I dont think they are "phools" I think they are entitled to their opinion, I vote conservative, but I am not happy with the EU at all, and frankly I wish we could build a wall around Yorkshire and feth the rest of the UK off, let alone Europe!
Culturally perhaps we can take some solace in the fact that our little island developed quite seperately... politically we're still divided between remaining on the US' leash or kow-towing to the EU... But geopgraphically we are pretty much European.
Ketara wrote:I dunno. Welshmen are as gaelic as the Scots or Irish.
And anyone calling me European can feck right off.
How about "Non-American" because let's face it, compared to THE BEST COUNTRY ON EARTH the rest of you all just kind of blend together. Europe is that city that kind of looks like a gun, right?
Ketara wrote:I dunno. Welshmen are as gaelic as the Scots or Irish.
And anyone calling me European can feck right off.
I don't see the what big deal about being called a European is, if someone called me a North American I wouldn't be offended because I am after all from that continent.
Ketara wrote:I dunno. Welshmen are as gaelic as the Scots or Irish.
And anyone calling me European can feck right off.
I don't see the what big deal about being called a European is, if someone called me a North American I wouldn't be offended because I am after all from that continent.
You're not "North American" you're just north, of America.
Ketara wrote:I dunno. Welshmen are as gaelic as the Scots or Irish.
And anyone calling me European can feck right off.
I don't see the what big deal about being called a European is, if someone called me a North American I wouldn't be offended because I am after all from that continent.
Because some people over here have a perception that they've been "fighting the fight" against Europe for all of their history... Britons are proud of having resisted invasion multiple times as well as sitting back and drinking tea watching the Europeans slaughter one another whilst we either finance who we want to win or just skip off in a boat to colonise India.
Ketara wrote:I dunno. Welshmen are as gaelic as the Scots or Irish.
And anyone calling me European can feck right off.
I don't see the what big deal about being called a European is, if someone called me a North American I wouldn't be offended because I am after all from that continent.
You're not "North American" you're just north, of America.
Ketara wrote:I dunno. Welshmen are as gaelic as the Scots or Irish.
And anyone calling me European can feck right off.
I don't see the what big deal about being called a European is, if someone called me a North American I wouldn't be offended because I am after all from that continent.
You're not "North American" you're just north, of America.
Last time this map was posted I made some witty comment about misspelling the name of the poorest nation was a great way to demonstrate knowledge and international awareness.
Kilkrazy wrote:Last time this map was posted I made some witty comment about misspelling the name of the poorest nation was a great way to demonstrate knowledge and international awareness.
What was it again...?? Demmed if I can recall.
Oh well, toodle pip!
I assume it was "Paupa" New Guinea.
Also, it looks like they labeled Afghanistan as "Afghanistan and Pakistan", incorporated Pakistan into India, and drew a line across India and called Pakistan "mostly muslim." Which I find amusing.
Henners91 wrote:
Get devolution, kick out the wiccans and maybe I'll take you seriously
Go into any of the pubs in Newlyn on landing day and tell the gentlemen coming ashore from their trawlers the same thing and maybe I'll return that favour.
Ketara wrote:I dunno. Welshmen are as gaelic as the Scots or Irish.
And anyone calling me European can feck right off.
I don't see the what big deal about being called a European is, if someone called me a North American I wouldn't be offended because I am after all from that continent.
You're not "North American" you're just north, of America.
Melissia wrote:Indeed, Biccat is definitely an imposter, not a southerner.
Sweet iced tea is quite common!
You're from Texas, which is full of Yankee interlopers.
When I lived in Georgia I never heard of "Sweet iced tea," it was just "sweet tea."
You are correct. The more common nomenclature is simply "sweet tea." However, I was simply trying to provide a more descriptive reference for our British friends who might incorectly assume I was referring to either a lot of honey or several extra cubes of sugar in the hot molasses-black stuff they drink and refer to as tea.
The only time I wouldn't also have ice in my sweet tea is when I have a 32 oz+ glass, and most of the ice has melted...
Melissia wrote:Indeed, Biccat is definitely an imposter, not a southerner.
Sweet iced tea is quite common!
You're from Texas, which is full of Yankee interlopers.
When I lived in Georgia I never heard of "Sweet iced tea," it was just "sweet tea."
You are correct. The more common nomenclature is simply "sweet tea." However, I was simply trying to provide a more descriptive reference for our British friends who might incorectly assume I was referring to either a lot of honey or several extra cubes of sugar in the hot molasses-black stuff they drink and refer to as tea.
The only time I wouldn't also have ice in my sweet tea is when I have a 32 oz+ glass, and most of the ice has melted...
Actually, in Louisiana and Mississippi, it's just called Iced Tea. There's no such thing as tea that isn't sweetened there.
If for some reason you DO want some that isn't sweetened, you specifically ask for Unsweet Tea and prepare yourself for The Look. My wife was very surprised when she discovered she didn't have to ask for Unsweet Tea in other parts of the country.
helgrenze wrote:Wait... there's a "West" Virginia? when did that happen?
Yes there is. Amazing huh? We can't make our mind up if were are yanks or southerners.
Melissia wrote:I did, I just didn't care.
Oh. That explains it.
Eldanar wrote:
Lord Scythican wrote:See what I mean? My state is so obscure no one realized I was talking about West Virginia.
I like West Virginia...Its the only place I've ever been to that regularly sells motion sickness pills in convenience stores...
That is because of all our hills. Every WV resident has one leg that is shorter than the other from walking across these hills. It really throws off your equilibrium, so the motion sickness pills are a necessary if you live here in WV.
ChrisWWII wrote:Just because we have cities that like to pretend they're independent countries...
So does Texas and New York (Granted, New York only has one).
Wait, there's more NY than just the city?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
helgrenze wrote:
ChrisWWII wrote:California is better than all the other states. Do you have the 5th largest economy in the world? Huh? HUH!? Yeah. Didn't think so.
Removing the Film industry from California would be like taking the Barbie line from Mattel...... It would ruin that economy.
No it wouldn't.
Mattel would just make up for it by selling more lines as their limited exclusive way overpriced lines through MattyCollector than just He-man and Ghostbusters.
Melissia wrote:So does Texas and New York (Granted, New York only has one).
Texas has cities?
I thought it was just thousands of miles of flat empty land dotted with oil wells, cow farms and outposts of Frazzled's weiner dog army.
Yep, Texas has three cities in the top ten most populated cities in the top ten most populated cities in the nation. The DFW metroplex is larger than los angelos.
English, Irish, and Scottish generals were captured after a courageous
battle by the Nazi SS. The SS officer said to them that before be put
them in the concentration camp that he would punish them with 100
lashes in front of his men as they had killed so many of his men
before they were captured.
He said to the Scottish general, "You fought very bravely, so I vill
give you one vish."
His reply was, "Ach, give me one of your SS leather jackets to protect
me."
So he got his lashes, but still had to be dragged in through the gate.
