Why is most North American speech rhotic?












6















Most North American speech is rhotic—why is that? Does it come from the early English settlers or perhaps from the Irish settlers?










share|improve this question

























  • North American? Do you mean USAmericans from the north or everyone that lives on the continent?

    – MrHen
    Apr 2 '11 at 12:42






  • 4





    Consider that English was rhotic until the 17th century, and that British colonization in America began in 1607.

    – kiamlaluno
    Apr 2 '11 at 12:49











  • @kiamlaluno: If you add a citation, that should be the answer.

    – Kosmonaut
    Apr 2 '11 at 12:51











  • @Kosmonaut That is the reason I didn't answer: I cannot find any citation for the fact English was rhotic until 17th century, except a question asked here. Is then this question on topic, for EL&U?

    – kiamlaluno
    Apr 2 '11 at 12:56






  • 2





    @MrHen: "North American" is a standard term for people from North America. "Northern American" refers to people from the northern part of the US.

    – Kosmonaut
    Apr 2 '11 at 19:49
















6















Most North American speech is rhotic—why is that? Does it come from the early English settlers or perhaps from the Irish settlers?










share|improve this question

























  • North American? Do you mean USAmericans from the north or everyone that lives on the continent?

    – MrHen
    Apr 2 '11 at 12:42






  • 4





    Consider that English was rhotic until the 17th century, and that British colonization in America began in 1607.

    – kiamlaluno
    Apr 2 '11 at 12:49











  • @kiamlaluno: If you add a citation, that should be the answer.

    – Kosmonaut
    Apr 2 '11 at 12:51











  • @Kosmonaut That is the reason I didn't answer: I cannot find any citation for the fact English was rhotic until 17th century, except a question asked here. Is then this question on topic, for EL&U?

    – kiamlaluno
    Apr 2 '11 at 12:56






  • 2





    @MrHen: "North American" is a standard term for people from North America. "Northern American" refers to people from the northern part of the US.

    – Kosmonaut
    Apr 2 '11 at 19:49














6












6








6


1






Most North American speech is rhotic—why is that? Does it come from the early English settlers or perhaps from the Irish settlers?










share|improve this question
















Most North American speech is rhotic—why is that? Does it come from the early English settlers or perhaps from the Irish settlers?







history speech pronunciation-vs-spelling north-american-english rhotic






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Dec 6 '14 at 2:36









tchrist

109k28290464




109k28290464










asked Apr 2 '11 at 9:56









nicholas ainsworthnicholas ainsworth

4,6672971112




4,6672971112













  • North American? Do you mean USAmericans from the north or everyone that lives on the continent?

    – MrHen
    Apr 2 '11 at 12:42






  • 4





    Consider that English was rhotic until the 17th century, and that British colonization in America began in 1607.

    – kiamlaluno
    Apr 2 '11 at 12:49











  • @kiamlaluno: If you add a citation, that should be the answer.

    – Kosmonaut
    Apr 2 '11 at 12:51











  • @Kosmonaut That is the reason I didn't answer: I cannot find any citation for the fact English was rhotic until 17th century, except a question asked here. Is then this question on topic, for EL&U?

    – kiamlaluno
    Apr 2 '11 at 12:56






  • 2





    @MrHen: "North American" is a standard term for people from North America. "Northern American" refers to people from the northern part of the US.

    – Kosmonaut
    Apr 2 '11 at 19:49



















  • North American? Do you mean USAmericans from the north or everyone that lives on the continent?

    – MrHen
    Apr 2 '11 at 12:42






  • 4





    Consider that English was rhotic until the 17th century, and that British colonization in America began in 1607.

    – kiamlaluno
    Apr 2 '11 at 12:49











  • @kiamlaluno: If you add a citation, that should be the answer.

    – Kosmonaut
    Apr 2 '11 at 12:51











  • @Kosmonaut That is the reason I didn't answer: I cannot find any citation for the fact English was rhotic until 17th century, except a question asked here. Is then this question on topic, for EL&U?

