This is an archive of past discussions about Mid-Atlantic accent. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Hello - I do not agree that the mid-atlantic accent is always consciously acquired. Before I moved from the American Midwest to England at the age of 29, the letter "t" was soft, more like a "d" sound. I hadn't known that about myself but gradually I amended my speech to make myself better understood. A perfect example would be that sometimes people thought I was saying "kiddies" instead of "kitties." Ten years on, my speech is as neutral as possible, partly by conditioning but mostly that I'm picking things up from the English people around me. To say consciously acquired would be to suggest that I wanted to talk this way.
So, I did read somewhere this is common for people who have lived in at least two different Anglophone countries for a long period of time. As soon as I find it, I'm deleting the phrase from this entry.
The "soft" 't' you are referring to is an unaspirated 't' which can sound like a 'd' to people who are not use to distinguishing an aspirated 't' from an unaspirated 't'. It is also called a "tenuis t" or a "plain t". The confusion between how to spell "Tao" ("Dao" or "Tao") is due to Chinese distinguishing the two 't' sounds as separate, with the word "Tao" happening to be using the unaspirated sound (it is neither a 'd' nor an English 't', but an unaspirated 't').
Aspiration has a longer unvoiced duration (the time between the consonant being pronounced and the beginning of the hum of the vowel that follows it; this very short quiet space has a sound similar to a breathy 'h') than a unaspirated consonant.
Unaspirated 't's are becoming increasingly common in American English. Like you, many English speakers who use a lot of unaspirated 't's in their speech will often consciously aspirate it in an attempt to make their speech clearer. Mid-Atlantic accent does the same by consciously aspirating all 't' sounds. — al-Shimoni (talk) 23:30, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
Just because you live in England and unconsciously changed your speech patterns does not mean you have a mid-Atlantic accent nor does it mean that all mid-Atlantics are not consciously acquired.Griessinthewood (talk) 01:09, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
Are you really trying to claim that no one ever grew up hearing this spoken in their homes and learned it naturally? What if one is a grandparent that already "acquired" it--Does that mean that one's children and grandchildren have to consciously re-acquire it with each generation even if they grew up hearing it every day? That seems a bit absurd. 2606:A000:8948:A100:8DB7:F8B6:2A4B:4A2 (talk) 04:11, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
Merger thoughts regarding Locust Valley lockjaw, Boston Brahmin accent, and American Theater Standard
At (admittedly) quick glance, this page can easily merge with a few other articles that all appear to discuss cultivated (i.e. artificial or learned) accents of American English associated generally with theatre, wealth, and/or higher education in the early 1900s (all now moribund), and all involving a quite similar pronunciation system that blends perceived American and British speech features. I'd like to go through these various pages' references in the next few days and determine whether the sources in fact show any real connections. I'm wondering whether these relatively small (and not super citation-laden) articles could simply be combined, each having sections on a single page. As these articles currently stand, their similarities seem stronger than than their distinctions. Do others share my sentiments? Wolfdog (talk) 02:24, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
Looking through the different articles and their sources, I see that they all claim many of the same speakers (William F. Buckley and Katharine Hepburn, for example, come up again and again) with little distinction made between the accents in terms of actual phonology. They are likely different regional names for a similar upper-class affected standard throughout the Northeast. The most information (though still scant) seems to be on the mid-Atlantic accent, where I will begin merging the other pages soon. Wolfdog (talk) 01:49, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Internationalise?
I hate to slap an 'internationalise' tag on this, but the term, mid or trans Atlantic was just as much used in UK as in the US. The term in the UK, especially of people in broadcasting or entertainment, was used to describe a sometimes seemingly conscious adoption of US sounds, intonation etc., though people with 'a foot in each camp', appeared to come by it more naturally. Just as mid-Atl might have sounded 'classier' to US listeners, the UK form sounded livelier to UK ears than RP.
