October 28, 2019

Dialect Dissection: Britney Spears

It's fair to say that Britney Spears is one of the defining pop icons from the 2000s. From the moment she smashed her way into our hearts with "...Baby One More Time," she's been delivering hits and controversy. Perhaps her most distinguishing feature is her croaky voice, which has been discussed by news outlets and fan pages alike.

Most people aren't aware that her linguistic uniqueness goes beyond the rasp. Britney Spears is a veritable vocal experimenter, playing with vowels and consonants to create a different sound on each album. She's also a Southern American with a knack for switching between radio-perfect Standard English and down-home Southern inflections. Britney's work shows a keen sociolinguistic awareness of speaking a regional dialect - she knows when to let it go and when to hold back.

In this Dialect Dissection, we're going to take a closer look at Britney's work to figure out what makes her sound so distinctive - and why she does it.

Southern Accent

Britney grew up in Kentwood, Louisiana, a rural town with a popular of 2205 in the year 2000 (per the US census). Although Britney does not have the most dramatic features of a Southern accent (no 'drawl'), her spoken speech shows that she has some Southern features. Listen to how she says "two," "five," and "ten" in particular.

Tew [tʉ], three, four, fav [fav], six, seven, eight, nan [nan], tin [tɪn], [...] twenty [twɪni]

In her interviews, she often conceals these features - a fact her fans have noticed. But Britney is also able to switch between a General American-sounding accent and a Southern one. Her Southern accent becomes more pronounced when she's with her family, as can be seen in the below clip where she talks to/about her family. It's also very pronounced when she's talking to her assistant, Felicia Culotta (who also appears to be Southern). In other words, her Southern accent most appears around people she trusts.

..."I'm surprased, I'm surprised ... this is my sister, Jamie Leean..."

There's also an exchange between Britney and Felicia, where Britney teases Felicia about using a short "u" sound in "poor" (so it sounds like "poo-er." Most Americans and English English speakers have merged "pour" and "poor" so that they sound like "pore" with an "o" sound, but some Southerners still pronounce them differently. Britney is aware that using a merged vowel is more standard, and also points out the similarity to "poo." This shows that Britney is aware of how Southern English is perceived by non-Southerners and which features may be prone to mockery.

(at 26:07) Felicia: Remember we were poo-r.

Britney: She said poo-er! [laughter] It's pore!

Felicia: I said pore!

Britney: Poo-er!

Felicia: [laughter] We were pore.

Chuck Klosterman, who interviewed her for Esquire magazine, noticed how Britney was marketed on the basis of both her sexuality and her Southern-ness. He writes about the extent he believes her celebrity life has resulted in her being disconnected from a sense of normality, but also notes how Britney flips between accents when annoyed. If she mostly uses her Southern accent in the company of people she trusts, like her family and her personal assistant, perhaps her switching away from it is a revocation of that intimacy in an interview.

After I [interviewed Spears for Esquire], people kept asking me, ‘What is she really like?’ My answer was usually, ‘I don’t know, and I don’t think she does, either.’ […]

Her management team directed so much emphasis toward turning her into an unsophisticated semi-redneck that she now has no idea what is normal what is marketing. [...]

That said, I did notice that her Southern accent always seemed to mysteriously disappear whenever she became annoyed with my questions. Maybe she’s the blond Machiavelli.”

Why might Britney switch so often between varieties, and why does she use General American so often that fans aren't even aware that she has a Southern accent? Southern accents in the United States have a complicated perception. They can be considered 'uneducated' or 'cute', but rarely 'normal.' By mostly staying in a General American accent, Britney can avoid the harsh stereotyping that Southern accents are subject to. From Slade and Narro (2002):

On the other hand, the shocking actions of Britney Spears often put the South in a negative light. From the small town of Kentwood, Louisiana, Spears has portrayed the “white trash” inferiority Portwood-Stacer examines - marketing herself “with a kind of trashy sexuality, enacted in a celebrity culture of high fashion and unfathomable wealth.” In the study, Portwood-Stacer notes in her short and cataclysmic show with Kevin Federline that depicted their lives as a young, famous and married couple, Spears often falls from her “cutesy Southern accent into a twangy Louisiana drawl.” Cute? Twangy? Would successful professionals like their speech labeled as cute or twangy? Even Southerners question their speech as being accepted.

If Britney is particular about who gets to hear her Southern accent, her music has plenty of Southern features. This isn't unusual, since the features of Southern English overlap with African American Vernacular English, and both Southern and AAV English have been heavily imitated in popular music. But Britney likes to exaggerate these features. Combined with her light, sweet tone, her use of Southern features ends up creating a definitive sound for her.

If you would like to skip the in-depth audio samples and go straight to the discussion, click here to get to the good stuff.