He said to the English general, "You fought bravely too. So you can
have a vish also."
He replied. "Put one of the mattresses on my back old boy."
So he got his lashes, but managed to crawl in after his thrashing.
He said to the Irish general, "You fought bravely too, more so zan ze
other two, so you can have two vishes!"
Ketara wrote:I dunno. Welshmen are as gaelic as the Scots or Irish.
And anyone calling me European can feck right off.
How about "Non-American" because let's face it, compared to THE BEST COUNTRY ON EARTH the rest of you all just kind of blend together. Europe is that city that kind of looks like a gun, right?
I don't think the best country in the would would have let us Canucks, invade their capital, and burn the white house.
Therefore you Americans are NOT The best country on earth!!!
Ketara wrote:I dunno. Welshmen are as gaelic as the Scots or Irish.
And anyone calling me European can feck right off.
How about "Non-American" because let's face it, compared to THE BEST COUNTRY ON EARTH the rest of you all just kind of blend together. Europe is that city that kind of looks like a gun, right?
I don't think the best country in the would would have let us Canucks, invade their capital, and burn the white house.
Therefore you Americans are NOT The best country on earth!!!
Thaanos wrote:I don't think the best country in the would would have let us Canucks, invade their capital, and burn the white house.
Therefore you Americans are NOT The best country on earth!!!
Lord Scythican wrote:Okay time for some bad humor:
English, Irish, and Scottish generals were captured after a courageous
battle by the Nazi SS. The SS officer said to them that before be put
them in the concentration camp that he would punish them with 100
lashes in front of his men as they had killed so many of his men
before they were captured.
He said to the Scottish general, "You fought very bravely, so I vill
give you one vish."
His reply was, "Ach, give me one of your SS leather jackets to protect
me."
So he got his lashes, but still had to be dragged in through the gate.
He said to the English general, "You fought bravely too. So you can
have a vish also."
He replied. "Put one of the mattresses on my back old boy."
So he got his lashes, but managed to crawl in after his thrashing.
He said to the Irish general, "You fought bravely too, more so zan ze
other two, so you can have two vishes!"
He replied, "I want 200 lashes!"
"Are you sure?" asked the SS officer.
"Yes," he said.
"Okay zen, vot is your second vish?"
"Put the Englishman on my back!"
How could the Irishman get captured by the SS when the Irish didnt fight against them, and possibly assisted them?
Seriously. How the feth can you be "neutral" against THE NAZI MENACE?
Ive got no respect for this neutral BS, i prefer my enemies that picked the other side of the fence more than those wishy washy neutral fethers..
Kilkrazy wrote:The coming royal wedding is so popular that the tabloids newspapers are talking about a new era of "Blinglish" based around the pomp and ceremony.
"Blinglish" So they are gonna speak gangsta rap now!
ChrisWWII wrote:Just because we have cities that like to pretend they're independent countries...
So does Texas and New York (Granted, New York only has one).
Wait, there's more NY than just the city?
There's also Brooklyn, Queens, Manhatten, Staten Island, New Jersey...
Aren't those just parts of Greater New York sort of like how we have Vancouver City and then we have Greater Vancouver (which combines Langley, Abbotsford, Surrey, Richmond, New West Minister, Coquitlam,
Without trying to really upset MGS Neil Oliver in the lastest episode of A History of Celtic Britain basically says the concept of a Celtic race is basically wrong, there was no such race.
If you really want to play mind games over British history try this. The Celtic races of the UK like to say that they were conquered by the Normans, but in fact the Normans would of been a mixture of Norse & Celt. Ultimately King Rollo's ment may of been a bamd of roving Norse who got given Normandy as a prize, but ulitimately there wasn't enough of them to repopulate it. It would of been a classic Norse case of intergrating with the local population, which was what they were good at... and who were the local population? Celts. So Celts with a Norse twist basically invaded Britain.
Err I'd heard the same thing Wolfstan (about the Celts being a Victorian myth) but you've got a bit of a fact wrong: "Popular" British history refers to those that were conquered by the Normans as the Anglo-Saxons, dervied from the German Angles and Saxons that conquered the Britons after the Romans left.
Thaanos wrote:I don't think the best country in the would would have let us Canucks, invade their capital, and burn the white house.
Therefore you Americans are NOT The best country on earth!!!
Burning Washington is nullified, because we burned York. But then who kicked whose arses on Lake Erie? But I suppose you canuks were rather helpful in WW II, so we'll let it pass.
Henners91 wrote:I think people care a lot more about the White House getting burned down than the Canadian Legislature
Bah, it was only singed. Besides, we rebuilt it, and there was a nice little mysterious tornado that appeared out of nowhere, that shouldn't have ever occurred during that season or on that location, that blew out all the fires. Coincidence? I think not.
Besides, only a few Russian politicians have done stuff as badass as American politicians.
Henners91 wrote:I think people care a lot more about the White House getting burned down than the Canadian Legislature
Bah, it was only singed. Besides, we rebuilt it, and there was a nice little mysterious tornado that appeared out of nowhere, that shouldn't have ever occurred during that season or on that location, that blew out all the fires. Coincidence? I think not.
Besides, only a few Russian politicians have done stuff as badass as American politicians.
Take your pick!
Though the singers of the first video are a tad stupid... they seem to think that "The Alamo" and The Bay of Pigs were "Wars".
In collaboration with the Brits mind you! We can't take all the credit, but we can note that we have something like 5000 warheads, and the Brits have 200.
Henners91 wrote:Err I'd heard the same thing Wolfstan (about the Celts being a Victorian myth) but you've got a bit of a fact wrong: "Popular" British history refers to those that were conquered by the Normans as the Anglo-Saxons, dervied from the German Angles and Saxons that conquered the Britons after the Romans left.
Sorry, was generalising so didn't bother with adding that. Of course the main line of history would of been; Stone age peoples, migration of the Bronze age peoples (or as they are refered to, Celts), then the Romans, then the Saxon's (who could be decended from Celts?), part settlement by the Vikings, then the Normans.
Henners91 wrote:Well they say that the Saxons are the most dominant genetic strain because they bred with the Celts and totally assimilated them.
'They' don't say that, or at least not in any of the source material I've read on the subject.
You should check this book out (I've just wiki'd it for brevity's sake):
wiki wrote:Blood of the Isles
In his 2006 book Blood of the Isles (published in the United States and Canada as Saxons, Vikings and Celts: The Genetic Roots of Britain and Ireland), Sykes examines British genetic "clans". He presents evidence from mitochondrial DNA, inherited by both sexes from their mothers, and the Y chromosome, inherited by men from their fathers, for the following points:
* The genetic makeup of Britain and Ireland is overwhelmingly what it has been since the Neolithic period and to a very considerable extent since the Mesolithic period, especially in the female line, i.e. those people, who in time would become identified as British Celts (culturally speaking), but who (genetically speaking) should more properly be called Cro-Magnon.