    – kiamlaluno
    Apr 2 '11 at 12:56






  • 2





    @MrHen: "North American" is a standard term for people from North America. "Northern American" refers to people from the northern part of the US.

    – Kosmonaut
    Apr 2 '11 at 19:49

















North American? Do you mean USAmericans from the north or everyone that lives on the continent?

– MrHen
Apr 2 '11 at 12:42





North American? Do you mean USAmericans from the north or everyone that lives on the continent?

– MrHen
Apr 2 '11 at 12:42




4




4





Consider that English was rhotic until the 17th century, and that British colonization in America began in 1607.

– kiamlaluno
Apr 2 '11 at 12:49





Consider that English was rhotic until the 17th century, and that British colonization in America began in 1607.

– kiamlaluno
Apr 2 '11 at 12:49













@kiamlaluno: If you add a citation, that should be the answer.

– Kosmonaut
Apr 2 '11 at 12:51





@kiamlaluno: If you add a citation, that should be the answer.

– Kosmonaut
Apr 2 '11 at 12:51













@Kosmonaut That is the reason I didn't answer: I cannot find any citation for the fact English was rhotic until 17th century, except a question asked here. Is then this question on topic, for EL&U?

– kiamlaluno
Apr 2 '11 at 12:56





@Kosmonaut That is the reason I didn't answer: I cannot find any citation for the fact English was rhotic until 17th century, except a question asked here. Is then this question on topic, for EL&U?

– kiamlaluno
Apr 2 '11 at 12:56




2




2





@MrHen: "North American" is a standard term for people from North America. "Northern American" refers to people from the northern part of the US.

– Kosmonaut
Apr 2 '11 at 19:49





@MrHen: "North American" is a standard term for people from North America. "Northern American" refers to people from the northern part of the US.

– Kosmonaut
Apr 2 '11 at 19:49










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















10














As reported on Wikipedia (Rhotic and non-rhotic accents), English had become non-rhotic by the end of the 18th century; John Walker used the spelling ar for the pronunciation of aunt in 1775, and reported caad as pronunciation of card in 1791.



British colonization of the Americas began in 1607 in Virginia, even though there had been previous attempts in 1586 and 1587. United States of America declared its independence on July 4 1776, when the non-rhotic accent had started to spread on Southern England.






share|improve this answer


























  • Outscored by a later answer stealing my Wikipedia quote! I'll have to tolerate it, because the initial idea was yours :)

    – F'x
    Apr 2 '11 at 18:31





















4














As kiamlaluno noted in his comment, it's a question of when predominant English dialects transitioned from rhotic to non-rhotic. While I don't have any definite (or academic) reference to supply, three comments on this:




  • One can read here: “In 1776, both American accents and British accents were largely rhotic. It was around this time that non-rhotic speech took off in southern England, especially among the upper class. This “prestige” non-rhotic speech was standardized, and has been spreading in Britain ever since.” The author offers as a reference The Cambridge History of the English Language: English in North America. I located the correct passage at page 75 and later.


  • This datation is backed by the following Wikipedia quote: “Loss of coda /r/ apparently became widespread in southern England during the 18th century; John Walker uses the spelling ar to indicate the broad A of aunt in his 1775 dictionary and reports that card is pronounced "caad" in 1791 (Labov, Ash, and Boberg 2006: 47).”


  • Even by 1950, large parts of England still had largely rhotic dialects (see maps here).







share|improve this answer



















  • 2





    To second F'x's answer, one can note that Australian, New Zealand and South African accents are non rhotic and that their colonisation took place later than that of New England. Furthermore there are little variation in American accent. In his study of the American English Melvyn Bragg has a nice description of American English unity: "American English was also developing its own sound. The first settlers had come from various parts of England, each with its own regional accent. [cont']

    – Alain Pannetier Φ
    Apr 2 '11 at 18:13






  • 1





    [cont'd] But no single accent dominated. As they talked to each other, the variety very quickly became a blend. To this day, there's only a tiny variation in accents across America compared to Britain, and the further west you go, the more true that becomes. By the middle of the 18th century, the absence of regional pronunciations and dialect words was being noted approvingly by upper-class British visitors, who regarded all such variations as vulgar.