The article at the moment seems pretty cruel to US users, while I am sure this accent is unlike any US regional accent (and of course unlike any British one), was it not the accent of a conscious social elite, probably absorbed in nursery, private school and club. It is still the case today in the UK that the aristocacry, inc some royals, speak in an accent of their own making, which wouldn't get them a job reading the weather. Just out of interest would Jackie Kennedy have been considered as being a mid-Atl speaker? Pincrete (talk) 20:13, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
@Pincrete: Interesting observations. Do you know of any sources that confirm this UK perspective? Certainly the UK royal accent is more RP than Mid-Atlantic, right? I can't imagine the queen being described as using more conscious US features in her speech than the average English citizen. As for Jackie Kennedy, the article indeed cites a source that describes her accent as mid-Atlantic. Wolfdog (talk) 17:22, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
@Wolfdog:, only source is my own memory! I think the term, and accent is less common now in UK. In the early days of TV into late '60s, popular programmes were often hosted by mid-Atlanticers, some natural, some conscious. Her Majesty certainly isn't mid-Atlantic, the only reason I think I mentioned 'nobility', is that ruling elites sometimes develop their own distinctive speech, in the UK this is a sort of 'swallowed' not very clear English all of their own, (think Charles rather than Liz!). Jackie Kennedy may have been the US-equiv, a style of speech that conveys class origins, rather than regional origins. Pincrete (talk) 18:12, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
Mixing concepts
The article as written seems to be mixing some concepts, or at least not clarifying them. There is an implication that if an American speaks with a non-rhotic accent, then it is a Mid-Atlantic accent. This is, of course, wholly false. Many of the regional accents that developed across the eastern seaboard and nearly the entire south (east of Texas) during the later 19th century were non-rhotic. And despite the regression over the course of the 20th century to rhotic accents, non-rhotic accents persist in many areas, particularly the Northeastern seaboard. But all of these are distinct from the artificially developed Mid-Atlantic accent (though one could argue this artificial accent probably influenced some of the native accents to a degree).
I agree that the differentiation may not be clear enough. This might simply be a matter of better wording. I will try to make some adjustments. Wolfdog (talk) 17:22, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
I took the liberty of correcting "non-rhotic accept" to "non-rhotic accent" when I couldn't find any linguistic "accepts!" Also, (so I might net some karma from taking time to look it up) one has a rhotic accent if they pronounce the /r/ in butter and hard, and non-rhotic if they don't (with some exceptions). See Rhoticity in English for more info. Peacedance (talk) 21:52, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
Requested move 13 September 2016
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: Not moved. Consensus is that there is no problem with the current page, it follows common usage, and a hatnote can lead people to the article on the mid-Atlantic region of America. — Amakuru (talk) 22:06, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
Mid-Atlantic accent → Transatlantic accent – I'm interested in a fuller discussion on this topic. I acknowledge that both names are somewhat common, but "Transatlantic accent" gets 86,300 Google hits, while "Mid-Atlantic accent" gets only 16,800 hits. Even if this were not true, we are advised that when there are multiple common names and "the most common has problems, it is perfectly reasonable to choose one of the others". My major concern is that someone coming upon "Mid-Atlantic accent" could be easily be confused, looking for what Wikipedia fully calls Mid-Atlantic American English. I feel a hatnote alone is not helpful. (The hatnote currently reads "For the mid-Atlantic dialect of American English, see..." which for lay readers and linguists alike hardly clarifies the two ideas. Both are arguably "dialects of American English".)
Within the USA, the term "Mid-Atlantic" generally refers to a section of the country on the Eastern Coast about halfway between the North and South: the Mid-Atlantic states. Both articles, by the way, have strong national ties to the USA, so there is good reason to keep this possibility for misinterpretation in mind. To mean specifically "across the Atlantic Ocean", the term "Transatlantic" is clearer and already prevalent; this is how the word is already used in both proper names and common phrases like Transatlantic Pictures, Transatlantic Records, Transatlantic crossing, Transatlantic flight, Transatlantic relations, etc. etc. Transatlantic accent as a term is now even backed by some of the sources currently on the WP page. Wolfdog (talk) 21:03, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
Oppose. I don't support this move. There are various accent pages for the various accents in the northeast. Mid-atlantic American English has it's own wikipedia page. Mid-Atlantic is a wide used term for this accent. It should stay as is. Jeremykcarter (talk) 21:16, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
Yes, but Transatlantic accent is also a widely used term. What are your specific reasons Mid-Atlantic should trump Transatlantic? Wolfdog (talk) 01:08, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
Oppose. I've always heard it referred to as the Mid-Atlantic accent in the UK. "Transatlantic" means "across the Atlantic" (i.e. American, as far as we Brits are concerned). "Mid-Atlantic" means somewhere in between, which is exactly what it is. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:49, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
I disagree with your last sentence (especially from a U.S. viewpoint), and I think you're only confirming my understanding that "Transatlantic" can mean "sounding somewhat British to American ears" OR "sounding somewhat American to British ears." However, if Mid-Atlantic is the most popular term in the UK (any sources to confirm this?), then I can't argue with that. Wolfdog (talk) 21:55, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
The main problem is probably that the article is trying to deal with two separate accents: American with British overtones (apparently referred to as either Transatlantic or Mid-Atlantic) and British with American overtones (in my experience referred to pretty much exclusively as Mid-Atlantic). -- Necrothesp (talk) 08:00, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
OK, but, reading above, you can see that I believe the hatnote does not effectively deal with ambiguities. I give my reason why that proposed solution is inadequate. Wolfdog (talk) 21:49, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
Weak oppose (somewhat per Necrothesp): The current title does a better job of conveying the notion that the primary topic of the article is not an accent that exists in natural reality. A person can have a bi-continental background and thus exhibit some characteristics of both British and American accents, but that is not what this article is (primarily) about. This article is about the accent of a fictional mid-Atlantic location. As the article says, the topic is an accent that is "not a vernacular American accent native to any location, but an affected set of speech patterns whose 'chief quality was that no Americans actually spoke it unless educated to do so.'" —BarrelProof (talk) 16:35, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
sources for some parts of the article:
A classic Mid-Atlantic accent in film was the "lockjaw" speech pattern affected by Joanna Barnes in her portrayal of anti-Semitic, pretentious, spoiled rich socialite, Gloria Upson in the 1958 film, Auntie Mame. Barnes' entertaining parody earned her a Golden Globe nomination for "New Star of the Year." As a stockbroker's daughter born and raised in a Boston socialite family, as well as educated at Milton Academy and then a Phi Beta Kappa graduate of Smith College. Barnes was naturally familiar with the accent which she assumed for many of her film and television roles.