...The Anglo-Saxons are supposed, by some, to have made a substantial contribution to the genetic makeup of England, but in Sykes's opinion it was under 20 percent of the total, even in southern England.
Albatross wrote:
* The genetic makeup of Britain and Ireland is overwhelmingly what it has been since the Neolithic period and to a very considerable extent since the Mesolithic period, especially in the female line, i.e. those people, who in time would become identified as British Celts (culturally speaking), but who (genetically speaking) should more properly be called Cro-Magnon.
So wait..... Brits are really Cro-mags? no wonder folks don't want to identify as "english decent".
I suggest looking up the 'Blueshirt' movement - some of their membership were ardent fascists. On the flip-side of that coin, it's pretty widely-accepted that the IRA assisted the Nazis...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
helgrenze wrote:
Albatross wrote:
* The genetic makeup of Britain and Ireland is overwhelmingly what it has been since the Neolithic period and to a very considerable extent since the Mesolithic period, especially in the female line, i.e. those people, who in time would become identified as British Celts (culturally speaking), but who (genetically speaking) should more properly be called Cro-Magnon.
So wait..... Brits are really Cro-mags? no wonder folks don't want to identify as "english decent".
You are aware that we're all, as humans, descended from Cro-Magnon man, yeah?
ChrisWWII wrote:Technically we're all Cro-Magnons, as Cro-Magnons are classified Homo Sapiens Sapiens as opposed to their relatives Homo Sapiens Neanderthalis.
Were anatomically identical to Cro-Magnon all they are is an earlier form of Homo Sapiens.
Alby, what about all that William the Conqueror business? How can you all be Celts with no French blood? Must have just been a lot of Celts ruled by the French (and lately Germans).
Manchu wrote:Alby, what about all that William the Conqueror business? How can you all be Celts with no French blood? Must have just been a lot of Celts ruled by the French (and lately Germans).
Bear in mind how small conquering armies were in those days.
Basically a couple thousand lads showed up and beat up a couple thousand others, then the peasantry looked up from ploughing mud and working down mines to be told they would belong to a new lord of the land with a funny sounding name, were told to thank god and saint peter they had it so good and then went back to ploughing the mud and working down the mines.
The ruling elites would have changes many times, the actual citizenry far less.
Albatross wrote:
* The genetic makeup of Britain and Ireland is overwhelmingly what it has been since the Neolithic period and to a very considerable extent since the Mesolithic period, especially in the female line, i.e. those people, who in time would become identified as British Celts (culturally speaking), but who (genetically speaking) should more properly be called Cro-Magnon.
So wait..... Brits are really Cro-mags? no wonder folks don't want to identify as "english decent".
You're kidding, right?
Cro-magnons were the supermen of prehistoric cavemen. Modern homo sapiens is a weak, degenerate version with less robust physique and smaller cranial capacity.
Albatross wrote:Aye, that may be, but were are physically pretty distinct from them, enough to say that we're 'descended' from them, IMO.
Technically we're anatomically identical to Cro-Magnon man, they are considered the first 'modern' human beings, if I recall my old anthropology reading.
ChrisWWII wrote:Technically we're all Cro-Magnons, as Cro-Magnons are classified Homo Sapiens Sapiens as opposed to their relatives Homo Sapiens Neanderthalis.
Were anatomically identical to Cro-Magnon all they are is an earlier form of Homo Sapiens.
...so not the current form? So...different then?
MeanGreenStompa wrote:Bear in mind how small conquering armies were in those days.
Basically a couple thousand lads showed up and beat up a couple thousand others, then the peasantry looked up from ploughing mud and working down mines to be told they would belong to a new lord of the land with a funny sounding name, were told to thank god and saint peter they had it so good and then went back to ploughing the mud and working down the mines.
The ruling elites would have changes many times, the actual citizenry far less.
Yeah, Manchu - pretty much this. In the book I cited, the guy talks about how the image of Viking 'rape-and-pillage' that so excites teenage boys (for example) is probably largely inaccurate, and that there is evidence that they brought their wives with them when they settled here, meaning that interbreeding was likely to be much lower than originally thought. It's the culture that is impacted in the most meaningful ways - the genetic make-up, less so.
I suggest looking up the 'Blueshirt' movement - some of their membership were ardent fascists. On the flip-side of that coin, it's pretty widely-accepted that the IRA assisted the Nazis...
Neither of those facts are in dispute.
However they do not back up the implied and rather sweeping psuedo statement of
Irish sympathy for the Nazis?
A trite dip into recent history reveals much more then a few morons beating a drum (bluehirts not the IRA) who had Nazi sympathies.
I suggest looking up the 'Blueshirt' movement - some of their membership were ardent fascists. On the flip-side of that coin, it's pretty widely-accepted that the IRA assisted the Nazis...
Neither of those facts are in dispute.
So there was some Irish sympathy for the Nazi party then, yes?
However they do not back up the implied and rather sweeping psuedo statement of
Irish sympathy for the Nazis?
Feel free to draw whatever implications you like, but if I said 'during WWII, all Irish were Nazi sympathisers' you should have no difficulty in quoting that part of my post. The button's right there. Go nuts.
A trite dip into recent history reveals much more then a few morons beating a drum (bluehirts not the IRA)...
Oh, of course! We simply MUSN'T say anything negative about the IRA! Wow.
Not at all but one gets a feel for certain posters upon browsing a forum section for so long.
You'll forgive me if I decline to engage you further, I can see exactly where this is going.
Manchu wrote:Alby, what about all that William the Conqueror business? How can you all be Celts with no French blood? Must have just been a lot of Celts ruled by the French (and lately Germans).
If you come over as a conquering class to establish a new upper strata to rule society, you do not breed with the Natives.
Judging how... you British/Scot/Welsh/(insert appropriate racial/cultural term) claim whom you are.
I am indeed then a Texan, but let's face it I won't be a "Texan" in your eyes, just as much as I wouldn't claim for you to be British/Scot/Welsh and just call you European.
But I do call Europeans as their proper terms. I know a Scotsman isn't European he's a Scot, as well as a Welshman is in fact Welsh.
I just would like to know, do y'all give the same distinguished terms for us from different states of America? Or are we simply American?
A little history: Some Texans seem glorified, we were our own country at one point. And when we say Texan we take pride because we actually do stand out from the states; even if only a little. (In before, Lolz Texan? Bush is Texan.) > Bush isn't genuinely Texan he was born in Connecticut and is of primarily English and German descent, and also has distant Welsh, Irish, French and Scottish ancestry.
Anyways... what I'm getting at is, do other people distinguish others all over the world or only in Europe?
I'd also like to note, I'm getting at we shouldn't judge people based on the majority and generalization of their fellow people. I know we're all different, but just because we're from a certain place doesn't mean we're lesser or greater than someone else. Although... some people would claim otherwise.
Speaking for myself, while I am aware that there are cultural differences between a native Texan, New Englander and Californian, for examples, the differences are less important than the similarities.