    – Alain Pannetier Φ
    Apr 2 '11 at 18:14





















2














Expanding a little on the info above: The perception that American English and British English somehow developed largely independently after North America was colonized is not correct. Non-rhoticity started around London, then gradually spread northward and westward around England, and then spread to North America. In North America it started on the East and Gulf coasts and then spread inward. By the early 20th century American culture was starting to really assert itself and Americans stopped looking to England for what was fashionable. As the Midwestern and Western states became economically more important, the Midwestern (rhotic) accent became established as the "standard" accent, especially with the advent of radio and television. The accent trend began to reverse and rhoticism re-asserted itself eastward in North America.



But it is important to note that, even today, New York and New England still have large numbers of non-rhotic speakers, as do New Orleans and some other parts of the South. Similarly southwestern England is still heavily rhotic as are Ireland and Scotland.






share|improve this answer































    0














    One reason I heard for Britain becoming non-rhotic that made sense is that in the early 1800s the British royals married with German aristocracy. German was non-rhotic, and the imported royals had a non-rhotic accent (think “Ahnold Swarzeneggah” type accent) So the British upper classes were quick to start copying the new “posh” accent, and it spread from there.





    share








    New contributor




    Marshall is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.




















      Your Answer








      StackExchange.ready(function() {
      var channelOptions = {
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "97"
      };
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
      createEditor();
      });
      }
      else {
      createEditor();
      }
      });

      function createEditor() {
      StackExchange.prepareEditor({
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
      convertImagesToLinks: false,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: null,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader: {
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      },
      noCode: true, onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      });


      }
      });














      draft saved

      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function () {
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f19063%2fwhy-is-most-north-american-speech-rhotic%23new-answer', 'question_page');
      }
      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      4 Answers
      4






      active

      oldest

      votes








      4 Answers
      4






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      10














      As reported on Wikipedia (Rhotic and non-rhotic accents), English had become non-rhotic by the end of the 18th century; John Walker used the spelling ar for the pronunciation of aunt in 1775, and reported caad as pronunciation of card in 1791.



      British colonization of the Americas began in 1607 in Virginia, even though there had been previous attempts in 1586 and 1587. United States of America declared its independence on July 4 1776, when the non-rhotic accent had started to spread on Southern England.






      share|improve this answer


























      • Outscored by a later answer stealing my Wikipedia quote! I'll have to tolerate it, because the initial idea was yours :)

        – F'x
        Apr 2 '11 at 18:31


















      10














      As reported on Wikipedia (Rhotic and non-rhotic accents), English had become non-rhotic by the end of the 18th century; John Walker used the spelling ar for the pronunciation of aunt in 1775, and reported caad as pronunciation of card in 1791.



      British colonization of the Americas began in 1607 in Virginia, even though there had been previous attempts in 1586 and 1587. United States of America declared its independence on July 4 1776, when the non-rhotic accent had started to spread on Southern England.






      share|improve this answer


























      • Outscored by a later answer stealing my Wikipedia quote! I'll have to tolerate it, because the initial idea was yours :)

        – F'x
        Apr 2 '11 at 18:31
















      10












      10








      10







      As reported on Wikipedia (Rhotic and non-rhotic accents), English had become non-rhotic by the end of the 18th century; John Walker used the spelling ar for the pronunciation of aunt in 1775, and reported caad as pronunciation of card in 1791.



      British colonization of the Americas began in 1607 in Virginia, even though there had been previous attempts in 1586 and 1587. United States of America declared its independence on July 4 1776, when the non-rhotic accent had started to spread on Southern England.






      share|improve this answer















      As reported on Wikipedia (Rhotic and non-rhotic accents), English had become non-rhotic by the end of the 18th century; John Walker used the spelling ar for the pronunciation of aunt in 1775, and reported caad as pronunciation of card in 1791.



