Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: Austin, TX/Chicago, IL/Houston, TX/Washington, DC
10,138 posts, read 16,035,535 times
Reputation: 4047
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by californio sur
When someone from Chicago is being interviewed on TV there is no way the average American can detect an accent. Does President Obama have an accent
Actually the accent situation in Chicago is a mess. You have Polish immigrants that mix Midwestern accent with their native language- I don't even know what that makes but it's distinctly different. Same with any previous generation groups that are established Chicagoans for multiple generations.
I notice accents more with the older generation in Chicago than the immediate younger crowd.
I myself have a neutral accent. Like many Chicagoans- but it is true that a lot do have accents. grapico isn't wrong about that. I think it's where a persons background is coming from- for the most part though, I will agree with you, there's not much of an accent but when there is, it's with someone who is either older or has had generations of connection to the region.
I see a lot of older generation people say Chicago like this "ChicaaaaaaaGO!" And some immigrants say this "shiiiiiiiiii cahhhhh go".
It varies most part people just say Chicago like the way it's meant to be said.
Quote:
Originally Posted by californio sur
I don't think I can agree. I've been to Miami several times and never detected an accent unless you consider a Spanish accent [than LA would also be included as having an accent].
I agree with you on that. And it's got a lot to do with what I was saying in the top portion of this post. Immigrants and different nationalities create a blend. I personally have never heard any accent in any part of California, just difference in phrases used. It's like Midwesterners saying "pop" Southerners saying "coke" and West Coasters saying "soda" and Northeasterners saying "soft drink".... difference in daily phrases not accents.
Quote:
Originally Posted by californio sur
But if someone from Boston [like politicians] are talking on TV almost everyone can hear the very distinct accent. New York and much of the Northeast [esp states like New Jersey] do have prominent accents and, of-course all the Southern states with the exception of southern Florida have Southern accents.
I do notice that with people from the Northeast though. Both Mid Atlantic subregion & New England subregion. For Mid Atlantic, I see it on and off just like the Chicago thing, mostly people with generations of family history or the older crowd.
Quote:
Originally Posted by californio sur
Also the upper Midwest has an accent somewhat similar to Canadian speakers. But the Mountain States and West Coast\ Southwest don't have noticeable if any kind of accent.
Yeahhh pretty much. I can't argue that part- because it does seem that way.
Come to think of it there does seem to be a bit of an accent in the Great Lakes. Areas like Milwaukee where lots of Germans\ Swedes settled have an accent and certainly the upper Midwest [North & South Dakota\ Nebraska\ Minnesota\ Wisconsin have an almost Canadian accent. I think the average person would have somewhat of a difficult time detecting an accent from most Chicago residents. Illinois\ northern Missouri\ Indiana\ Michigan\ Ohio don't seem to have accents to me. Also Kansas. But that changes radically in Oklahoma\ Arkansas on southward. It seems to me that the stronger American accents are restricted to states east of the Mississippi with the exception of the Gulf Coast states. By the time a person reaches New Mexico\ Colorado\ Wyoming\ Montana and westward it is hard to detect any accent.
LA all day, no contest! However, I'm biased, being from the City of Angels. I really like Boston, though. It's one of my top 5 favorite cities of all time!
California Sur is 100% correct. California has no distinct accent, nor does any of the places he listed. People sound the same in Chicago as they do in California although they may use different terms.
Yeah, kinda have to agree that I wonder about this thread, well, at least at first glance. I don't really like knocking any thread unless its premise is absurd--Pluto vs. Amarillo or some such--but I think the idea that there's some big rivalry between these two cities is questionable to say the least. (The SOX and the DODGERS have a big rivalry? That's news to me.)
But maybe this comparison works if we get away from the questionable premise that these two cities have a big rivalry. My first reaction was that you'd have a better comparison between LA and NYC (aside from the fact that it has already been done to death) because those two cities are closer in size than LA and Boston, but NYC and LA are built differently, so you could discuss the question of whether you prefer the densely built, older-style city or the new Sun Belt kind of city.
I don't know, though. Maybe the difference in size between LA and Boston could be part of the basis for comparison. Not only can people discuss densely built old city vs. Sun Belt city, but they can also discuss the pros and cons of a giant megalopolis of a city with mega doses of both the good and bad points of urban living vs. more of a typically-sized basic big city which has a more manageable scale than a giant city, and happens to be a city that packs a punch in terms of amenities but still not to the degree of a huge city like LA.
So, this could be make for an interesting comparison after all, but one problem may be getting people to read past the opening premise that Boston and LA have a big rivalry, which they really don't except from time to time when their teams both make the NBA finals.
wow take away 5 championships really? isn't the team name still the Lakers? just like it was in Minneapolis?
Location: Austin, TX/Chicago, IL/Houston, TX/Washington, DC
10,138 posts, read 16,035,535 times
Reputation: 4047
Quote:
Originally Posted by Primate 24
wow take away 5 championships really? isn't the team name still the Lakers? just like it was in Minneapolis?
Lakers 16 Championships *official*
That's the way i see it too. Nothing to do with where they play, but how much their records hold. Lakers belong to LA now, so do all their championships.
Minnesota has their hey day, but they had to give it up.
Just like LA can't claim any NFL wins since they currently don't have those teams.
I guess that's just the way i perceive it though. But I can totally see the other side of the argument though, and it makes sense as well... but so does this.
California Sur is 100% correct. California has no distinct accent, nor does any of the places he listed. People sound the same in Chicago as they do in California although they may use different terms.
That's the way i see it too. Nothing to do with where they play, but how much their records hold. Lakers belong to LA now, so do all their championships.
Minnesota has their hey day, but they had to give it up.
Just like LA can't any NFL wins since they currently don't have those teams.
Nice thinking!
Yeah it seemed that person was trying to pull La from the Celtics # of championships.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