Same language, same national media, same currency, same large businesses.
Compare it to Europe where culture and language are very different depending on country of birth.
didn't even know this was going on until today, can't quite get my head around the concept of a million acres being burnt and, seemingly it not being exactly a massive deal, but best wishes to all those there anyway. [/hijack]
while I am aware that there are cultural differences between a native Texan, New Englander and Californian, for examples, the differences are less important than the similarities.
Quite. If anything I'd only really make any difference with regards to their immediate location -- farm, city, town etc etc than any specific quirks or traits due to their state.
To be honest, about the WILDFIRES. I was even aware or informed of this until last night, when friends from other states told me.
I think it's because it's nowhere close (and because I don't check the news), and wildfires are common, let me check where it's at... (Googling)
Okay I see it hit a massive area, but not exactly near my area.
I live in the Southern area near the Gulf Coast of Mexico.
Thanks for your concern though. I would hate to have been part of that experience. It's never funny to watch things burn with malcontent.
Especially when you live in a town of only 700 people. My little home is worth protecting. When we get fires everyone comes out to help put it out. Since, my town is covered in brush, and trust me the lack of rain doesn't help. :/
I can tell a spaniard apart from a Frenchman. I can tell a German apart from a Russian. And I can tell an Italian apart from a Dutchman. Half the time, I can do it purely on phenotype. The rest of the time I can do it on how they dress, the sound of their language, the food they eat, cultural personality quirks and so on.
I can't tell a Texan apart from someone from Minnesota. Or a Californian apart from someone from New York.
Unfortunately, Americans all look and sound like one big homogenous mass to the rest of the world. You look the same, sound the same, and behave the same.
Ketara wrote:I can tell a spaniard apart from a Frenchman. I can tell a German apart from a Russian. And I can tell an Italian apart from a Dutchman. Half the time, I can do it purely on phenotype. The rest of the time I can do it on how they dress, the sound of their language, the food they eat, cultural personality quirks and so on.
I can't tell a Texan apart from someone from Minnesota. Or a Californian apart from someone from New York.
Unfortunately, Americans all look and sound like one big homogenous mass to the rest of the world. You look the same, sound the same, and behave the same.
You're kidding right?
Maybe because you don't live around here. We have different accents and looks.
Actually in Texas you can tell who's not from Texas, and who's from different areas in Texas.
If you really think all Americans do the same exact thing, you need to come down here and visit.
The_Savior wrote:Except, I'm not from the Colony states nor am I of Anglo-Saxon Descent.
Guilt by association my friend... guilt by association.
Your only hope is to cooperate with agents of the Crown as and when the times comes for reintegration.
Wait which crown? This is formerly Spanish and French territory not steenking Engleshhhh. Now go away or we shall taunt you with our superior cuisine and proper dental hygiene you island booys.
The_Savior wrote:Except, I'm not from the Colony states nor am I of Anglo-Saxon Descent.
Guilt by association my friend... guilt by association.
Your only hope is to cooperate with agents of the Crown as and when the times comes for reintegration.
Wait which crown? This is formerly Spanish and French territory not steenking Engleshhhh. Now go away or we shall taunt you with our superior cuisine and proper dental hygiene you island booys.
Frazzled wrote:Wait which crown? This is formerly Spanish and French territory not steenking Engleshhhh. Now go away or we shall taunt you with our superior cuisine and proper dental hygiene you island booys.
England lays claim to all land an territory, even that where no Englishman has reigned.
Kilkrazy wrote:Speaking for myself, while I am aware that there are cultural differences between a native Texan, New Englander and Californian, for examples, the differences are less important than the similarities.
Same language, same national media, same currency, same large businesses.
Compare it to Europe where culture and language are very different depending on country of birth.
Oh contraire...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
The_Savior wrote:To be honest, about the WILDFIRES. I was even aware or informed of this until last night, when friends from other states told me.
I think it's because it's nowhere close (and because I don't check the news), and wildfires are common, let me check where it's at... (Googling)
Okay I see it hit a massive area, but not exactly near my area.
I live in the Southern area near the Gulf Coast of Mexico.
Thanks for your concern though. I would hate to have been part of that experience. It's never funny to watch things burn with malcontent.
Especially when you live in a town of only 700 people. My little home is worth protecting. When we get fires everyone comes out to help put it out. Since, my town is covered in brush, and trust me the lack of rain doesn't help. :/
A million acres, no big deal. Its a little smokey, but hey it beats Los Angeles smog.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
SilverMK2 wrote:
Frazzled wrote:Wait which crown? This is formerly Spanish and French territory not steenking Engleshhhh. Now go away or we shall taunt you with our superior cuisine and proper dental hygiene you island booys.
England lays claim to all land an territory, even that where no Englishman has reigned.
My relatives disabused you of that philosophy in 1814.
The_Savior wrote:To be honest, about the WILDFIRES. I was even aware or informed of this until last night, when friends from other states told me.
I think it's because it's nowhere close (and because I don't check the news), and wildfires are common, let me check where it's at... (Googling)
Okay I see it hit a massive area, but not exactly near my area.
I live in the Southern area near the Gulf Coast of Mexico.
Thanks for your concern though. I would hate to have been part of that experience. It's never funny to watch things burn with malcontent.
Especially when you live in a town of only 700 people. My little home is worth protecting. When we get fires everyone comes out to help put it out. Since, my town is covered in brush, and trust me the lack of rain doesn't help. :/
A million acres, no big deal. Its a little smokey, but hey it beats Los Angeles smog.
How many times has this happened now? I think that's also a reason I didn't pay no mind to it.
I mean Texas is huge, and probably most of the areas burned where just flat, uninhabited plains anyways. I think the news said only about 170 homes were lost.
Ketara wrote:I can tell a spaniard apart from a Frenchman. I can tell a German apart from a Russian. And I can tell an Italian apart from a Dutchman. Half the time, I can do it purely on phenotype. The rest of the time I can do it on how they dress, the sound of their language, the food they eat, cultural personality quirks and so on.
I do this too. It works better on the wimminz though. Probably because I look at them more.
As for telling seppos apart, that's an accent thing. I can tell Texans apart from Massachussets-ians, Noo Yawkers, N'awlinites, Californians (both so-cal and nor-cal),Georgians and Minnesotans. Can even tell Canuckians (Torontonians and Vancouverians) apart.
Even works on Kiwis. I can tell North Islanders from South Islanders, and what area of that island they are from, purely by accent and idioms.
Quite. If anything I'd only really make any difference with regards to their immediate location -- farm, city, town etc etc than any specific quirks or traits due to their state.
Forgive them lord, for they know not what they say.
Ketara wrote:
Unfortunately, Americans all look and sound like one big homogenous mass to the rest of the world. You look the same, sound the same, and behave the same.
Excuse me! I have, like, a totally different accent from those people in, like, New England, and like Texas and stuff. We Californians have a HELLA different accent and diction from like, the rest of the, like country.