  • Pin-pen merger: Most English dialects differentiate the the vowels in 'dress' [ɛ] and 'kit' [ɪ] when they appear before 'n' and 'm'. This means 'pin' /pɪn/ 🔊 and 'pen' /pɛn/ 🔊 sound different. In Southern accents, they sound the same, so 'pen' and 'pin' both sound like 'pin' ([pɪn]), and 'hem' and 'him' both sound like 'him' ([hɪm]) (Source). Britney often uses the merged vowel here, as she does in speech. However, she does not always merge them - she uses both "spind" and "spend" in her song "Thinking About You."
    • “I spind [spɪnd] my days ... and for us there is no ind [ɪnd] in sight ... each day that I spend [spɛnd] around you" - Thinking about you, ...Baby One More Time (1999)
    • “This letter that I’ve sint [sɪnt] a hundred times” - Email My Heart, ...Baby One More Time (1999)
    • "Now I hold him at attintion [ətɪnʃən] cuz new Britney's on a mission" - Toy Soldiers, Blackout (2007)
  • GOOSE-fronting. /u/ 🔊 → [ʉ] 🔊 : Normally for the long 'oo' vowel (in goose or true), the tongue is in the back: [u]. Southern accents move the tongue forward in the mouth so it sounds kind of like 'ew' [ʉ] (Source). Britney's fronted 'oo' vowel is one of her most imitated characteristics.
    • "The reason I breathe is yew [jʉ]" - ...Baby One More Time, ...Baby One More Time (1999)
    • “I'm a slave for yew [jʉ]” - Slave 4 U, Britney (2003)
    • “If you want me to believe it's trew [trʉ]” - Don’t let me be the last to know, Oops! ... I Did It Again (2000)
    • "But no way I'm never gonna fall for yew [jʉ] ... never yew [jʉ], baby" - Womanizer, Circus (2008)
  • GOAT-centering. The 'oh' vowel in words like 'know' and 'go' is usually pronounced as [oʊ], with the first half of it starting in the back of the mouth. Modern Southern accents pronounce it [əʊ], with the first half starting in the center of the mouth. This is another characteristic Britney feature. One commenter on New Britneyology says "I always found the way she said/sang O very distinctive and Britneyish," and poster Karenannanina comes at it from a singing perspective: "[in her first album] we get early glimpses of sounds she has always had problems with and has never been able to 'sing out'. These are the 'o' sounds in 'supposed' and 'know.'" (Source)
    • "How was I supposed to know [nəʊ]" - ...Baby One More Time, ...Baby One More Time (1999)
    • “Move slow [sləʊ]” - Sometimes, ...Baby One More Time (1999)
    • “Oh, but Cinderella's got to go [gəʊ]” - Cinderella, Britney (2001)
    • "I'm simply sick and tired of theuse [ðəʊz]" - Toy Soldiers, Blackout (2007)
  • COT-CAUGHT distinction - while most young Americans (especially Californians) rhyme "cot" and "caught" [kɑt]. Britney Spears does not. She distinguishes it by having words like CAUGHT with an o-like vowel like in "core," resulting in [kɔt]. (Britney sometimes uses the merger, perhaps to sound more Californian.)
    • “The day we cried, Autumn [ɔɾəm] goodbye” - Autumn Goodbye, ...Baby One More Time (1999)
    • "Life doesn't al-ways [ɔlweɪz] go my way" - Not A Girl, Not Yet A Woman, Britney (2001)
    • "You had caught [kɔt] my eye and I wanted" - (I Got That) Boom Boom, In The Zone (2003)
    • "Even when we're up against the wall [wɔl] - "Gimme More", Blackout (2007)
  • LOT-CLOTH split - In most varieties of English English and American English, "on" and "Don" have the same vowel. In Southern English, however, "on" can have the same vowel as "door" or "dawn," resulting in [ɔn]. Britney uses this o-like vowel in words like "on" and "strong." Fans have also noticed this as a Britney pronunciation, but they have not connected it to Southern accents before.
    • "And the beat goes ohn [ɔn]" - The Beat Goes On, ...Baby One More Time (1999)
    • "What I like, what I wont [wɔnt] and what I don't" - Overprotected, Britney (2001)
    • "Please forgive me if I'm coming on too strong [strɔŋ] ... they're playin' my favorite song [sɔŋ]" - Hold It Against Me, Femme Fatale (2011)
    • "I got what you wont [wɔnt] - What You Need, Glory (2016)
  • FACE-lowering. In most American accents, words like 'baby' and 'say' are pronounced with a vowel that's high in the front of the mouth, [eɪ]. Southern accents use a vowel that's lower down in the mouth, resulting in [ɛɪ]. No imitation of "oh baby baby" is complete without some FACE-lowering.
    • "Oh baby baby [bɛɪbɪ]" - ...Baby One More Time, ...Baby One More Time (1999)
    • "I'm like a fire, bottle busting in your face [fɛɪs]" - Toy Soldier, Blackout (2008)
    • "Oh bayby bayby bayby [bɛɪbɪ]" - If U Seek Amy, Circus (2009)
  • Light l/dark l contrast - many varieties of American English use a dark l [ɫ] in all positions, with the back of the tongue raised towards the back of the mouth. A light l [l], in contrast, is made by gently tapping the tip of the tongue against the front of the mouth without raising the back of the tongue. Southern American English uses a light [l] at the beginning of syllables and a dark [ɫ] at the end of syllables.
    • "I still believe [bɪliv]" - ...Baby One More Time, ...Baby One More Time (1999)
    • "She's so lucky [laki]" - Lucky, Oops! ...I Did It Again (2000)
    • "Not this time because I realize [riəlaɪz]" - Lonely, Britney (2001)
  • STRUT-fronting. /ʌ/ 🔊 → [ɜ] 🔊 : The 'uh' vowel as in bug, luck, strut, etc., sounds like [ɜ] or [ə], a sound similar to British 'er'. It is higher in the mouth (Source).
    • "Before we rurn [rɜn]" - One Kiss From You, Oops! ...I Did It Again (2000)
    • "I lurv [lɜv] rock and roll" - I Love Rock and Roll, Britney (2001)
    • "I’ve had enurf [ɪnɜf]” - Cinderella, Britney (2001)
  • FEEL-FILL merger. This results in the sound 'eel' /il/ being pronounced as 'ill' [ɪl], so that "feel" [fil] 🔊 ends up sounding exactly like "fill" [fɪl] 🔊. Britney pronounces "feel" not with the vowel "ee", but as "fill," with the vowel sound "ih".
    • "Fillins [fɪlɪns]" - When Your Eyes Say It, Oops! ...I Did It Again (2000)
    • "Why am I so rill [rɪl]" - My Prerogative, Greatest Hits: My Prerogative (2004)
    • “My heart, it feels [fɪlz] so safe, You are my melody” - That's Where You Take Me, Britney (2001)
  • MARRY-MERRY distinction. Britney pronounces words like "paradise" with the vowel of "mat" [mæt], resulting in something like "maarry" [mæri] 🔊. Meanwhile words like "merry" and "fairy" are pronounced with the vowel of "met" [mɛt], resulting in "meh-ri" [mɛri] 🔊. Most Americans do not distinguish between -arry/-erry words and pronounce them the same, as -erry. Meanwhile, British English speakers have a three way distinction between MARRY, MERRY, and MARY - one more distinction than Britney.
    • “From the ashes rise a glimpse of paradise [pærədaɪs]" - When I found you, Britney (2001)
    • “I don't believe in fairy [fɛri] tales” - Cinderella, Britney (2001)
    • “From the first kisses to the very [vɛri] last rose” - From the Bottom of my Broken Heart, ...Baby One More Time (1999)

Britney's Dialectal Awareness

Britney Spears would not be the first singer to use a more Southern/African-American Vernacular influenced dialect in her sung speech while using a different accent when speaking. What is interesting is that it seems Britney was not always so comfortable using Southern American English in her music. As an example, let's look at aɪ-monophthongization, which is where vowels like "I" start sounding more like "ah." It is one of the most distinctive parts of Southern English. Britney's first album, ...Baby One More Time, has a remarkably low usage of aɪ-monophthongization. The blogger Karenannanina notices as such:

In fact, contrary to many assumptions – and I have been as guilty as anybody – at the start of her career her singing was rather mannered, with self-consciously “correct” pronunciation. On the BOMT album, the “i” sounds as in “time” and “sign”, are sung open-mouthed and open-throated and not rendered as “tahm” and “sahn”. The way she delivers “time” and “find” in From the bottom of my broken heart is quite startling.

You can hear the exaggerated "ai" diphthong in the following clip. There is barely any focus on the "a" part and instead a lot of stress on the "i" part. It sounds almost purposefully constructed to be the opposite of the Southern "ah."

Britney seems to be able to switch between a Southern and a General American accent, so she is bi-accent-al. Moreover, she seems aware of the stigmatization of Southern accents. Her decision to not use aɪ-monophthongization on her first album could be to avoid sounding "uneducated" or "low class."

Note that this doesn't really apply to the rest of the Southern features that she uses. As an anecdote, most people I've spoken to associate a Southern accent with a 'drawl' or with aɪ-monopthongization. Features like the FEEL-FILL merger, the DON-DAWN distinction, and GOAT centering tend to go unnoticed. A lot of Britney fans don't even relate GOAT centering to Southernness but as a "Britneyish" mode of singing." See the following quotes from "New Britneyology", which relates GOAT-centering and the DON-DAWN distinction to a failure to "sing out." A fan, Sucker Pnch, also considers the GOAT-centering to be a Britney feature:

On the other hand, we get early glimpses of sounds she has always had problems with and has never been able to “sing out”. These are the “o” sounds in “supposed” and “know”, and even more so in “born”, “on”, “wrong” and “along”, which have always been Britney’s biggest weakness. - Karen Annanina

I always found the way she said/sang O very distinctive and Britneyish - Sucker Pnch

Britney therefore shows interesting dialectal awareness on her album where she uses plenty of common Southern features, except for the most well known one. Once her status as a star was assured, she seemed comfortable using aɪ-monophthongization freely on her songs. She abandons her efforts to sound "neutral" on Oops! ...I Did It Again and beyond.