      British colonization of the Americas began in 1607 in Virginia, even though there had been previous attempts in 1586 and 1587. United States of America declared its independence on July 4 1776, when the non-rhotic accent had started to spread on Southern England.







      share|improve this answer














      share|improve this answer



      share|improve this answer








      edited Apr 2 '11 at 18:27









      F'x

      33.5k15125221




      33.5k15125221










      answered Apr 2 '11 at 15:03









      kiamlalunokiamlaluno

      43.5k56181295




      43.5k56181295













      • Outscored by a later answer stealing my Wikipedia quote! I'll have to tolerate it, because the initial idea was yours :)

        – F'x
        Apr 2 '11 at 18:31





















      • Outscored by a later answer stealing my Wikipedia quote! I'll have to tolerate it, because the initial idea was yours :)

        – F'x
        Apr 2 '11 at 18:31



















      Outscored by a later answer stealing my Wikipedia quote! I'll have to tolerate it, because the initial idea was yours :)

      – F'x
      Apr 2 '11 at 18:31







      Outscored by a later answer stealing my Wikipedia quote! I'll have to tolerate it, because the initial idea was yours :)

      – F'x
      Apr 2 '11 at 18:31















      4














      As kiamlaluno noted in his comment, it's a question of when predominant English dialects transitioned from rhotic to non-rhotic. While I don't have any definite (or academic) reference to supply, three comments on this:




      • One can read here: “In 1776, both American accents and British accents were largely rhotic. It was around this time that non-rhotic speech took off in southern England, especially among the upper class. This “prestige” non-rhotic speech was standardized, and has been spreading in Britain ever since.” The author offers as a reference The Cambridge History of the English Language: English in North America. I located the correct passage at page 75 and later.


      • This datation is backed by the following Wikipedia quote: “Loss of coda /r/ apparently became widespread in southern England during the 18th century; John Walker uses the spelling ar to indicate the broad A of aunt in his 1775 dictionary and reports that card is pronounced "caad" in 1791 (Labov, Ash, and Boberg 2006: 47).”


      • Even by 1950, large parts of England still had largely rhotic dialects (see maps here).







      share|improve this answer



















      • 2





        To second F'x's answer, one can note that Australian, New Zealand and South African accents are non rhotic and that their colonisation took place later than that of New England. Furthermore there are little variation in American accent. In his study of the American English Melvyn Bragg has a nice description of American English unity: "American English was also developing its own sound. The first settlers had come from various parts of England, each with its own regional accent. [cont']

        – Alain Pannetier Φ
        Apr 2 '11 at 18:13






      • 1





        [cont'd] But no single accent dominated. As they talked to each other, the variety very quickly became a blend. To this day, there's only a tiny variation in accents across America compared to Britain, and the further west you go, the more true that becomes. By the middle of the 18th century, the absence of regional pronunciations and dialect words was being noted approvingly by upper-class British visitors, who regarded all such variations as vulgar.

        – Alain Pannetier Φ
        Apr 2 '11 at 18:14


















      4














      As kiamlaluno noted in his comment, it's a question of when predominant English dialects transitioned from rhotic to non-rhotic. While I don't have any definite (or academic) reference to supply, three comments on this:




      • One can read here: “In 1776, both American accents and British accents were largely rhotic. It was around this time that non-rhotic speech took off in southern England, especially among the upper class. This “prestige” non-rhotic speech was standardized, and has been spreading in Britain ever since.” The author offers as a reference The Cambridge History of the English Language: English in North America. I located the correct passage at page 75 and later.


      • This datation is backed by the following Wikipedia quote: “Loss of coda /r/ apparently became widespread in southern England during the 18th century; John Walker uses the spelling ar to indicate the broad A of aunt in his 1775 dictionary and reports that card is pronounced "caad" in 1791 (Labov, Ash, and Boberg 2006: 47).”