Bear in mind that despite, like, studying in the UK, you all are still, like, 'Brits' to me.
Oh and, like, HELLA viva le revolution, dudes! \m/(^_^)
P.S.
God that was painful to write, we Californian still have a hella different accent though.
The_Savior wrote:To be honest, about the WILDFIRES. I was even aware or informed of this until last night, when friends from other states told me.
I think it's because it's nowhere close (and because I don't check the news), and wildfires are common, let me check where it's at... (Googling)
Okay I see it hit a massive area, but not exactly near my area.
I live in the Southern area near the Gulf Coast of Mexico.
Thanks for your concern though. I would hate to have been part of that experience. It's never funny to watch things burn with malcontent.
Especially when you live in a town of only 700 people. My little home is worth protecting. When we get fires everyone comes out to help put it out. Since, my town is covered in brush, and trust me the lack of rain doesn't help. :/
A million acres, no big deal. Its a little smokey, but hey it beats Los Angeles smog.
How many times has this happened now? I think that's also a reason I didn't pay no mind to it.
I mean Texas is huge, and probably most of the areas burned where just flat, uninhabited plains anyways. I think the news said only about 170 homes were lost.
Mostly Permian basin land. Fires go through there every year, but we're in the middle of a drought with decent winds which has really picked it up. This will probably go through until we get the remnants of a hurricane go through the area.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
SilverMK2 wrote:
Frazzled wrote:My relatives disabused you of that philosophy in 1814.
We are just biding our time. Building up our strategic tea reserves ready for the next big push.
And thats why you'll lose Engleesh. No one drinks British tea here but hippy tree huggers. Tecquila > tea
The_Savior wrote:To be honest, about the WILDFIRES. I was even aware or informed of this until last night, when friends from other states told me.
I think it's because it's nowhere close (and because I don't check the news), and wildfires are common, let me check where it's at... (Googling)
Okay I see it hit a massive area, but not exactly near my area.
I live in the Southern area near the Gulf Coast of Mexico.
Thanks for your concern though. I would hate to have been part of that experience. It's never funny to watch things burn with malcontent.
Especially when you live in a town of only 700 people. My little home is worth protecting. When we get fires everyone comes out to help put it out. Since, my town is covered in brush, and trust me the lack of rain doesn't help. :/
A million acres, no big deal. Its a little smokey, but hey it beats Los Angeles smog.
How many times has this happened now? I think that's also a reason I didn't pay no mind to it.
I mean Texas is huge, and probably most of the areas burned where just flat, uninhabited plains anyways. I think the news said only about 170 homes were lost.
Mostly Permian basin land. Fires go through there every year, but we're in the middle of a drought with decent winds which has really picked it up. This will probably go through until we get the remnants of a hurricane go through the area.
Isn't already dying down anyways?
I think the weathered changed recently to our favor. That or I misread something.
Excuse me! I have, like, a totally different accent from those people in, like, New England, and like Texas and stuff.
To your ears.
To our, clearly, more refined, cultured inbred lugs, you all just sound "wrong".
But it's not your fault, we understand and forgive you.
Except for the cheese in a can thing, some sins are so monstrous, such an affront to the very fabric of nature and naked morality that they can never be forgotten.
Excuse me! I have, like, a totally different accent from those people in, like, New England, and like Texas and stuff.
To your ears.
To our, clearly, more refined, cultured inbred lugs, you all just sound "wrong".
But it's not your fault, we understand and forgive you.
Except for the cheese in a can thing, some sins are so monstrous, such an affront to the very fabric of nature and naked morality that they can never be forgotten.
Frazzled wrote:And thats why you'll lose Engleesh. No one drinks British tea here but hippy tree huggers. Tecquila > tea
Yes, we have had trouble shipping tea to our advanced staging areas due to the burger blockades surrounding your major transport arteries
And our internal arteries as well.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
reds8n wrote:
ChrisWWII wrote:
Excuse me! I have, like, a totally different accent from those people in, like, New England, and like Texas and stuff.
To your ears.
To our, clearly, more refined, cultured inbred lugs, you all just sound "wrong".
But it's not your fault, we understand and forgive you.
Except for the cheese in a can thing, some sins are so monstrous, such an affront to the very fabric of nature and naked morality that they can never be forgotten.
Actually much of California has very interesting accents. Don't get trippedup by the surfer accent. Much of Southern California actually has a Mexican or Central American accent. In San Fran you'll find a lot of foreign accents as well.
You guys don't surf, your big hats would fall off and your horses, whilst well trained aren't that clever. !
.. yeah, I can pick up on different American accents, it's more there's only a few -- maybe New York, California way and "Southern drawl" -- that I would feel even vaguely confident of recognising or identifying.
I guess that's mainly due to TV/movies. It seems to work t'other way round as well. I once spent a great night out with a few septics and we bumped into two mates of mine, one who was a scouser and the other was from Govan region of Glasgow. We had a couple of swifties with them and moved on at which point my american guests revealed they ahdn't understood a single word either of them had said.
Which, upon reflection, is quite understandable indeed, a lot of british people would struggle with their brogue too.
It's somehow comforting that this thread exists. Its topic, nay much of its content, was a key player in my internet infancy, so many years ago. It's nice to see that we've still not quite managed to reach an agreement.
I can normally pick up on accents from Georgia and Texas, New York and Boston, and rural and urban Canada, differentiating between the two in all cases. Otherwise I'm stuffed. Still, it's a fun party trick that makes Canadians surprisingly grateful. Bless their little cotton socks.
Ketara wrote:I can tell a spaniard apart from a Frenchman. I can tell a German apart from a Russian. And I can tell an Italian apart from a Dutchman. Half the time, I can do it purely on phenotype. The rest of the time I can do it on how they dress, the sound of their language, the food they eat, cultural personality quirks and so on.
I can't tell a Texan apart from someone from Minnesota. Or a Californian apart from someone from New York.
Unfortunately, Americans all look and sound like one big homogenous mass to the rest of the world. You look the same, sound the same, and behave the same.
You're kidding right?
Maybe because you don't live around here. We have different accents and looks.
Actually in Texas you can tell who's not from Texas, and who's from different areas in Texas.
If you really think all Americans do the same exact thing, you need to come down here and visit.
To be fair, there is one predominant dialect found in popular culture, that most people end up assimilating. Even local slang seems to be found everywhere to varying degrees, due to people moving around, and the extremely interconnected culture that's developing.
Ketara wrote:I can tell a spaniard apart from a Frenchman. I can tell a German apart from a Russian. And I can tell an Italian apart from a Dutchman. Half the time, I can do it purely on phenotype. The rest of the time I can do it on how they dress, the sound of their language, the food they eat, cultural personality quirks and so on.
I can't tell a Texan apart from someone from Minnesota. Or a Californian apart from someone from New York.
Unfortunately, Americans all look and sound like one big homogenous mass to the rest of the world. You look the same, sound the same, and behave the same.
You're kidding right?
