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.
The real question is: as a unit, does New England share more with the Mid Atlantic or the Maritimes?
That’s not fair. NY and NJ are far too different themselves. I’d say New England and Mid Atlantic culture meet at NYC. New England and Great Lakes culture meet at...Syracuse maybe?
Greenwich and Westchester County are way different than Newark and Hudson County. I think the north-of-NYC vs south-of-NYC divide is pretty stark.
Agreed about north and south of NYC. I love how stark the difference is. I don’t know which I prefer honestly. I haven’t done enough fo the Westchester/Fairfield/downstate thing to speak to it well. What I have seen I felt was much not similar to Greater Boston than Northern NJ.
True enough but parts of Jersey like Princeton are very New England esque. Counties and towns west of Hudson County and Newark can feel very New England like.
Vermont has no areas like Darien, Rowayton, Greenwich, Noroton, Weston, Wellesley, Lexington nor areas like Brookline or South Orange.
There’s an urbane, affluent commuter vibe as well as an ‘urban minority‘ Thats vibe lacking in the entirety of Northern New England. It may have the preppy New England traditional vibe but not the urbane affluent suburban commuter vibe found in NNJ, SWCT, and MetroWest (think Chestnut Hill)... and I think that is a more dominant force in Mass and CT than anything else in terms politics and culture.
And let’s not act like people do move from between MA and NJ with some level of noticeable frequency. a significant portion for states that do not share a border. It’s nit as fluid as NH Ir Maine but probably more so than Vermont. We all know enough about NJ to talk about it...
True enough but parts of Jersey like Princeton are very New England esque. Counties and towns west of Hudson County and Newark can feel very New England like.
Vermont has no areas like Darien, Rowayton, Greenwich, Noroton, Weston, Wellesley, Lexington nor areas like Brookline or South Orange.
I’ll admit that New England culture does pierce into Northern New Jersey and Mid Atlantic culture pierces into Fairfield County, CT. That doesn’t mean the two cultures aren’t different.
Eastern Long Island is also New England-y.
Last edited by Boston Shudra; 08-16-2020 at 10:15 PM..
Agreed about north and south of NYC. I love how stark the difference is. I don’t know which I prefer honestly. I haven’t done enough fo the Westchester/Fairfield/downstate thing to speak to it well. What I have seen I felt was much not similar to Greater Boston than Northern NJ.
True enough but parts of Jersey like Princeton are very New England esque. Counties and towns west of Hudson County and Newark can feel very New England like.
Vermont has no areas like Darien, Rowayton, Greenwich, Noroton, Weston, Wellesley, Lexington nor areas like Brookline or South Orange.
There’s an urbane, affluent commuter vibe as well as an ‘urban minority‘ Thats vibe lacking in the entirety of Northern New England. It may have the preppy New England traditional vibe but not the urbane affluent suburban commuter vibe found in NNJ, SWCT, and MetroWest (think Chestnut Hill)... and I think that is a more dominant force in Mass and CT than anything else in terms politics and culture.
And let’s not act like people do move from between MA and NJ with some level of noticeable frequency. a significant portion for states that do not share a border. It’s nit as fluid as NH Ir Maine but probably more so than Vermont. We all know enough about NJ to talk about it...
I think one big thing is if someone moves from Medford to Nashua (or even Keene) it’s really not considered “Moving away” (as long as both parties have a motor vehicle) like moving to East Orange NJ would be.
The former would’ve like moving from the North Shore to Worcester like you moved but didn’t relocate if that makes sense.
I don't think Texas cleanly fits into a region on this map, but personally I'd agree with pairing Texas with NM and AZ over AL, MS, GA, SC, etc.
Louisiana is tougher, because it is much closer to Texas's population centers than NM. (Particularly Houston). However, I look at Louisiana as being a border state in the south itself, to some extent. It's much more southern than Texas, but still distinctly separate from the deep south in my eyes.
I don't agree at all (with some on this thread) that Arkansas has more influence in Texas than NM. I'm a native Texan, I have never been to Arkansas in my life, and frankly don't know anyone with particular ties there. Texans have more ties with Colorado than Arkansas IMO.
I'd rank the border influence:
1. Mexico
- big gap -
2. Louisiana, Oklahoma, New Mexico
- big gap -
3. Arkansas
I don't think Texas cleanly fits into a region on this map, but personally I'd agree with pairing Texas with NM and AZ over AL, MS, GA, SC, etc.
Louisiana is tougher, because it is much closer to Texas's population centers than NM. (Particularly Houston). However, I look at Louisiana as being a border state in the south itself, to some extent. It's much more southern than Texas, but still distinctly separate from the deep south in my eyes.
I don't agree at all (with some on this thread) that Arkansas has more influence in Texas than NM. I'm a native Texan, I have never been to Arkansas in my life, and frankly don't know anyone with particular ties there. Texans have more ties with Colorado than Arkansas IMO.
I'd rank the border influence:
1. Mexico
- big gap -
2. Louisiana, Oklahoma, New Mexico
- big gap -
3. Arkansas
The only people I know who have been to New Mexico are the ones who have driven through. I agree, Colorado has more influence on Texas than Arkansas as well as New Mexico but I didn't point it out because it isn't bordering state.