      • Even by 1950, large parts of England still had largely rhotic dialects (see maps here).







      share|improve this answer



















      • 2





        To second F'x's answer, one can note that Australian, New Zealand and South African accents are non rhotic and that their colonisation took place later than that of New England. Furthermore there are little variation in American accent. In his study of the American English Melvyn Bragg has a nice description of American English unity: "American English was also developing its own sound. The first settlers had come from various parts of England, each with its own regional accent. [cont']

        – Alain Pannetier Φ
        Apr 2 '11 at 18:13






      • 1





        [cont'd] But no single accent dominated. As they talked to each other, the variety very quickly became a blend. To this day, there's only a tiny variation in accents across America compared to Britain, and the further west you go, the more true that becomes. By the middle of the 18th century, the absence of regional pronunciations and dialect words was being noted approvingly by upper-class British visitors, who regarded all such variations as vulgar.

        – Alain Pannetier Φ
        Apr 2 '11 at 18:14
















      4












      4








      4







      As kiamlaluno noted in his comment, it's a question of when predominant English dialects transitioned from rhotic to non-rhotic. While I don't have any definite (or academic) reference to supply, three comments on this:




      • One can read here: “In 1776, both American accents and British accents were largely rhotic. It was around this time that non-rhotic speech took off in southern England, especially among the upper class. This “prestige” non-rhotic speech was standardized, and has been spreading in Britain ever since.” The author offers as a reference The Cambridge History of the English Language: English in North America. I located the correct passage at page 75 and later.


      • This datation is backed by the following Wikipedia quote: “Loss of coda /r/ apparently became widespread in southern England during the 18th century; John Walker uses the spelling ar to indicate the broad A of aunt in his 1775 dictionary and reports that card is pronounced "caad" in 1791 (Labov, Ash, and Boberg 2006: 47).”


      • Even by 1950, large parts of England still had largely rhotic dialects (see maps here).







      share|improve this answer













      As kiamlaluno noted in his comment, it's a question of when predominant English dialects transitioned from rhotic to non-rhotic. While I don't have any definite (or academic) reference to supply, three comments on this:




      • One can read here: “In 1776, both American accents and British accents were largely rhotic. It was around this time that non-rhotic speech took off in southern England, especially among the upper class. This “prestige” non-rhotic speech was standardized, and has been spreading in Britain ever since.” The author offers as a reference The Cambridge History of the English Language: English in North America. I located the correct passage at page 75 and later.


      • This datation is backed by the following Wikipedia quote: “Loss of coda /r/ apparently became widespread in southern England during the 18th century; John Walker uses the spelling ar to indicate the broad A of aunt in his 1775 dictionary and reports that card is pronounced "caad" in 1791 (Labov, Ash, and Boberg 2006: 47).”


      • Even by 1950, large parts of England still had largely rhotic dialects (see maps here).








      share|improve this answer












      share|improve this answer



      share|improve this answer










      answered Apr 2 '11 at 14:31









      F'xF'x

      33.5k15125221




      33.5k15125221








      • 2





        To second F'x's answer, one can note that Australian, New Zealand and South African accents are non rhotic and that their colonisation took place later than that of New England. Furthermore there are little variation in American accent. In his study of the American English Melvyn Bragg has a nice description of American English unity: "American English was also developing its own sound. The first settlers had come from various parts of England, each with its own regional accent. [cont']

        – Alain Pannetier Φ
        Apr 2 '11 at 18:13






      • 1





        [cont'd] But no single accent dominated. As they talked to each other, the variety very quickly became a blend. To this day, there's only a tiny variation in accents across America compared to Britain, and the further west you go, the more true that becomes. By the middle of the 18th century, the absence of regional pronunciations and dialect words was being noted approvingly by upper-class British visitors, who regarded all such variations as vulgar.