Maybe because you don't live around here. We have different accents and looks.
Actually in Texas you can tell who's not from Texas, and who's from different areas in Texas.
If you really think all Americans do the same exact thing, you need to come down here and visit.
To be fair, there is one predominant dialect found in popular culture, that most people end up assimilating. Even local slang seems to be found everywhere to varying degrees, due to people moving around, and the extremely interconnected culture that's developing.
I'm honest. I've met Americans from all over the place here at uni, from New York to Chicago to Utah. I can't tell the difference in the accents. I can identify, 'This is an American accent', but I can't tell regional dialects apart. You all have the same twang.
Interestingly enough, I can tell a Canadian apart from an American, but that's only because they pronounce certain words the English way. In terms of tone, they sound like Americans I tend to find.
The_Savior wrote:Judging how... you British/Scot/Welsh/(insert appropriate racial/cultural term) claim whom you are.
I am indeed then a Texan, but let's face it I won't be a "Texan" in your eyes, just as much as I wouldn't claim for you to be British/Scot/Welsh and just call you European.
But I do call Europeans as their proper terms. I know a Scotsman isn't European he's a Scot, as well as a Welshman is in fact Welsh.
I just would like to know, do y'all give the same distinguished terms for us from different states of America? Or are we simply American?
A little history: Some Texans seem glorified, we were our own country at one point. And when we say Texan we take pride because we actually do stand out from the states; even if only a little.
(In before, Lolz Texan? Bush is Texan.) > Bush isn't genuinely Texan he was born in Connecticut and is of primarily English and German descent, and also has distant Welsh, Irish, French and Scottish ancestry.
Anyways... what I'm getting at is, do other people distinguish others all over the world or only in Europe?
I'd also like to note, I'm getting at we shouldn't judge people based on the majority and generalization of their fellow people.
I know we're all different, but just because we're from a certain place doesn't mean we're lesser or greater than someone else.
Although... some people would claim otherwise.
Europe isn't a nation. America is. Ergo a Briton, despite being European, retains his British nationality.
So sorry, you're an American in my eyes at least ;P Though I do understand how much Texans pride themselves on... being Texan... 'Remember the Alamo' 'n' all that.
And I'd like to think there has been no implication of supposed superiority in this thread yet
@Frazzled, regarding 1814...
Peace was already signed... PEACE WAS ALREADY SIGNED! It made no difference! Yeah! *goes and plugs fingers in ears*
The_Savior wrote:Judging how... you British/Scot/Welsh/(insert appropriate racial/cultural term) claim whom you are.
I am indeed then a Texan, but let's face it I won't be a "Texan" in your eyes, just as much as I wouldn't claim for you to be British/Scot/Welsh and just call you European.
But I do call Europeans as their proper terms. I know a Scotsman isn't European he's a Scot, as well as a Welshman is in fact Welsh.
I just would like to know, do y'all give the same distinguished terms for us from different states of America? Or are we simply American?
A little history: Some Texans seem glorified, we were our own country at one point. And when we say Texan we take pride because we actually do stand out from the states; even if only a little.
(In before, Lolz Texan? Bush is Texan.) > Bush isn't genuinely Texan he was born in Connecticut and is of primarily English and German descent, and also has distant Welsh, Irish, French and Scottish ancestry.
Anyways... what I'm getting at is, do other people distinguish others all over the world or only in Europe?
I'd also like to note, I'm getting at we shouldn't judge people based on the majority and generalization of their fellow people.
I know we're all different, but just because we're from a certain place doesn't mean we're lesser or greater than someone else.
Although... some people would claim otherwise.
Europe isn't a nation. America is. Ergo a Briton, despite being European, retains his British nationality.
So sorry, you're an American in my eyes at least ;P Though I do understand how much Texans pride themselves on... being Texan... 'Remember the Alamo' 'n' all that.
And I'd like to think there has been no implication of supposed superiority in this thread yet
@Frazzled, regarding 1814...
Peace was already signed... PEACE WAS ALREADY SIGNED! It made no difference! Yeah! *goes and plugs fingers in ears*
Ketara wrote:I can tell a spaniard apart from a Frenchman. I can tell a German apart from a Russian. And I can tell an Italian apart from a Dutchman. Half the time, I can do it purely on phenotype. The rest of the time I can do it on how they dress, the sound of their language, the food they eat, cultural personality quirks and so on.
I can't tell a Texan apart from someone from Minnesota. Or a Californian apart from someone from New York.
Unfortunately, Americans all look and sound like one big homogenous mass to the rest of the world. You look the same, sound the same, and behave the same.
How can you not know the difference between a New Yorker accent and the Californian? Just listen to Rocky Balboa if you don't know what a Brooklyn accent sounds like.
Ketara wrote:I can tell a spaniard apart from a Frenchman. I can tell a German apart from a Russian. And I can tell an Italian apart from a Dutchman. Half the time, I can do it purely on phenotype. The rest of the time I can do it on how they dress, the sound of their language, the food they eat, cultural personality quirks and so on.
I can't tell a Texan apart from someone from Minnesota. Or a Californian apart from someone from New York.
Unfortunately, Americans all look and sound like one big homogenous mass to the rest of the world. You look the same, sound the same, and behave the same.
How can you not know the difference between a New Yorker accent and the Californian? Just listen to Rocky Balboa if you don't know what a Brooklyn accent sounds like.
It's mainly because I've never had a particularly wide sample at one specific time. I tend to meet Americans on their own, or in groups of people from the same area. Not only that, its enough of an oddity that its not an everyday thing, so I don't have a fixed memory of precisely what the last person sounded like. All I remember is the twang that they all share. So as a result, I can identify an American, but not regional differences.
And I suspect I'm not alone in this. Someone from Berlin can probably tell the difference between them and someone from Hamburg. A Japanese person can tell the difference between someone from Tokyo and someone from Osaka. But to the casual outsider who doesn't interact on a regular basis with people from different regions of the country, they sound identical.
Ketara wrote:I can tell a spaniard apart from a Frenchman. I can tell a German apart from a Russian. And I can tell an Italian apart from a Dutchman. Half the time, I can do it purely on phenotype. The rest of the time I can do it on how they dress, the sound of their language, the food they eat, cultural personality quirks and so on.
I can't tell a Texan apart from someone from Minnesota. Or a Californian apart from someone from New York.
Unfortunately, Americans all look and sound like one big homogenous mass to the rest of the world. You look the same, sound the same, and behave the same.
How can you not know the difference between a New Yorker accent and the Californian? Just listen to Rocky Balboa if you don't know what a Brooklyn accent sounds like.
It's mainly because I've never had a particularly wide sample at one specific time. I tend to meet Americans on their own, or in groups of people from the same area. Not only that, its enough of an oddity that its not an everyday thing, so I don't have a fixed memory of precisely what the last person sounded like. All I remember is the twang that they all share. So as a result, I can identify an American, but not regional differences.