The media reaction to her Southern-ness

That a Southerner might feel self conscious using aɪ-monophthongization is curious when you consider the number of singers who use aɪ-monophthongization freely such as the Beatles, Grand Funk Railroad, and Iggy Azalea. They can imitate speakers of aɪ-monophthongizing dialects (in other words, African Americans who speak AAVE and working class White Southerners) and reap the benefits of sounding "soulful" and "authentic." Meanwhile, AAVE speakers and speakers of Southern English are aware of how stigmatized this feature is.

Plenty of African-Americans and white Southerners use the feature in their music anyway, as can be seen in genres like the blues, country music, r&b, Southern rock, and hip-hop. But those wanting to seem more 'neutral' may suppress it because, unlike Northern American and English speakers, they are scrutinized more harshly and subject to class and race-based attacks. Detractors of Britney often mock her by using slurs and stereotypes against working class whites:

"I'm convinced she's an inbred hick," writes one Britney-hater on an Internet chat site, while another declares, "Well, what can you expect from her parents? (in a southern Hick accent) 'Gosh golly, ma dawters so a purrrty (Isa bees fangkin' cousin Henry for the inbred genes) . . . HYuk Hyuk! *snort*!'" "Britney Spears," writes one who intends to succinctly dismiss the whole matter, "herself is from Louisiana, she is a hillbilly." (Campbell 2001)

Cambell's 2001 paper "I'm Just a Louisiana Girl: The Southern World of Britney Spears" deals at length with Britney's Southern identity and how both her marketing team and the press used it to different ends. At the beginning of her career, when she was marketed as a sweet, young girl (who was frequently asked about her virginity), she was able to portray herself as a "Southern belle." But as her image became raunchier and more sexualized in an adult way, she was no longer able to maintain that image and she was instead increasingly castigated for being "white trash." Is it a coincidence that her more sexualized image in "Oops! ...I Did It Again" and "Britney" coincided with her increasing usage of Southern features? (It's also worth noting that this is the portion of her career when Britney began working with more African-American producers and music, a predecessor to singers like Miley Cyrus and Taylor Swift using AAVE for their 'edgy' periods.)

The tabloids had a field day with this. Certain parodies of Britney Spears honed in on the "Southern" part. Mad TV liked drawing on the "stupid Southerner" stereotype. The "I'm-a wiser" skit employed an exaggerated Southern accent (as seen below) while the "My Predicament" skit simply had the lyric "I'm gonna flash with all this cash - I cannot hide, that I was born white trash."

"Look I'm naked in the sauna! And I still can't really sing, bay-by ... a happy end for this white trash cinderella ... my hair's red now, y'all! ...And leave my bray-n and bay-bies at the door... look at y'all just pretend that I'm the girl from 'oops, I did it agin!' ... Hey y'all, did you like my sawng? I'm nay-kid!

Ballads remain neutral

Another curious aspect of Britney's dialectal awareness is how she treats ballads or otherwise 'sentimental' songs. She uses a lot of exaggerated features on fun songs, be they upbeat or slinky. But she tones the features down on her ballads, where she strives to sound more General American. Think about how the ballad "From The Bottom of my Broken Heart" had an exaggerated "ai" diphthong, sounding almost like a parody of General American.

I'll mention my subjective experience here - singers are more likely to use an accent perceived as neutral on ballads than on other types of songs. Perhaps it's the same way there's a distinction between how the use of accents in motion picture is associated with comedy, while supposedly 'serious' actors in dramas don't do accents. The idea is that the use of regional accents would detract from the emotional weight of the work (or that accents are too high risk to imitate and can easily end up sounding silly or offensively bad). A similar logic seems to be at work in music, where singers strive to sound more 'neutral' on ballads. Despite this, Britney still uses creaky voice on ballads, which shows that she considers it to be a vocal technique as opposed to part of an accent or dialect.

Creaky voice

Britney did not invent creaky voice. Even clear-voiced clean-cut singers like Karen Carpenter from the 70s have been using creaky voice selectively. Karen Carpenter likes using creaky voice to suggest a sort of emotional intimacy with the listener. (We'll use a tilde ~ to mark creaky voice in this section.)

"~Or am I really lying here..." - I Just Fall In Love Again, Carpenters

Britney took creaky voice to a new level, using it liberally throughout songs. When used on her ballads, the creaky voice suggested the same kind of vulnerability that Karen Carpenter used decades before. But her creaky voice also made helped her with a more sensual sound - Rami Yacoub, co-producer of the album ...Baby, One More Time, said "With N' Sync and the Backstreet Boys, we had to push for that mid-nasal voice. When Britney did that, she got this kind of raspy, sexy voice." While creaky voice is often maligned nowadays, Britney's singing style was clearly enormously successful considering the amount of records she sold and imitators she spawned.

Britney's use of creaky voice is neither random nor formulaic - it is intentional and situationally-dependent. She tends to use creaky voice either to lead into a word (as in "E-Mail My Heart" and "Oops! I Did It Again"), or to finish a word on a lighter note (as in "Gimme More"). The creaky voice works both on ballady songs like "E-Mail My Heart" and contemporary pop like "Oops! I Did It Again." Her use of creaky voice on "Oops! I Did It Again" is especially nuanced as she goes from creaky voice to modal voice on the phrase "oh baby," back into creaky voice to finish it off, and then fades back into the last "oh." Try it out for yourself - slipping in and out of creaky voice smoothly is tougher than it seems.

  • "~Oh baby baby, ~I shouldn't have let you go" - ...Baby One More Time, ...Baby One More Time (1999)
  • “~I can see you ~in my mind” - E-Mail My Heart, ...Baby One More Time (1999)
  • "But to lose ~all my senses, ~that~ is just so typically me, ~oh, Baby~, ~oh” - Oops! ...I Did It Again, Oops! ...I Did It Again (2000)
  • "Cameras are flashing while we’re~ dirty dancing" - Gimme More, Blackout (2007)
  • She can also use creaky voice for an entire phrase, as in "Me Against the Music," to add sonic texture to a phrase - note that the example on "Me Against the Music" is layered under a melodic phrase.

  • "All the people in this crowd grab a partner take it down" - Me Against the Music, In the Zone (2003)
  • Britney-isms and other Miscellanea

    I mentioned in the "Creaky Voice" section around three sentences ago that Britney's use of creaky voice is "neither random nor formulaic - it is intentional and situationally-dependent." The same applies generally to her approach to each track. She noticeably likes experimenting with different voices. She may start using a feature on one track and then use its opposite on the next one. Some are found just on one album, while others seem to be favorites she likes using often ("babay").

    These features aren't necessarily from copying an accent. They're more like an actor trying different approaches to the same character. The result is that listening to a Britney performance on one album may sound different from a Britney performance on another, despite her ultimately staying in a relatively conservative vocal range and using pitch-correction software in later albums.

    One of the fun things about listening to the discography for this project was hearing Britney use all sorts of creative features. From the point of view of a researcher, I would be frustrated that she only used a feature a handful of times. But from the point of view of a listener, I found her playfulness and creativity delightful. It goes to show that you don't have to have a five-octave vocal range to be an engaging vocalist. Experimenting and having fun can be just as effective in connecting with listeners.