        – Alain Pannetier Φ
        Apr 2 '11 at 18:14
















      • 2





        To second F'x's answer, one can note that Australian, New Zealand and South African accents are non rhotic and that their colonisation took place later than that of New England. Furthermore there are little variation in American accent. In his study of the American English Melvyn Bragg has a nice description of American English unity: "American English was also developing its own sound. The first settlers had come from various parts of England, each with its own regional accent. [cont']

        – Alain Pannetier Φ
        Apr 2 '11 at 18:13






      • 1





        [cont'd] But no single accent dominated. As they talked to each other, the variety very quickly became a blend. To this day, there's only a tiny variation in accents across America compared to Britain, and the further west you go, the more true that becomes. By the middle of the 18th century, the absence of regional pronunciations and dialect words was being noted approvingly by upper-class British visitors, who regarded all such variations as vulgar.

        – Alain Pannetier Φ
        Apr 2 '11 at 18:14










      2




      2





      To second F'x's answer, one can note that Australian, New Zealand and South African accents are non rhotic and that their colonisation took place later than that of New England. Furthermore there are little variation in American accent. In his study of the American English Melvyn Bragg has a nice description of American English unity: "American English was also developing its own sound. The first settlers had come from various parts of England, each with its own regional accent. [cont']

      – Alain Pannetier Φ
      Apr 2 '11 at 18:13





      To second F'x's answer, one can note that Australian, New Zealand and South African accents are non rhotic and that their colonisation took place later than that of New England. Furthermore there are little variation in American accent. In his study of the American English Melvyn Bragg has a nice description of American English unity: "American English was also developing its own sound. The first settlers had come from various parts of England, each with its own regional accent. [cont']

      – Alain Pannetier Φ
      Apr 2 '11 at 18:13




      1




      1





      [cont'd] But no single accent dominated. As they talked to each other, the variety very quickly became a blend. To this day, there's only a tiny variation in accents across America compared to Britain, and the further west you go, the more true that becomes. By the middle of the 18th century, the absence of regional pronunciations and dialect words was being noted approvingly by upper-class British visitors, who regarded all such variations as vulgar.

      – Alain Pannetier Φ
      Apr 2 '11 at 18:14







      [cont'd] But no single accent dominated. As they talked to each other, the variety very quickly became a blend. To this day, there's only a tiny variation in accents across America compared to Britain, and the further west you go, the more true that becomes. By the middle of the 18th century, the absence of regional pronunciations and dialect words was being noted approvingly by upper-class British visitors, who regarded all such variations as vulgar.

      – Alain Pannetier Φ
      Apr 2 '11 at 18:14













      2














      Expanding a little on the info above: The perception that American English and British English somehow developed largely independently after North America was colonized is not correct. Non-rhoticity started around London, then gradually spread northward and westward around England, and then spread to North America. In North America it started on the East and Gulf coasts and then spread inward. By the early 20th century American culture was starting to really assert itself and Americans stopped looking to England for what was fashionable. As the Midwestern and Western states became economically more important, the Midwestern (rhotic) accent became established as the "standard" accent, especially with the advent of radio and television. The accent trend began to reverse and rhoticism re-asserted itself eastward in North America.



      But it is important to note that, even today, New York and New England still have large numbers of non-rhotic speakers, as do New Orleans and some other parts of the South. Similarly southwestern England is still heavily rhotic as are Ireland and Scotland.






      share|improve this answer




























        2














        Expanding a little on the info above: The perception that American English and British English somehow developed largely independently after North America was colonized is not correct. Non-rhoticity started around London, then gradually spread northward and westward around England, and then spread to North America. In North America it started on the East and Gulf coasts and then spread inward. By the early 20th century American culture was starting to really assert itself and Americans stopped looking to England for what was fashionable. As the Midwestern and Western states became economically more important, the Midwestern (rhotic) accent became established as the "standard" accent, especially with the advent of radio and television. The accent trend began to reverse and rhoticism re-asserted itself eastward in North America.