And I suspect I'm not alone in this. Someone from Berlin can probably tell the difference between them and someone from Hamburg. A Japanese person can tell the difference between someone from Tokyo and someone from Osaka. But to the casual outsider who doesn't interact on a regular basis with people from different regions of the country, they sound identical.
Well Canadians and American (except New Yorkers and southerners of course) English is popular with people trying to learn English because we have no accent, unlike the UK.
If he means 'regional accents', then he's still wrong....
There are very definite regional accents in the States - to my ears, a Texan sounds totally different to someone from say, Boston. I can obviously still identify both as American, but they are very distinctive accents.
Ketara wrote:I can tell a spaniard apart from a Frenchman. I can tell a German apart from a Russian. And I can tell an Italian apart from a Dutchman. Half the time, I can do it purely on phenotype. The rest of the time I can do it on how they dress, the sound of their language, the food they eat, cultural personality quirks and so on.
I can't tell a Texan apart from someone from Minnesota. Or a Californian apart from someone from New York.
Unfortunately, Americans all look and sound like one big homogenous mass to the rest of the world. You look the same, sound the same, and behave the same.
How can you not know the difference between a New Yorker accent and the Californian? Just listen to Rocky Balboa if you don't know what a Brooklyn accent sounds like.
It's mainly because I've never had a particularly wide sample at one specific time. I tend to meet Americans on their own, or in groups of people from the same area. Not only that, its enough of an oddity that its not an everyday thing, so I don't have a fixed memory of precisely what the last person sounded like. All I remember is the twang that they all share. So as a result, I can identify an American, but not regional differences.
And I suspect I'm not alone in this. Someone from Berlin can probably tell the difference between them and someone from Hamburg. A Japanese person can tell the difference between someone from Tokyo and someone from Osaka. But to the casual outsider who doesn't interact on a regular basis with people from different regions of the country, they sound identical.
I can tell people from Shitamachi (downtown) Tokyo from people from the wider metropolis, but that's only because I know what clues to listen for.
The fact that I've never heard anyone speak like her two english accents does not give me confidence in her general accuracy. As an Englishman, she sounds like someone mashing together two stereotypes and hoping it fits (AKA, the 'posh' voice and the 'cockney')
And honestly? Bar the Brooklyn and Texan accents, which varied ever so slightly, I couldn't really differentiate between the others very well.
As an American I can vouch for the accuracy of her Californian accent, and there is an EXTREMELY small but still audible distinction between the Californian and Seattlite accent. Of course, she is an actor, so she's likely playing up the accents for effect, but I have heard people from New York who sound like her Brooklyn accent.
The_Savior wrote:Okay, on the 21 Accent video, that Texan accent is stereotypical like no one talks like that at all. Like, that's all movie and pop-culture dribble.
God, that's like a pet-peeve of mine.
But I reckon dat der woman, knows how we sounds like around deez hur parts.
Aren't you supposed to end all of your sentences with "Pardner"?
Northerners tend to talk fast, southerners tend to talk slow(hence the term 'southern drawl and the joke about the Confederacy losing the civil war because the generals couldn't give orders fast enough).
Different regions have different sayings too. "Turned up missing" tends to be a Carolinian kind of thing to say while 'dontcha know' tends to be a Minnesota or Wisconsin area thing to say, along with the phrase 'eh'. Yeah, you think that Canadians say 'eh' but its really the north mid west.
Brooklyn accents and Texan accents are easy to pick out, people from New England also talk funny.
Imagine the phrase "Park the car in Harvard Yard" being pronounced as "pahk the cahr in Hahvahd Yahd" or you could watch 'Family Guy' its all the same.
The people who live in the mountains also have their own accent, which sounds a little bit more nasally than a southern accent. Then there's the all important 'Valley Girl' accents, which is the best accent to use to mock someone.
Thanks to the military and mixing and training with Yanks, plus living in the US, I can tell them apart, I can tell NY, from New England, and valley girls.. and even Northern and Southern California to some degree.
But more importantly, I fething love cheese in a can.
mattyrm wrote:Thanks to the military and mixing and training with Yanks, plus living in the US, I can tell them apart, I can tell NY, from New England, and valley girls.. and even Northern and Southern California to some degree.
But more importantly, I fething love cheese in a can.
Ah, but the thing is halo, you and all the other American chaps can point all the distinctions you like.
The simple fact is though, I still can't tell you apart.
And Savior says people in Texas don't actually talk like that. So that gives us three wrong stereotype accents so far. I think that pretty much discounts that video as any kind of real evidence to me....although again, bar the Brooklyn and Texas (one of which is now said to be false), I wouldn't be able to differentiate between any of the other american ones she did anyway.
I'd be interested to see her try a South African accent. It's quite difficult to wrap your tongue around.
I still say that she's using stereotypical accents on purpouse.
Ah well, I can't tell the British accents apart from 'posh', 'cockney', 'Glaswegian', and 'Scottish'. My friend from Swansea insists that there is such a thing as a Welsh accent, but I can't hear it at all, so I guess I can't get too peeved that the Brits can't tell our American accents apart.
ChrisWWII wrote:I still say that she's using stereotypical accents on purpouse.
Ah well, I can't tell the British accents apart from 'posh', 'cockney', 'Glaswegian', and 'Scottish'. My friend from Swansea insists that there is such a thing as a Welsh accent, but I can't hear it at all, so I guess I can't get too peeved that the Brits can't tell our American accents apart.
But.,...but.....a Liverpool accent and a London accent sound COMPLETELY DIFFERENT! *rage*
The welsh are easy to distinguish due to the lack of vowels and that you can't tell where one sentence ends and the other begins due to the speed at which they talk.
I thought a Scottish guy was from Australia and I also thought an Australian was from Scotland. I was very confused and not just because they were my physics and Calculus 3 teachers.
Ketara wrote:
But.,...but.....a Liverpool accent and a London accent sound COMPLETELY DIFFERENT! *rage*
The welsh are easy to distinguish due to the lack of vowels and that you can't tell where one sentence ends and the other begins due to the speed at which they talk.
Now you know how we feel!
See, that kinda sounds like a Brooklyn/New York accent to me. Talking so fast that you have to go 'wait what?' every few minutes to catch up. I have the same reaction to the Glaswegians up here...I can at least understand most Scottish people, but I can almost never understand the glaswegians.
Having grown up in rural Louisiana and living for 13 years in Houston, Texas, I am aware that I have a thick southern twang in my accent.
However, for work purposes, I have tried to keep my voice more "neutral" so that I'm more easily understood. When I go home for Chirstmas or spend more than 1 day around my family, it takes a few weeks to get that out of my system again.
My third drink of alcohol for the evening also brings back my accent and a goofy grin I can't get rid of...
kronk wrote:I mistakenly asked an English woman I shared an elevator ride if her accent was Australian.
Now I know just to ask "What a pretty accent. Where are you from?"