    • HAPPY-breaking. The 'ee' sound at the end of a word becomes 'ey'. Although Britney is not the first singer to use this, she has become one of the codifiers of this accent trope by using it heavily in the 90s and 2000s.
      • "You can't take your pretty eyes away from may [meɪ]" - Sometimes, ...Baby One More Time (1999)
      • "Finallay [faɪnəleɪ] ... what we had is historay [hɪstoreɪ]" - Don't Go Knocking On My Door, Oops! ...I Did It Again (2000)
      • "You want a piece of may [meɪ]" - Piece of Me, Blackout (2007)
      • "I might be a little hazay [hæɪzæɪ]" - Hold It Against Me, Femme Fatale (2011)
    • NURSE/SQUARE lowering. Britney often uses a variable vowel in words with an r-colored vowel.
      • "I will be thar [ðær] " - I Will be There, ...Baby One More Time (1999)
      • "Early marnin' [manɪn] she wakes up" - Lucky, Oops! ...I Did It Again (2000)
      • "Like them city boys from New Yark [jɑk] ‘ - Toy Soldier, Blackout (2007)
    • L-vocalization. This is when the 'l' at the end of a word sounds more like a 'w', so "well" sounds like "wew.'
      • "I kiw [kiw] the lights" - Kill The Lights, Circus (2008)
      • "I used to be your girlfriend and I know I did it wew [wæw]" - Cinderella, Britney (2001)
    • [a] diphthongs becomes centered. This is another one that sounds similar to a technique pop singers use because it is easier to 'sing on' the schwa vowel. She uses this one mostly on her first album "...Baby One More Time." To my ear, it sounds like she's trying to make her voice sound deeper and more "adult."
      • "And say our love will never duh-ee [dəi] and I, I know you're uh-ut [əʊt] there" - Email My Heart, ...Baby One More Time (1999)
      • “A clever way to get ba-uh-ee [baəi]” - Soda Pop, ...Baby One More Time (1999)
      • “Taking time is what love's all aba-uh-ut [əbaəʊt]” - From the bottom of my broken heart, ...Baby One More Time (1999)
      • “Hold you ta-uh-it [taəit]” 3:09 - From the bottom of my broken heart, ...Baby One More Time (1999)
    • KIT and FLEECE changing places. On Blackout, Britney pronounces 'eek' as 'ick' on words like 'freak' and 'sneak.' I haven't encountered this pronunciation on other Britney albums, so it seems like she was playing with language on this album. Meanwhile on Circus, you have the opposite: she pronounces 'ill' with a long 'ee' vowel.
      • "Frick show, frick show [frɪk]" - Freakshow, Blackout (2007)
      • "Or snick [snɪk] away to the Philippines" - Piece of Me, Blackout (2007)
      • "Are you steal [stil] in my bed?" - Shattered Glass, Circus (2008)
      • "I kiw [kiw] the lights" - Kill The Lights, Circus (2008)
    • DRESS-raising. Words like 'dress' are pronounced with a higher vowel. Although this is also a feature of Southern English, I have included it here because it subjectively sounds similar to a technique singers use where they raise mid-low vowels to mid-high vowels to 'sound better.'
      • "My loneline-ss [loʊnlines] is killing me" - ...Baby One More Time, ...Baby One More Time (1999)
      • “You used to say that I was spe-cial [speʃəl]” - What u see (is what u get), Oops! ...I Did It Again (2000)
      • "But to lose all my se-nse-s [sensez]" - Oops! ... I Did It Again, Oops! ...I Did It Again (2000)
      • "I want it more than e-ver [evə] now" - Toy Soldier, Blackout (2007)
    • Monophthongs. These might be copped from Caribbean English, and there are many Caribbean English speakers in r&b and hip-hop. Britney has been influenced by r&b and hip-hop before, so this is likely the source.
      • "Don’t you kno [no] that you’re toxic" - Toxic, In The Zone (2003)
      • "o [o] you’re a womanizer, baby" - Womanizer, Circus (2007)
      • "But you kno [no] i’m just your type" - Hold It Against Me, Femme Fatale (2011)
    • Opposite to the above, Britney sometimes pronounces DRESS vowels lower than normal so that they approach the TRAP vowel. This sounds similar to the California Shift. Britney has imitated a 'bratty' Valley Girl in her music before, which illustrates her comfort with borrowing from this dialect.
      • "I used to be your girlfriend and I know I did it wæl [wæw]" - Cinderella, Britney (2001)
      • "It's not the way I planned et [ɛt]" - ...Baby One More Time, ...Baby One More Time (1999)
      • "Sink or swem [swɛm]" - When I Found You, Britney (2001)

    Conclusion

    The rise and fall of one of the twenty-first century's musical icons had everyone saying "gimme more." Every aspect of Britney's life was scrutinized. When she uses a British accent, it's noted. Fans were shocked to find out that a number of vocals on Britney Jean seemed to come from her backup singer. Her use of creaky voice and otherwise non-standard vowel space made her the subject of derision and imitation.

    We can also see the consequences of failing to stay inside an approved box. Because Britney wanted to expand beyond the 'sweet little girl' angle and explore more sexual themes, both the media and the general public felt free to rip her apart and mock her origins. It does not matter how neutral she sounded on her first album - they were more than happy to call her a hick all the same. Britney may have been rich, but the attacks themselves were classist. As we've discussed in other articles, nobody should have to be mocked for the way they speak or where they are from. Britney may have had problematic behaviors, but mocking her origins does nothing but reinforced prejudiced attitudes towards Southerners.

    Despite the controversy, she still put out some great pop records. Britney has never truly been duplicated, though many a record label has tried. Her influence is still felt throughout the industry as the archetype of the young pop star gone awry. But even in her dark moments, her records remained full of a playful approach to language and music. Britney cultivated a recognizable style not by slavishly following the Standard, but by playing at the margins of it. She had no qualms about using a pronunciation for one album and abandoning it the next - while her imitators were still copying her creaky voice and "oh" vowels, she was experimenting with "snicking" to the Philippines.

    This article only scratches the surface of Britney's unique musico-lect. If you like Britney Spears and know just a little linguistics, you can expand on some of the phenomena discussed above. The New Britneyology post shows how valuable laymen approaches to music and linguistics can be. There's still a lot to cover that I just can't squeeze into this article without it becoming (even) longer. I hope there will be some more writing on this in the future from fans.

    Works Cited

    October 17, 2019

    What is the singing equivalent of "speech"?

    The word 'speech' can mean 'manner of speaking.' This is useful when talking about "analyzing's someone speech." However, there is no equivalent single word for 'manner of singing.' I suppose you could use 'song,' as in "analyzing someone's song," but that doesn't sound right. I've used roundabout descriptions before like "vocal style" and "singing style," but these have a connotation of analyzing the musical qualities of song as opposed to the linguistic qualities.

    I have thought about simply coining a new term, such as "songspeech." This would make it easy to say "John uses this pronunciation in his speech, but a different one in his songspeech." But "songspeech" appears (rarely) as a translation of the operatic term "sprechstimme" and refers to a style half between singing and speaking, which is not what I'm talking about at all. (1, 2, 3). There is also "SongSpeech," used in 1970 to refer to "the singing of old and new political songs." Although these terms are rare enough that I could attempt to co-opt them, I would rather not risk confusion.

    There's the classic "borrow from another language." Or perhaps just borrow one word. "Songsprache" came to mind, but apparently it means "song language" as in, "a language that is suited for singing." Not what I was looking for either. The one that really works is "canto," from Spanish meaning "singing." But alas, canto has a different meaning in English. What about 'chant'? That one, much like 'cant', also refers to speaking. I suppose cantus is free, but must we go to the Latin straight away? It always sounds a little pretentious to dig up Latin words and use them willy-nilly in English.