Look at historical influence as well, nearly every major person in the Texan fight against Mexico and Republic days came from the South, Austin spent years in Arkansas, Houston was in Tennessee but also went through Arkansas. Most of Texas history is the migration of Southerners from Louisiana, Arkansas, Mississippi west. The stereotypical Texan/Southern accent/accents like "y'all"
Nearly every dialect map in existence puts the populated portion of Texas (Eastern 40%) as solidly in the South as well, just based on word usage, and this is because of our historic ties to the South including in Louisiana, only when you get to Austin/San Antonio can you really start to see a difference but like I said 50% of the State is just Dallas and Houston which are firmly grouped with the South in nearly every dialect map in existence. Even Austin is made up of Californians, Dallasites and Houstonians seems to me to be more influenced by Louisiana versus any other bordering state (it's probably the most Texan part of the state seeing as Hill Country doesn't spill over into any other state and Austin is in near the Geographic center of the state).
(1) Kentucky as a Great Lakes state would be dumber than anything in the current Census classification.
(2) Also, Oklahoma is more like Kansas than NM or AZ. Most KS cities have significant Hispanic populations as well now, but that doesn't make you "Southwestern". Open borders have led to Hispanic populations in states like Wisconsin or Illinois as well. Cheap labor is drawn to wherever those jobs are. There's a significant difference culturally between places with a grown 'old' Hispanic population that's been there since the 19th century (typical for the Southwest) and places that are 20-30% Hispanic but 99% of them are recent immigrants. OK had virtually no Hispanics prior to WW2 and the % went from under 3% in 1990 to over 10% in 2010.
(3) It makes sense to reconsider VA and MD and perhaps put them in with NY/NJ/PA, but putting WV in the same region as Brooklyn is somewhat absurd. WV doesn't even have the big urban region that makes it politically fit in with the Northeast. It's politically and culturally closer to Alabama than it is to Maryland.
(4) Of course, Appalachia is kind of a region of its own. Many states are actually regionally split anyway. And that's why 'state-based' regions are a fool's errand to begin with, and really it's purely a statistical thing for Census nerds. Like does anyone in the real world care if MD is part of the South in the Census stats?
I think too much gets made of where Texas should or shouldnt be. Is it southern? Is it not? The honestly answer is that its pretty ridiculous to put the entire state into one region as big as it is. El Paso has more in common with Phoenix than it does with Houston and Dallas has more in common with Kansas than it does with Brownsville. The large Hispanic populations in all the above are the exception.
The common consensus seems to be: Mexican = Southwest and Black = Southern. Its true that demographically those are the dominant groups in each region, but just because a city has a large number of those groups doesnt mean thats where they belong culturally. It can be one element but far from the whole picture. Look at places like Chicago and Detroit.
I live in Houston and it feels unequivocally Southern to me. Not because of the demographics, but the natural surroundings. It swampy and surrounded by pine forests. Houston does have a very large and prominent black community which does add to that. Dallas honestly feels significantly less Southern. It reminds me much more of the Great Plains, but there still are Southern elements to Dallas like its large black community. Austin and San Antonio feel far more Southwestern than Southern to me. I really dont see either of them as Southern at all.
My honest opinion is that Texas is its own region. However for the sake of the OP and what they are trying to accomplish, if were trying to group Texas with other states I would have them in a group with those we border: LA, OK, AR, and NM.
The only people I know who have been to New Mexico are the ones who have driven through. I agree, Colorado has more influence on Texas than Arkansas as well as New Mexico but I didn't point it out because it isn't bordering state.
Look at historical influence as well, nearly every major person in the Texan fight against Mexico and Republic days came from the South, Austin spent years in Arkansas, Houston was in Tennessee but also went through Arkansas. Most of Texas history is the migration of Southerners from Louisiana, Arkansas, Mississippi west. The stereotypical Texan/Southern accent/accents like "y'all"
Nearly every dialect map in existence puts the populated portion of Texas (Eastern 40%) as solidly in the South as well, just based on word usage, and this is because of our historic ties to the South including in Louisiana, only when you get to Austin/San Antonio can you really start to see a difference but like I said 50% of the State is just Dallas and Houston which are firmly grouped with the South in nearly every dialect map in existence. Even Austin is made up of Californians, Dallasites and Houstonians seems to me to be more influenced by Louisiana versus any other bordering state (it's probably the most Texan part of the state seeing as Hill Country doesn't spill over into any other state and Austin is in near the Geographic center of the state).
I think those maps misleading because they aren't considering population density. So what you are really looking at is how (likely small samples) of people out in the country speak. Historically Texas was primarily a merge of two cultures: whites/blacks from the south and Tejanos, with the white southerners having the political power. IMO both groups provided a lot of cultural influence, but it's not surprising that the english speakers more heavily impacted the way english is spoken.
I'd say there are three primary aspects that separate Texas from the south and move it toward the West:
1. Proximity to / former territory of Mexico
2. Discovery of oil in ~1900 and resulting influx of transplants
3. Ranching as the primary agro industry rather than farming
I don't necessarily disagree with the "southern" traits having a plurality of influence, but I think Texas is nonetheless much less southern than most of census designated south. Overall I'd say Texas is equivalently southern as other border states like Missouri, Virginia, West Virginia, and maybe Florida.
Last edited by whereiend; 08-17-2020 at 07:50 AM..
Texas is not West. El Paso perhaps but the "TX Triangle" where most people live doesnt look or feel western at all.
True, but portions of that triangle arent really Southern either. Thats kind of my point. It seems ridiculous to pigeonhole Texas into one region.
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.
