The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 17.0472 Monday, 22 May 2006
[1] From: David Crystal <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Wednesday, 17 May 2006 15:07:08 +0000 GMT
Subj: Re: SHK 17.0455 Regional Accents
[2] From: Tony Burton <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Wednesday, 17 May 2006 12:48:13 -0400
Subj: Re: SHK 17.0455 Regional Accents
[3] From: Kevin De Ornellas <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Wednesday, 17 May 2006 18:03:23 +0100
Subj: Re: SHK 17.0455 Regional Accents
[4] From: William Godshalk <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Wednesday, 17 May 2006 14:20:49 -0400
Subj: Re: SHK 17.0455 Regional Accents
[5] From: Martin Green <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Thursday, 18 May 2006 22:51:31 +0000
Subj: Re: SHK 17.0455 Regional Accents
[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: David Crystal <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Wednesday, 17 May 2006 15:07:08 +0000 GMT
Subject: 17.0455 Regional Accents
Comment: Re: SHK 17.0455 Regional Accents
I have a fairly extensive discussion of these issues in my Pronouncing
Shakespeare (CUP 2005), based on what we did at the Globe for the
'original pronunciation' production of RJ that year, and also in the
middle chapters of The Stories of English (Penguin 2004 / Overlook Press
in the US), which I hope would help.
David Crystal
[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: Tony Burton <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Wednesday, 17 May 2006 12:48:13 -0400
Subject: 17.0455 Regional Accents
Comment: Re: SHK 17.0455 Regional Accents
For what it's worth, I happen to be engaged in an exchange with Roger
Lass, one of the pre-eminent elder students of English pronunciation and
the development of the language generally, in which he remarked that
>"Of course there were dialect differences throughout England (we don't
even
>know for sure whether Shakespeare spoke one of the many incipient London
>standards -- there was no 'standard' pronunciation at his time, but a lot
of
>competing varieties)."
Note that he distinguishes varieties in London only, as a different realm
of problems from that of regional dialects. I imagine it safe to assume
(or at least, unsafe to discount) that, among the competing London
varieties alone, each speaker might have understood within his or her own
system and phonology what sounded "educated," "rustic," Welsh," "French,"
"pretentious," "refined," or anything else; but at the same time, have
begun from a different phonetic base and probably applied different
definitions and value judgments to each category. Consider "liberal" in
the United States today, or the history of "egghead" in the fifties. Dare
I speak French in Walmart?
G'dye, mites,
Tony
[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: Kevin De Ornellas <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Wednesday, 17 May 2006 18:03:23 +0100
Subject: 17.0455 Regional Accents
Comment: Re: SHK 17.0455 Regional Accents
John Briggs writes: "I would suggest that Don Bloom first reads: E.J.
Dobson, English Pronunciation, 1500-1700 (Clarendon Press, 1957/1968)."
And for a more accessible, introductory guide, see David Crystal,
"Pronouncing Shakespeare: The Globe Experiment" (Cambridge University
Press, 2005), especially pp. 43-95.
Kevin De Ornellas
University of Ulster
[4]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: William Godshalk <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Wednesday, 17 May 2006 14:20:49 -0400
Subject: 17.0455 Regional Accents
Comment: Re: SHK 17.0455 Regional Accents
Terry Hawkes writes: "Donald Bloom wonders if readers have noted 'any
regional accents beyond a few Welshmen . . .' A touch quaint. How about
Henry V for a start?"
And for another, The Merry Wives of Windsor, which showcases regional
dialects -- including Welsh, of course.
Bill
[5]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: Martin Green <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Thursday, 18 May 2006 22:51:31 +0000
Subject: 17.0455 Regional Accents
Comment: Re: SHK 17.0455 Regional Accents
John Drakakis writes that "I think I'm right in saying that there was no
such thing in the late 16th or early 17th centuries as 'received
pronunciation', not even for aristocrats." And he probably is right.
Nevertheless, it is clear that at about the same time, school masters and
others interested in spoken and written English, believed that certain
pronunciations were to be preferred over others, and that care should be
taken that spelling reflect the "correct," or preferred, pronunciations.
Richard Hodges, who described himself as a "school-Master, dwelling in
Southwark" (Shakespeare's old stomping grounds), in 1643 published a book
entitled "A Special Help to Orthographie, or, The-Writing of English.
Consisting of such words as are alike in sound, and unlike both in their
significance and Writing: As also, of such Words which are so near alike
in sound, that they are sometimes taken for each other." Hodges gave
numerous examples of words which were pronounced alike, but which should
be spelled - - and, in fact, by necessary implication, pronounced
differently. Two of many examples are "His bile brake, when the pot did
boyl," and "It doth imply as much, that he sought to imploy himself well."
As all readers of 16th, 17th and 18th century English poetry know, these
distinctions in spelling were generally adhered to (the poets being,
usually, well educated), but the pronunciations were not (suggesting a
regional or dialect pronunciation by these educated poets) -- as for
example, Pope's famous couplet, "Good nature and good sense must ever
join,/To err is human, to forgive divine." So far as I can find,
Shakespeare did this only once, in Venus and Adonis: "And nuzzling in his
flank, the loving swine/, Sheath'd unaware the tusk in his soft groin." I
suspect that this does not reflect Shakespeare's pronunciation, but is
merely his appropriation of the lines "For an orped Swine/ Smit him in the
groyne," from "The Sheepherds Song of Venus and Adonis," published in
England's Helicon in 1600, but written, I believe, prior to Shakespeare's
poem, published in 1593.
_______________________________________________________________
S H A K S P E R: The Global Shakespeare Discussion List
Hardy M. Cook,
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
The S H A K S P E R Web Site <http://www.shaksper.net>
DISCLAIMER: Although SHAKSPER is a moderated discussion list, the opinions
expressed on it are the sole property of the poster, and the editor
assumes no responsibility for them.
|