    Perhaps there is no one word-alternative to "speech." No simple or elegant way to say "in his speech as in his [songspeech/cantus], John likes rounded vowels." And even if you try using the more unwieldy "in his speech as in his song/manner of singing," it doesn't seem to point at what I want to point. "His song," by force of habit, seems to point to a single work, to an actual song, as opposed to a pattern of singing. If I, the person writing this, find it ambiguous, I can't imagine it would be any clearer for those reading it.

    Luckily, a kind Redditor introduced me to the contrasting terms spoken speech versus sung speech. They are a little strange at first blush, since "spoken speech" seems redundant. But if you encounter both in quick succession, I think it clears up instantly, and one gets used to it right away. I have taken to using spoken and sung speech as descriptors in my articles since being introduced to the term.

    Even better, there is precedence for the terms sung and spoken speech in academic journals. Some examples:

    Allophonic variation in spoken and sung speech
    Music and Speech Perception in Children Using Sung Speech
    The effect of sung speech on socio-communicative responsiveness in children with autism spectrum disorders

    It seems more popular in speech pathology than in traditional linguistics; perhaps because most phoneticians and phonologists study spoken speech almost exclusively, while use of sung speech for therapeutic reasons is currently being investigated by speech pathologists and other therapists. Nevertheless, it is exciting to know that this term is already in currency and that you can use it to look up other articles.

    Do you have any particular feelings about "sung speech" and "spoken speech" as distinctive terms? Have you come across them before? Are you familiar with any other alternatives?

    October 14, 2019

    Tszuj

    The [ʒ] sound has long been complicated to indicate in English. Found in words like 'leisure' and 'genre,' it has no commonly agreed upon spelling representation. 'Zh' (perhaps by analogy with 'sh'?) is common (and, to my eyes, sensical), being found in romanizations of Russian and Mandarin, as well as the name 'Quenvanzhane.'

    Unfortunately, 'zh' does not have the best recognition. I remember being confused when the character 'Zhao' in Avatar: The Last Airbender was pronounced 'Zao.'

    When it comes to casual shortenings of words like 'cas(ual)' and 'us(ual)', the spellings can become even more erratic. And the spelling of 'zhuzh' [ʒʊʒ], a word meaning to make fabulous, isn't agreed upon yet - you can find 'zhoozh', 'zhuj,' 'jooj,' and other variants.

    All that being said, the following spelling(s) of 'zh' have truly caught my eye for total lack of consistency:

    While TOMS has “tszujed” its designs up since its initial introduction, innovative style and design has never been a brand hallmark.

    The 'j' for final [ʒ] isn't uncommon in laymen descriptions (see 'caj' for 'cazh'). The 'z' doesn't even surprise me, as 's', 'z', 'j', and 'h' are often bundled together in a haphazard attempt to capture the sound. But 'tsz' truly leaves me speechless. Is 'tsz' a representation of [ʒ] in some language I'm not aware of? Why the 't'? And much to my surprise, it's not all that new either. There's an Urban Dictionary entry from 2005 with the helpful tidbit:

    "It is very hard to pronounce, and even harder to spell, many times often misspelled 'jujj' or 'jooj'. Pronounced "zhuj", by the way."

    October 9, 2019

    The deed is done

    Some good news first - Ace Linguist has been approved for ads, which will hopefully help offset some of the hosting costs! And perhaps in the future, it could even help expand the scope of the site a little.

    The bad news - I am still figuring out some aspects of how to run the ads. Currently they appear after every single post, which is not quite what I wanted. I would prefer them as a footer. I will have to experiment with ad placement and such to see what Google does and does not allow. I want to make the ad experience simple and non-intrusive to you all.

    I have written up a sort of mission statement regarding ads, monetization, and the goal of the site. If I am going to be adding ads, after all, I think you should know what the ads are funding! (Currently they're not funding anything since they've just been added, but I think you get the idea). Dropbox is the number one priority to fund. After that, there a number of "nice-to-haves" that I have listed in the statement. The goal of the ads is to make the site better, not to rake in the dollars. Trust me, this sort of content isn't exaaactly the most lucrative sort.

    I shall continue to keep you updated regarding any changes to the site. I would expect a new Dialect Dissection to come some time this month. I wish I could say it were Halloween-related or otherwise spooky, but it isn't, except perhaps in some cosmic way of 'the horror of the situation.'

    I am also experimenting with the idea of "Dialect Mini-Dissections," for when there's a particular clip or album that I want to talk about but don't have enough material to justify making a full length Dialect Dissection. Some singers only have one album out, but still have linguistically interesting features. Likewise, perhaps an episode of a television show may merit a Mini article. I don't love the name "Mini-Dissection" (frankly I'm not as enthralled about 'Dialect Dissection' as I used to be, though I don't plan on changing it) so I will continue to brainstorm a more sensible name.

    Thanks as always to all my readers!

    - Karen

    October 8, 2019

    Dialect Borrowing and Confusion

    I would say that most of the time, people who speak different accents of English are able to understand each other. I would definitely say that American English speakers should be able to understand English English speakers. But sometimes there's interdialectal confusion, either with regards to comprehension or intention.

    This short post was inspired by Jeff Klingman's review of Sri Lankan/English rapper M.I.A.'s song "Bad Girls." He writes:

    The lyrics are the worst part by a fair margin. There’s no eye-rolling political agit-prop, but there’s nothing taking up its void either. It’s about being a bad girl, and driving a car. (But which seat will she take??) It acts like “get down” rhymes with “you can hang.” It’s just sort of filling space.

    The lyrics in question from the song are:

    Get back, get down
    Pull me closer if you think you can hang
    Hands up, hands tied
    Don't go screaming if I blow you with a bang

    Klingman seems to think that MIA was attempting to rhyme "down" with "hang," and moreover that this is a forced rhyme. But it's clear that "hang" was meant to rhyme with "bang."

    Whence this confusion? MIA uses a curious bit of pronunciation on "down" and pronounces it as "d[æ]wn" like many Americans, instead of using the RP "d[a]wn." But she uses an RP pronunciation on "hang," which is "h[æ]ng."

    Perhaps the similar phones used in "down" and "hang" caused Klingman to think that she was attempting to rhyme "down" and "hang," when "down" was just borrowing from American English and the "hang"/"bang" rhyme was always the intended one.

    This is obviously a very minor instance of confusion, but it's still one that's stuck out to me since I read this review. Do you have any examples of borrowing pronunciations from other dialects which caused confusion, minor or major?

    October 6, 2019

    News regarding the site

    Greetings! Content has been going slower than I hoped due to the enormity of some of the topics I have attempted to tackle. I'm working on a follow-up to the Indie Voice article that goes more in-depth into the past of the feature and multiple potential origins. I'm also re-working one of my very old articles on HAPPY-breaking in pop music. It's one thing to write about a particular artist, where there is a beginning and an end. It's another to look through multiple decades' worth of music, where there are no delimitations and little prior research. Research is ultimately a living project and no topic is ever truly "done" - but I want to make sure the pages I'm working on will meet the standards of Ace Linguist up until now.

    I am also working on one more Dialect Dissection that will be out very soon on an individual. I have two more that are in the very early stages, one of which might be a sort of mini-dissection due to lack of material from the artist and substantial overlap with the Indie Voice page. Nevertheless, I think it may be worthwhile to cover some of that overlap because it's one thing to look at it from the point of view of "multiple artists with indie voice", which is quite macro, and "one artist with their own version of indie voice," which is the micro level. I try to avoid repeating myself, but maybe in this case the repetition will help.

