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.
I mean...really is there even a debate on this? Who the f-ck in New York talks like the woman above? Yeah, they talk like that in Jersey up to Trenton and maybe a bit further north but NYC? Seriously.
Not really hearing the NY connection much, other than the "aw" sounds which are ubiquitous across the East Coast from Maine to Georgia. Oh, and like NYC, there's a tense-lax split. Oh wait, Cincy has that, too.
If I encountered people speaking like that, I would just assume they were from around here. New Yorkers, on the other hand, obviously sound way different from us and cannot possibly hide where they're from when they speak.
Actually, by your criteria, Kentucky is in the Midwest, which it's clearly not.
I find this statement odd because Kansas is considered part of the Midwest and both are on the same latitude. I guess if you're talking socioeconomic conditions then yeah. Kansas has a lot more wealth, more education and less poverty than Kentucky. Which isn't a knock on KY, as I've found that people in the south choose to live the slower, less wealthy lifestyle.
Think about it. Ohio is closer to New York, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey than it is to the quintessential Midwestern "Plains States". Ohio has very Northeastern demographics. It has high concentrations of Italians and Puerto Ricans. Puerto Ricans are more prominent than other Hispanics. Cleveland is more like Upstate NY than it is like Iowa or Nebraska. Cincinnati has a dialect that sounds a lot like Philadelphian with their "o" sounds and short split A system. In Central Ohio there is t-glottalization like in NYC and Philly. It was also settled by Yankees and at one point a part of it was known as the New Connecticut. Aside from Cincinnati sharing linguistic similarities to Philly, Cleveland shares them with Buffalo and Rochester as well as the inner part of the Northeast as far as Western Mass and Connecticut itself. Youngstown shares linguistics with Pittsburgh. In Dayton, locals call their city "Day-on" with a glottal stop the same way Southern Pennsylvania people would say it and how certain New Yorkers would say it. This shows the cultural tie with the Northeast as they kept that remnant of British English the same way the Northeast did. Cleveland also has that "tough guy" cultural aspect to it like Philly and NYC do.
I think Ohio should reconsider being Midwestern and think more Northeastern.
From a geographically viewpoint, Ohio would probably be considered to be "Northeast" but is considered Midwestern because of historical reasons (because Ohio was not one of the 13 colonies). But despite that Ohio was not of the 13, you could argue that even from a historical viewpoint, Ohio is more like the Northeast then it is like the Plains States. Here is why.
Dates that the original 13 states entered the Union
Delaware - 1787
Pennsylvania - 1787
+ 11 others
Dates that Midwestern States entered the Union:
When looking at these figures, a couple of things struck me. First of all, you can see it took more 86 years from the first state (Ohio) to the last states (the Dakotas) to join the Union. That is how big the Midwest is.
Second, Ohio entered the Union only 16 years after its neighbor, Pennsylvania. Thomas Jefferson was President in 1803. That is how old Ohio is. These early Ohio settlers were primarily Americans from the old colonial states like Pennsylvania and Connecticut and indeed were often people who were born as British Colonials. Clearly these early Ohio settlers were different from the people who generations later settled the Plains.
Anyway the point is that Ohio from a historical viewpoint probably has more in common with Pennsylvania then it does with say Kansas or Minnesota. This is because Ohio is so far EAST, that it was settled relatively early.
I'll agree with not being placed with New York and New England but there's also too many eastern Midwesterners that want people to think that the eastern Midwest states are farther west than they actually are. "The Great Lakes Region" would've be a prefect name for the Eastern Midwestern states but Pennsylvania and New York also border Great Lakes and Iowa doesn't, the "Mideastern United States" would've been a perfect name for the eastern Midwest states if it wasn't for our country's controversies with the world's Middle East.
I'll agree with not being placed with New York and New England but there's also too many eastern Midwesterners that want people to think that the eastern Midwest states are farther west than they actually are. "The Great Lakes Region" would've be a prefect name for the Eastern Midwestern states but Pennsylvania and New York also border Great Lakes and Iowa doesn't, the "Mideastern United States" would've been a perfect name for the eastern Midwest states if it wasn't for our country's controversies with the world's Middle East.
The Great Lakes should be its own region. Culturally, it shares little in common with its Great Plains neighbors. Other than high German American numbers, not much else is similar be it linguistics, climate, or even terrain.
The Great Lakes should be its own region. Culturally, it shares little in common with its Great Plains neighbors. Other than high German American numbers, not much else is similar be it linguistics, climate, or even terrain.
The plains states should really be in its own region. Thats said, i jave no problem being listed as midwestern. Although, historically, the great lakes states people have always shunned us.
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.