, placate,
antagonise and presidential were ridiculed. Dr Johnson (1756) talks about the
American dialect, a tract (= process) of corruption to which every language widely
diffused must always be exposed.

Initially, Americans imported all their books from Europe, and the Old World was
seen as the repository of civilisation and greatness. The Declaration of Independence
(1776), however, was the culmination of a reaction against that kind of attitude, so
that a strong, sometimes belligerent patriotism arose. This was seen clearly in the
person of Noah Webster (17561843). He began as a lawyer but later turned to
teaching, where he quickly became dissatisfied with the materials then available. In
1806, he produced a small Dictionary, and the large American Dictionary of the
English Language was published in 1828.
In 1789, in his Dissertations on the English Language, he declared, As an
independent nation our honour requires us to have a system of our own, in language as
well as government. Great Britain, whose children we are, should no longer
be our standard. . . . . A national language is a band of national union. Every
engine should be employed to render the people of this country national; to call their
attachment home to their own country; and to inspire them with the pride of national
character. There was a strong concern on how to pull together the thirteen colonies to
form a unified nation.

3. Perception of linguistic diversity as an obstacle to political and cultural unity:
After the retreat of the British, attention turned explicitly to the internal problems: that
of a lack of unity. Difference, variety were seen as a problem, generating instability, a
threat to civil society within which the position of the dominant group was otherwise
assured. Language was seen as having a role in all of this. Linguistic discord was seen
to lead to social discord, whereas drawing together all the various strands into a
dominant strand, a common language was seen as a way of achieving internal unity.

Which variety then should serve as this common language or standard language?
What is interesting is that whereas the early Webster sounded the clarion call
for differentiation from English in Britain, this was tempered by 1828 (after residence
for a year in England), when he said, It is not only important, but, in a degree
necessary, that the people of this country, should have an American Dictionary of the
English Language; for, although the body of the language is the same as in England,
and it is desirable to perpetuate that sameness, yet some differences must exist.

Whilst he still asserts difference, he also concedes that it is desirable to perpetuate
that sameness, so that the common language should not be too divergent from
standard British English. Thus, Webster, the nationalist, abandons some of his earlier
recommendations for spelling in his Dictionary: bred, tuf, tung, thum, iland, wimmin.
He also urged for <k> to be used for character and chorus; for ee to be used
in mean, speak, grieve and key. Most of the differences are to do with spelling.

BRITISH AMERICAN
axe ax
centre center
cheque (as in cashing a cheque) check
colour color
defence defense
dialogue dialog or dialogue
honour honor
mould mold
omelette omelet
plough plow
programme (except computer programs) program
theatre theater or theatre
through through or (informal) thru

4. The establishment of a standard based on the usage of the educated class: This
standard was based on the usage of the well-educated yeomanry of New England
(yeoman = a farmer who owns and works his land), who speak the most pure English
now known in the world not the illiterate peasantry, but substantial independent
freeholders, masters of their own persons and lords of their own soil are the standard
bearers. The usage selected is the usage, essentially, of the property-owning, educated
class of New England and the Virginia groups of settlers, i.e. the most powerful in
society. These become the dominant white middle class group, and the usage of this
class is taken to define the favoured American English usage.

5. The British orientation of the standard selected: The standardising impulse was
expressed around the central (British) tradition which was retained far more than is
commonly supposed to. (G.P. Krapp, The English Language in America). The usage
of these dominant groups was predominantly influenced by south-eastern British
speech, which formed the basis of Standard British English Many of the principal
immigrants to this country were educated at the English universities (Webster 1836).
The establishment of the education system in America almost at the very start
reinforced this orientation. The widely-held idea that the development of the standard
language in America should be in the hands of great writers, an authoritative
senatorial class of men of letters, who by developing the language in the desired
manner would guard it against the ravages of populism and the interventions of those
who needed to be kept out (Simpson, p. 47). But such a group of writers was not
believed to have yet come into being. Therefore, there was no alternative but to go to
the established British standard, the further advantage of which was that it was itself
the dialect of the dominant middle class in England.

Therefore,
Webster: The body of the language is the same as in England and it is desirable to
perpetuate that sameness.
John Adams: British and Americans must together force their language into general use,
in spite of all the obstacles that may be thrown in their way
Washington Irving (1851): any deviations on our part from the best London usage will
be liable to be considered as provincialism

Have a look at Washington Irvings well-known tale of Rip Van Winkle (published in
1820 as part of The Sketch Books of Geoffrey Crayon, Gent.) and consider the kind of
English he used: http://courses.nus.edu.sg/course/elltankw/history/rvw.htm

When youre ready to take the quiz based on this topic, go to the IVLE page and click
on Assessment on the left, and then on American English.