    Dropbox has increased their rates, which is not surprising to me. But it does make me realize that the services I rely on are not static and may continue to rise in price in the future. In particular, I'm working on some more advanced projects that may require paid hosting services. This sort of stuff starts adding up quickly. The Patreon has not been a huge success (shout-out to my one patron - I appreciate your support greatly!) and I understand. Patreon is usually better for content that comes out once a month or weekly. However, I cannot pump out articles monthly and have them be to my standards. I would still like to cover my costs of hosting and such as I try to do more advanced things. I have therefore been exploring having some unintrusive ads on the site. The purpose of the ads would be to cover, at least partially, the hosting costs - I doubt that they will cover the cost completely. I don't view Ace Linguist as a profit making venture, and on the very remote chance that the ads bring a bucketload of cash, I would like to communicate that with you to see how we can use it to improve the website. There are few accessible linguistic educational sites out there and I want to continue making Ace Linguist accessible to you all - one thing I've looked into is hiring expert help, which is currently out of the realm of possibility.

    If it doesn't work out, I'll remove them or try something else. I don't want to plaster this with unpleasant ads. I also strongly dislike deceptive ads and am aware of the possibility that ads may be a vector for malware. I'll research these possibilities and be vigilant about them. The ads are not in place yet and I will let you all know once the dirty deed is finalized.

    Many thanks to everyone who has supported this site by sharing it with friends or commenting or writing an email or supporting on Patreon. It warms my heart to know that there are all sorts of people out there who want more in-depth linguistic knowledge in their life. I hope to continue meeting that need for years to come!

    - Karen

    September 19, 2019

    Dr. Eggman - genius, gentleman, feminist?

    Dr. Eggman, also known as Dr. Robotnik, is the primary antagonist of the Sonic video game series. He's a mad genius known for engineering all sorts of robotics to take over the world.

    But according to the English-language Sonic Heroes manual, he has some hidden depths. He's also a feminist:

    Eggman is a romanticist, a feminist, and a self-professed gentleman.

    This quote has long confused Sonic fans because Dr. Eggman has never spoken about feminism or had any particular attitudes toward women. (If you want to determine for yourself whether Dr. Eggman is a feminist, I recommend reading this Vice article.) Imagine reading a description of Bowser from the Mario games that mentioned "Bowser is also a fiscal conservative" among random traits and you'll see how jarring this is.

    There's been speculation that this is a mistranslation, because there's a Japanese word "feminisuto" that actually means something along the lines of "chivalrous, romantic." Considering the context that Dr. Eggman is both a "romanticist" (another strange translation) and "a self-professed gentleman," it makes more sense for the intention to be "chivalrous."

    You can see an example of "feminisuto" to mean chivalrous in the following episode from the anime Revolutionary Girl utena:

    Ki-sama wa... (why you)
    Feminisuto daraka na ore wa. (because I'm chivalrous)

    The Japanese manual of Sonic Heroes does not mention whether or not Dr. Eggman is "feminisuto." This has basically been the end of most research.

    However, it's worth pointing out that the translation for the English Sonic Heroes manual may not have come from the Japanese manual, but from another source. The official Japanese site for the anime Sonic X does indeed say that Dr. Eggman is "feminisuto":

    ロマンチストかつフェミニスト。 自称紳士のええかっこしい。
    Romantic and chivalrous. (?)A self proclaimed gentleman.(?)

    It seems that they decided to use Sonic X descriptions for the English Sonic Heroes manual, but whoever was translating it was unaware that "feminisuto" meant "chivalrous." "feminisuto" does also refer to someone who is a feminist, so the translator may also simply have decided that "feminist" would make more sense. It's even possible they thought it was funny.

    Whatever the cause, it's a humorous example of how strange translations can end up taking on a life of their own.

    Note: this was originally published in abbreviated form on Twitter in October 2018.

    August 26, 2019

    From Glide to Fricative

    Updated:: with more audio samples besides YouTube.

    Glides, or semivowels, are made by having the tongue almost come in contact with part of the mouth. For example, when you make the sound in "you" [ju], the tongue moves near the front of your mouth but it doesn't touch it. It almost sounds like a very fast 'ee' [i]! The same thing happens in "woo" [wu], where your lips almost form an 'oo' [u] but don't touch.

    But what if you overshot your estimate, and then your lips touched, or your tongue touched the roof of your mouth? Then the air passing through would be disturbed, and the sound would become a fricative. If a sound that is normally a glide becomes a fricative, that's called fortition, because the sound is getting stronger. (Fortition also applies to other sound changes.)

    Here are the examples that inspired this post. First, fortition of [w] into something almost like [v].

    “vwhoa, let me show you how a country boy treats a lady, vwhoa, go ahead kick 'em off...” - "If the boot fits," Granger Smith

    You can clearly hear some buzzing as he says the 'w' in "whoa", and that buzzing is a telltale sign of frication. No buzzing means no frication.

    Now let's look at [j] becoming something like [z]. This one is a bit more subtle, but you can also hear some buzzing on the "you" that normally isn't there. I had to listen to this one multiple times to make sure that this wasn't some kind of editing error, but it doesn't sound like this was cut from a longer line.

    "“zyou’ve got everything you need,” One Direction

    How common is fortition from glide to fricative? It's been known to happen across languages, but how often does it happen in English? Frankly, I've no idea how common it is. I don't even know how common it is in song. From this very limited sample, it doesn't seem region specific - Granger Smith is from Texas and Liam is from Wolverhampton in England. Both probably 'overshot' while singing and ended up with a little extra buzzing. Since it's not super noticeable, I bet you most people won't even think of it as a speech error.

    Have you encountered examples of glides becoming fricatives? What about across languages? Do you notice this happening in speech as well? Sound off in the comments!

    August 20, 2019

    The Frequency Illusion

    Those of us who have bought a car will notice a curious phenomenon where, just as soon as we purchase our car, we immediately begin to see the same model everywhere on the streets. It's remarkable how we all become trendmakers as soon as we buy a car; we singlehandedly turned a Toyota Corolla into a bestseller. After all, we only start seeing this car in mass numbers after we purchase it.

    Or perhaps you relate more to having psychic powers capable of influencing the world. You learn about a particular term, or meet someone from a country, and suddenly you see reference to that country everywhere. Once I started studying the Scottish accent more, I found references to Scotland everywhere - Scottish bands on my Spotify auto-generated playlists, Scottish actors referenced on Twitter, and even more books on Scotland at my local bookstore. Could it be that me learning about Scotland raised the prominence of this northern country?

    Luckily (or not), these were not incidences of the Toyota Corolla and the country of Scotland suddenly becoming more popular after one learns about them. These are examples of what is popularly called the Baader-Meinhof effect, also called the Frequency Illusion. This is a cognitive bias resulting from selective attention (you don't pay the same amount of attention to everything all the time) and confirmation bias (looking for/remembering things that support our hypothesis and ignoring contrary evidence). The Frequency Illusion is especially relevant in linguistics research, and it was indeed coined by a linguist. We're going to take a look at the Frequency Illusion and some examples of how it applies in language.

    History

    Arnold Zwicky, a linguist at the University of Stanford and former writer for Language Log, codified this observation in a 2006 post.

    In any case, we have here another instance of the Recency Illusion, the belief that things YOU have noticed only recently are in fact recent. This is a selective attention effect. Your impressions are simply not to be trusted; you have to check the facts. Again and again -- retro not, double is, speaker-oriented hopefully, split infinitives, etc. -- the phenomena turn out to have been around, with some frequency, for very much longer than you think. It's not just Kids These Days.