I started doing the same thing after I started meeting Canadians on a regular basis, and asking them if they were Americans. Canadians really hate being called American, y'know that? It's like calling a Gibraltarian Spanish.
ChrisWWII wrote:
Now you know how we feel!
See, that kinda sounds like a Brooklyn/New York accent to me. Talking so fast that you have to go 'wait what?' every few minutes to catch up. I have the same reaction to the Glaswegians up here...I can at least understand most Scottish people, but I can almost never understand the glaswegians.
Trust me, you'd have a better chance understanding someone from Glasgow than someone from Wales. Like I said, they have a severe shortage of vowels over there, despite the best attempts of the English to import them. Only in Wales do you get places like Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch, or Rhosllanerchrugog.
Oh, I know. One of my friends speaks Welsh, and she enjoys tormenting all of us by shouting at us in Welsh, and challenging us to say things in Welsh. It makes my head hurt.
I respond by replying in Chinese and berating them over the finer points of Chinese pronounciation.
I respond to such things with Yiddish. It's a thoroughly satisfying language to curse in. 'Geh kak afen yam' is one of my favorites, roughly translating as , 'go take a gak in the sea'.
Hmm First, Stallone is not from Philly... he was born in NYC.
Second, I get asked all the time to 1) slow down so others can understand what I am saying, and 2) where I am from because they cannot place my (lack of, imo) accent.
For the record I am Pennsylvanian. Philly born and bred to be specific. Speakers from Pittsburgh sound different to my ears as do folk from Scranton.
Like all accents, its mostly in the words we say and how we use them: "hoagie," "crick," "rilly," "chipped ham," "dippy eggs", "sticky buns," "shoo-fly pie," "lemon sponge pie", and "pocketbook" tend to be identifiers of Pennsylvanians.
Of course, I also have witnessed a "conversation" in So Cal that almost solely used the word "Dude".
kronk wrote:Having grown up in rural Louisiana and living for 13 years in Houston, Texas, I am aware that I have a thick southern twang in my accent.
However, for work purposes, I have tried to keep my voice more "neutral" so that I'm more easily understood. When I go home for Chirstmas or spend more than 1 day around my family, it takes a few weeks to get that out of my system again.
My third drink of alcohol for the evening also brings back my accent and a goofy grin I can't get rid of...
Ain't that the truth pardner
Lolz, the Texan accent is really only in certain areas, it's from older generations. Being as Texas is so big, it has accents from different cultures and people of distinct descent.
Believe it or not the most South Western part of Texas has a lot of German influenced culture and dialect.
It's actually quite easy to distinguish based on area...
South East - South: Heavy Mexican accent.
South East - East: Mid Mexican to Eastern State accents (Valley accent)
South: Mexican/Spanish becomes the first language of most people. (Mexican accent)
South West - South: Mixture of German, Valley, and Mexican (Multi-Cultural accents)
South West - West: Mixture of German, Valley, and Western State Accents. (Mid-Fair accents i.e. French Louisiana being proof of this.)
North West/East - North: Takes accents from all neighboring states and from whomever the persons' descent is from. (Mixed accents)
I think the British government should buy up some big ol' tracts of land in the Texas, and resettle all the chavs over there. See how long it takes their accent to mingle with and twist your own....
Ketara wrote:I think the British government should buy up some big ol' tracts of land in the Texas, and resettle all the chavs over there. See how long it takes their accent to mingle with and twist your own....
Never. They would all be dead in an hour from the heat or making the mistake of messing with people who are fully versed in the right to bear arms and a shovel with which to bury the evidence.
Come to the midwest home of the Neutral accent. Most American newscasters speak with a neutral midwest accent. We pronounce our words almost spot on phonetically. The English while inventing the language really abuse it. They can't even get their A and R correct. Is it" Ask Monica about her hair" or "Ask Moniker about er aia".
ChrisWWII wrote:I still say that she's using stereotypical accents on purpouse.
Ah well, I can't tell the British accents apart from 'posh', 'cockney', 'Glaswegian', and 'Scottish'. My friend from Swansea insists that there is such a thing as a Welsh accent, but I can't hear it at all, so I guess I can't get too peeved that the Brits can't tell our American accents apart.
Albatross wrote:If he means 'regional accents', then he's still wrong....
There are very definite regional accents in the States - to my ears, a Texan sounds totally different to someone from say, Boston. I can obviously still identify both as American, but they are very distinctive accents.
I already stated that Southerners and New Yorkers have different accents form the rest of America several times.
Ketara wrote:I can tell a spaniard apart from a Frenchman. I can tell a German apart from a Russian. And I can tell an Italian apart from a Dutchman. Half the time, I can do it purely on phenotype. The rest of the time I can do it on how they dress, the sound of their language, the food they eat, cultural personality quirks and so on.
I can't tell a Texan apart from someone from Minnesota. Or a Californian apart from someone from New York.
Unfortunately, Americans all look and sound like one big homogenous mass to the rest of the world. You look the same, sound the same, and behave the same.
Haha, that's funny. Americans can definitely tell apart the regions that other Americans are from. Most can also tell where different Europeans come from.
It's too bad you can't tell a Californian apart from a New Yorker. It's a pretty massive difference.
Possibly, possibly. But I wouldn't know that. I've met people from California. I've met people from New York. But the key is, never at the same time. Possibly, if you put the two together, I'd be able to discern some modicum of difference. But as both share the twang, that's what I use as my identification sign for an American. I can't differentiate any further than that.
*shrugs*
I'm sure I'll somehow learn to live with this crippling disability of mine though.
If I heard just a Scottsman speak, or just an Irishman speak, or just an Englishman speak, I wouldn't know where they were from other than part of the UK. If I heard all three talking, I'd know they were different and could possibly pick their origin.
If the Scottsman was wearing his standard issue kilt, the Irishman wearing his standard issue green tights, and the Englishman was ranting about the price of tea, I could definitely pick their origin!
Further to the Celt debate, I came across an article on the BBC news website today about a Celt grave in Germany, part of it is below:
"Celtic art and Celtic culture have their origins in south-western Germany, eastern France and Switzerland and spread from there to other parts of Europe," said Dr Krausse.
They were then squeezed by the tribes from the north and the Romans from the south, so that today they remain only on the western edges of the continent."
If you watch the first four or so minutes of this video, Applejack has a Southern Accent, the cows have a Minnesotta accent, and Rarity has a Bostonian accent. Most of the other ponies have generic American accents.
kronk wrote:If I heard just a Scottsman speak, or just an Irishman speak, or just an Englishman speak, I wouldn't know where they were from other than part of the UK. If I heard all three talking, I'd know they were different and could possibly pick their origin.
If the Scottsman was wearing his standard issue kilt, the Irishman wearing his standard issue green tights, and the Englishman was ranting about the price of tea, I could definitely pick their origin!
Edit: (Did I get the stereotypes right?)
The English man would be moaning about football and how its the refs fault or the managers fault but never the players. Also you can Irishmen? I can't understand them at all.
.
in NYC.