        But it is important to note that, even today, New York and New England still have large numbers of non-rhotic speakers, as do New Orleans and some other parts of the South. Similarly southwestern England is still heavily rhotic as are Ireland and Scotland.






        share|improve this answer


























          2












          2








          2







          Expanding a little on the info above: The perception that American English and British English somehow developed largely independently after North America was colonized is not correct. Non-rhoticity started around London, then gradually spread northward and westward around England, and then spread to North America. In North America it started on the East and Gulf coasts and then spread inward. By the early 20th century American culture was starting to really assert itself and Americans stopped looking to England for what was fashionable. As the Midwestern and Western states became economically more important, the Midwestern (rhotic) accent became established as the "standard" accent, especially with the advent of radio and television. The accent trend began to reverse and rhoticism re-asserted itself eastward in North America.



          But it is important to note that, even today, New York and New England still have large numbers of non-rhotic speakers, as do New Orleans and some other parts of the South. Similarly southwestern England is still heavily rhotic as are Ireland and Scotland.






          share|improve this answer













          Expanding a little on the info above: The perception that American English and British English somehow developed largely independently after North America was colonized is not correct. Non-rhoticity started around London, then gradually spread northward and westward around England, and then spread to North America. In North America it started on the East and Gulf coasts and then spread inward. By the early 20th century American culture was starting to really assert itself and Americans stopped looking to England for what was fashionable. As the Midwestern and Western states became economically more important, the Midwestern (rhotic) accent became established as the "standard" accent, especially with the advent of radio and television. The accent trend began to reverse and rhoticism re-asserted itself eastward in North America.



          But it is important to note that, even today, New York and New England still have large numbers of non-rhotic speakers, as do New Orleans and some other parts of the South. Similarly southwestern England is still heavily rhotic as are Ireland and Scotland.







          share|improve this answer












          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer










          answered Jan 25 '16 at 5:23









          user157099user157099

          211




          211























              0














              One reason I heard for Britain becoming non-rhotic that made sense is that in the early 1800s the British royals married with German aristocracy. German was non-rhotic, and the imported royals had a non-rhotic accent (think “Ahnold Swarzeneggah” type accent) So the British upper classes were quick to start copying the new “posh” accent, and it spread from there.





              share








              New contributor




              Marshall is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
              Check out our Code of Conduct.

























                0














                One reason I heard for Britain becoming non-rhotic that made sense is that in the early 1800s the British royals married with German aristocracy. German was non-rhotic, and the imported royals had a non-rhotic accent (think “Ahnold Swarzeneggah” type accent) So the British upper classes were quick to start copying the new “posh” accent, and it spread from there.





                share








                New contributor




                Marshall is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                Check out our Code of Conduct.























                  0












                  0








                  0







                  One reason I heard for Britain becoming non-rhotic that made sense is that in the early 1800s the British royals married with German aristocracy. German was non-rhotic, and the imported royals had a non-rhotic accent (think “Ahnold Swarzeneggah” type accent) So the British upper classes were quick to start copying the new “posh” accent, and it spread from there.





                  share








                  New contributor




                  Marshall is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                  Check out our Code of Conduct.










                  One reason I heard for Britain becoming non-rhotic that made sense is that in the early 1800s the British royals married with German aristocracy. German was non-rhotic, and the imported royals had a non-rhotic accent (think “Ahnold Swarzeneggah” type accent) So the British upper classes were quick to start copying the new “posh” accent, and it spread from there.






                  share








                  New contributor




                  Marshall is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                  Check out our Code of Conduct.








                  share


                  share






                  New contributor




                  Marshall is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                  Check out our Code of Conduct.









                  answered 2 mins ago









                  MarshallMarshall

                  1




                  1




                  New contributor




                  Marshall is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                  Check out our Code of Conduct.





                  New contributor





                  Marshall is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                  Check out our Code of Conduct.






                  Marshall is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                  Check out our Code of Conduct.






























                      draft saved

                      draft discarded




















































                      Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language & Usage Stack Exchange!


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid



                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function () {
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f19063%2fwhy-is-most-north-american-speech-rhotic%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                      }
                      );

                      Post as a guest















                      Required, but never shown





















































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown

































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown







                      Popular posts from this blog

                      Рижское политехническое училище

                      Красноярск

                      Is there a gender-neutral alternative to workmanlike suitable for use in legal context?