    Professional linguists can be as subject to the Recency Illusion as anyone else. Charles Hockett wrote in 1958 (A Course in Modern Linguistics, p. 428) about "the recent colloquial pattern I'm going home and eat", what Laura Staum has been investigating under the name (due to me) the GoToGo construction. Here's an example I overheard in a Palo Alto restaurant 8/6/05: "I'm goin' out there and sleep in the tent." But Hockett's belief that the construction was recent in 1958 is just wrong; David Denison, at Manchester, has collected examples from roughly 30 years before that.

    Another selective attention effect, which tends to accompany the Recency Illusion, is the Frequency Illusion: once you've noticed a phenomenon, you think it happens a whole lot, even "all the time". Your estimates of frequency are likely to be skewed by your noticing nearly every occurrence that comes past you. People who are reflective about language -- professional linguists, people who set themselves up as authorities on language, and ordinary people who are simply interested in language -- are especially prone to the Frequency Illusion.

    Here at Stanford we have a group working on innovative uses of all, especially the quotative use, as in the song title "I'm like 'yeah' and she's all 'no'". The members of the group believed that quotative all was very common these days in the speech of the young, especially young women in California, and the undergraduates working on the project reported that they had friends who used it "all the time". But in fact, when the undergrads engage these friends in (lengthy) conversation, tape the conversations, transcribe them, and then extract occurrences of quotatives, the frequency of quotative all is very low (quotative like is really really big). There are several interpretations for this annoying finding, but we're inclined to think that part of it is the Frequency Illusion on our part.

    Zwicky wasn't the first to notice this phenomenon; the name Baader-Meinhof Effect had been circulating on message boards since 1994, and is more widely recognized. This wasn't even the first time Zwicky had written about it; he noticed his own sensitivity to a character in a book saying "and yet" despite the phrase only occurring three times in a novel. He has made a collection of posts on the Frequency Illusion, helpfully listed on his site.

    He uploaded a short pamphlet to the Stanford University website that helpfully summarizes the sub-types of the Frequency Illusion:

    Why are many people – including, on occasion, linguists – inclined to systematic dogged misapprehensions about variation in language (like the five below, from postings to the Language Log over the past two years)? These illusions follow from psychological processes and social practices, combined with bits of language ideology, and are facilitated by the fact that hardly anyone has a panoptic view of language variation; we mostly have to think about it on the basis of our personal experience.

    (1.1) Recency Illusion: If you've noticed something only recently, you believe that it originated recently. (Example: a widespread belief that the case selection in between you and I is a recent innovation.)

    (1.2) Antiquity Illusion: If you do something yourself, you believe that you always have, and that people in general have done it for a long time. (Example: the idea that the whole nine yards is a venerable idiom.)

    (2.1) Out-Group Illusion: Things you view as novel, or simply ba d, are characteristic of groups you don’t see yourself as belonging to. (Example: an Australian’s assertion that “double is” is not found in Australia, but is probably an Irish thing.)

    (2.2) In-Group Illusion: Things you view as characteristic of groups you see yourself as belonging to are peculiar to those groups, not shared by outsiders. (Example: many Pittsburghers’ belief that items like needs washed and redd up are unique to their city.)

    (3) Frequency Illusion: Once you notice a phenomenon, you believe it happens a whole lot. (Example: a widespread belief that quotative all occurs “all the time” in the speech of some (young) people.)

    One of the most humbling observations that Zwicky has made is that the Frequency Illusion can happen to anyone, even to professional linguists. The reality is that there are far too many things happening in language for one to be able to keep track of. Even keeping up with published papers is a challenge, let alone running statistical models of every phrase that catches the ear. It is easy for us to be mislead as to how common something is, and our intuitive responses on who is doing it are often simply wrong.

    That being said, these intuitive responses can be a good jumping off point. I often go into my Dialect Dissections with certain expectations about what I will find and which features will be the most salient, but almost every time the evidence takes me in a different direction from what I expected. That being said, without my initial intuition, I would not have even known where to look. When the Frequency Illusion is the beginning and the end, it can be harmful. But if we let it guide research, we can learn what is really going on - and then hopefully share with others to 'shatter' their own Frequency Illusion.

    Although Zwicky has already discussed several examples of the Frequency Illusion in his writings, I'm going to extend that analysis to some other areas.

    Examples

    One of the most noticeable examples of the Frequency Illusion is the discourse surrounding creaky voice, also known as glottal fry and vocal fry. Creaky voice is a kind of phonation that results in a noticeably 'croaky' or 'creaky' sound. It is an important phonemic mode in some languages, where presence and absence of creaky voice tells some words apart. But most of the attention paid to creaky voice isn't about its use in distinguishing words. Instead, it has focused on the supposed epidemic of creaky voice affecting college age girls in the United States.

    Carrie Gillion has a great article discussing creaky voice. She mentions that creaky voice used to be associated with British men, up until an article was released that mentioned that college age women use creaky voice often. At this point, the association flipped and also took on an increasingly negative tone.

    Gillon mentions that prejudice against young female speech is an important part of this. I would like to add that this is an example of the Frequency Illusion, for I have found a surprising number of examples of creaky voice from before 2011 that nobody seems to have been bothered by.

    An example of the old-fashioned association of creaky voice with British men can be found in "Courage the Cowardly Dog." The character "Naughty Fred" appears in a 2005 episode. He has an English accent, although he is played by a Canadian actor. What is curious is the amount of vocal fry that his actor applies. It is especially noticeable each time he says 'naughty.' This episode aired in 2005, before the hullabaloo about creaky voice. Perhaps his voice actor still associated creaky voice with English men. I haven't found any references or comments about the high amounts of creaky voice this character displays. The notion that creaky voice is a new phenomenon or only prevalent in young women thus seems to suffer from a mass example of the Frequency Illusion striking at a particular time.

    "Cause me to be quite ~naughty~"

    Creaky voice as an artistic choice has also been criticized heavily. On two different ends of the pop music spectrum, we have Britney Spears, who was hugely influential in popularizing the use of creaky voice, and on the other end we have indie and indie-aligned artists like Billie Eilish who also use creaky voice frequently. Both usages of creaky voice are subject to heavy criticism and attack - though perhaps not that heavy since both Britney Spears and Billie Eilish are successful singers who have sold millions of records.

    Creaky voice as an artistic effect is not even new, although its increased prevalence may be. In the song "Can't Smile Without You," we hear Karen Carpenter use creaky voice to transition from the musical phrase "finding it hard even to talk" to "and I feel sad." Karen Carpenter is the poster child for that pure, 'clean' 70s style of singing, with few affectations and a nice dose of vibrato on sustained notes. It is surprising to hear her use creaky voice in much the same way Britney does, to demarcate different musical phrases. While her use is definitely very limited compared to 1990s+ artists', it damages the notion that creaky voice is a novelty.

    "~I~ don't even talk to people I meet ~and I~ feel sad when you're sad"

    We can continue finding examples of the Frequency Illusion. For instance, I highly suspect that some aspects of Indie Voice are subject to the Frequency Illusion. The musical style is very common, but the linguistic style is rarer. The diphthongization, which was the subject of a Buzzfeed article, is difficult to find consistently. My articles on Indie Voice collect a number of these examples. There are even quotations from people complaining about how 'these artists are saying dreyss' and how you 'have to add an i' to sing in this style. But many of the early examples are noticeably subtle. Indeed, I have had several commenters tell me that they cannot hear the supposed diphthongization in the early examples.

    There is evidence that something similar to this diphthongization does happen in spoken speech, as reported by John Wells and in the scant two examples I found. But if this has been happening since 1980, the publication date of the John Wells book, why did people only start talking about it now? There are pre-2013 examples of this subtle diphthongization, but there are few online records of people specifically talking about the diphthongization. I even have had commenters tell me that they do something similar in their own speech and that they don't consider it a noticeable linguistic phenomenon. If this has been happening in speech and in song, why did people start paying attention?

    The indie voice example does not have a clean resolution. Perhaps the Frequency Illusion caused people to associate otherwise uninteresting phonetic features specifically with the singing style. I don't think the Frequency Illusion is the whole story, but I would not be surprised if it weren't a part of this perception that 'indie voice is everywhere' when actual linguistic examples are not as easy to come by.

    Conclusion

    I once read a post on a message board where a man in his 50s was complaining about how 'young people' cannot speak English correctly. His example was the word 'tree', which he claimed young people pronounced 'chree.' It seems this man was unaware that this sort of affricative assimilation is common not just in English, but cross-linguistically.

    He had likely heard this form many times in his life and never paid it any mind. But when it came from the mouth of someone he was suspicious of - a young person - his brain suddenly noticed it and not only registered it as a 'young person thing,' but started hearing it everywhere and taking it as proof that 'this is how all young people talk.' It was his subjective experience, but his conclusion was not based on any evidence.

    We all need to be aware that our intuitions often lead us astray when it comes to linguistic phenomena, and that pop explanations can lead us astray. Our own feelings about a group (young people, young women, the Irish, Pittsburghers) can cause us to inaccurately attribute certain features as being unique to them and as also being newer than they seem. If we want to have an understanding of language variation that lines up with reality, then we need to as much as possible collect evidence to try and test these intuitions. We also need to be wary and skeptical of 'new' features without accompanying proof, especially if we are claiming some particular group is doing it.

    July 1, 2019

    July 1 Site Update

    Hello! Just wanted to let you all know that I'm alive and kickin'.

    The modern expectation for constant content posted weekly, daily, or multiple times a day means that if a site takes a while to update, it can seem dead. I myself sometimes fret over whether I need to pump out more constant content.

    But my goal isn't to compete with sites that are bringing you content all the time. My goal is to produce novel research on understudied linguistic phenomena - and that's not beholden to any schedule. I can spend months researching a topic and only find the lynchpin tying it all together at the very end, in a completely unexpected way. If I had given myself a goal to produce a Dialect Dissection every month, for example, I would miss out on so many important things to include.

    That being said, since I have also let the Twitter take a break, I figured I should post on here to reassure everyone that there is new material coming. I've been trying to take a break from social media for typical time consumption reasons, but if I don't use Twitter as much, I have to communicate with you all somehow.

    I'm planning on doing the first major rewrites of (a) older articles that I did when the site's focus and style wasn't clearly established and (b) articles that I have since found important connections and which require more than a cursory update to explain. Although you may think that rewrites should come faster than new articles, there is enough new information in them to make them take as much time, not to mention that figuring out how to incorporate the old material in there is a challenge in and of itself.

    I would like to thank the regular site visitors that have left comments on my posts - I love hearing from you all! And anyone who's decided to give this humble site a read - another thank you to you.

    There is more to come in 2019 for Ace Linguist, so stay tuned!

    - Karen

    June 3, 2019

    Because You Just Told Me - Presupposition in Fiction

    I’ve been listening to Lingthusiasm episodes over again and hit upon the presupposition episode. If you haven’t heard it yet, you should check it out (or read the transcript if you’re not a fan of podcasts).

    What’s a presupposition

    A presupposition is an implicit assumption about the world that is taken for granted in an utterance. Presupposition is an important concept in pragmatics, semantics, and philosophy (a lot of the work that has been done on presupposition has actually been done by philosophers as opposed to linguists). We presuppose many things all the time, because actually having to state every single thing in a sentence that exists would take a long time.

    “The sheep are grazing.”

    This sentence presupposes that there are things, sheep, and that they are capable of doing an action, such as grazing. This seems obvious, but if you change this…

    “The matriniax are grazing.”

    This presupposes we know what a matriniax is. Do you know? I don’t know either. In this case, we would have benefitted from a prior description of what a matriniax is. As it stands, we can’t really understand this sentence except for that there is a thing, a matriniax, that there are many of them, and they are capable of grazing. The nature of matriniax is unknown to us.

    There are plenty of words and grammatical situations that trigger presupposition. Wikipedia has a pretty good list.

    As an example of the philosophical interest of presupposition, think about what it means for a presupposition to be false. The most famous example is “The King of France is bald.” There is no person alive right now who can be called “the king of france.” Does that mean that this sentence is false? But if this sentence is false, then that means that “the kind of france is not bald” must be true, and that sentence cannot be true because there is no king of France. Some philosophers say that a negative presupposition results in a statement without a truth value - a statement that is neither true nor false.

    Using Presuppositions for Effect

    One thing McCulloch mentions is presupposition in the Lizzie Bennet diaries, where Lizzie’s sister pretends not to have watched an episode of Lizzie’s diary. Lizzie asks, “you just want to know about Darcy’s letter, don’t you?” Darcy’s letter was mentioned earlier. Lizzie’s sister says “No I don’t!” which outs her as having watched Lizzie’s diary - there’s no way she would know about Darcy’s letter otherwise. Outed by presupposition.

    This is a pretty popular technique in fiction. TV Tropes has a page dedicated to the trope, although they do not mention how presupposition plays into it. Presupposition in media can be used for dramatic effect for one character to verify knowledge by presupposing it.

    Some additional examples: in the musical Legally Blonde, Elle is part of the defense team of Brooke Wyndham, who has been accused of murdering her husband to run away with her poolboy. Elle suspects that her poolboy is lying about having been amorously involved with Elle because she thinks he’s gay. Her colleague Emmett decides to prod him by asking him, “And your first name again is?” with the poolboy responding appropriately, and then asking “and your boyfriend’s name?” and the poolboy replies “Carlos,” shocking everyone. Emmett presupposes that the poolboy had a boyfriend, and the poolboy absentmindedly confirms his presupposition instead of challenging it. This reveal leads Carlos to show up and declare that the poolboy is indeed gay, and has never been involved with any woman.

    In an actual courtroom, presuppositions can be dangerous. Presuppositions can be used to create loaded questions, such as “when did you stop smoking?" which presupposes that smoking - of a legal or illegal sort - must have taken place. The defendant, if they have never smoked before, must make the clarification: "I have never smoked."

    Villains can also make use of presupposition. One of my favorite examples is from Sonic Adventure 2. Tails and Sonic were offering a fake Chaos Emerald to Dr. Eggman, who was trying to collect all 7 for nefarious purposes. However, Dr. Eggman imprisons Sonic as he's approaching, and he states, “You didn’t think you could fool me with that fake chaos emerald, could you?” Tails, believing he’s been caught, asks “how did you know that was fake?” Sonic tries to get Tails to stop, but it’s too late. Dr. Eggman replies, “because you just told me, fox boy!” Here presupposition is used to confirm information that one is not certain about - as in Legally Blonde where the poolboy could have been gay or European, Dr. Eggman knows that there is a fake emerald, but he wanted to confirm it was fake, likely to rub it in their faces.

    Note: volume increases a lot in the second half of the video.