One of the classic Mid-Atlantic accents on television was the "lockjaw" speech pattern affected by Jim Backus in his portrayal of millionaire Thurston Howell III on the situation comedy Gilligan's Island.
In 1983's film, Trading Places, Dan Aykroyd's character Louis Winthorpe III affected a Mid-Atlantic accent as he said of Eddie Murphy's Billy Ray Valentine, "He was wearing my Harvard tie--can you believe it? My Harvard Tie! Like, oh sure, HE went to Harvard!"
David Tench (played by Drew Forsythe), who was a fictional animated Australian TV host from David Tench Tonight, often used a transatlantic accent. Although, most of the time, he had a cultivated Australian accent which vacillated into the transatlantic accent.
Harry Shearer's vocal portrayal of Mr. Burns, Kelsey Grammer's vocal portrayal of Sideshow Bob, and Dan Castellaneta's vocal portrayal of Sideshow Mel in The Simpsons.
Jon Lovitz spoke in a highly theatrical Mid-Atlantic accent for his character Master Thespian on Saturday Night Live.
Tabitha St. Germain uses a Mid-Atlantic accent for the voice of Rarity in My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic.
For her role as Amelia Earhart, Amy Adams spoke with a Mid-Atlantic accent in Night at the Museum 2 (2009), probably to give the character a confident air but would otherwise seem an odd choice for a portrayal of the famous flier who was a "midwesterner" - born (and spent her first twelve years) in Aitchison, Kansas, next five years in Des Moines, Iowa, and high school in Chicago, Illinois. Film clips of the real "tomboy" Earhart reveal a midwestern accent.
Dodo Bellacourt in the series Another Period speaks with an exaggerated Mid-Atlantic accent.
Asian films dubbed into English in Hong Kong often use Mid-Atlantic accents, most notably the English-dubbed versions of many entries of the Godzilla series, numerous films produced by Shaw Brothers and most of Bruce Lee's filmography. The accent was used in a somewhat utilitarian fashion as the dubbing casts featured English-speaking ex-pats living in Hong Kong from many different countries including Britain, the U.S. and Australia, and the dubs themselves were meant for all English-speaking territories so a neutral accent was preferred.
Evan Peters employs a Mid-Atlantic accent on American Horror Story: Hotel (as James Patrick March, a ghostly serial killer from the 1920s), as does Mare Winningham (as March's accomplice, Miss Evers).
In the 2015 film The Man From U.N.C.L.E., Henry Cavill speaks with a Mid-Atlantic accent for his character Napoleon Solo.
In the 1994 Coen Brothers comedy, The Hudsucker Proxy, Amy Archer, played by Jennifer Jason Leigh, is a brassy Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter for the Manhattan Argus who employs (to comedic effect) a Mid-Atlantic accent."
The sound files used for the "Pronuncation of T" section is not mid-Atlantic. That's just a standard US accent. Why is it being used for that section? Zekkertx (talk) 13:04, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
"Cot" and "cloth" vowel
I will state that I don't know a thing about the trans-Atlantic accent. So, I am confused. Currently, the article says that in this accent, "cot" and "cloth" have the same vowels; i.e. there is no lot–cloth split. However, at the time that trans-Atlantic English was developed, the lot–cloth split was a feature of Received Pronunciation. I can't find a source to support either side. Could anybody verify? Thank you.LakeKayak (talk) 03:50, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
Both Edith Skinner's "Speak with Distinction" and Patricia Fletcher's "Classically Speaking" (considered the Bibles of American theatre speech) have "cloth" with [ɒ]. XSAMPA (talk) 22:12, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
These sources are probably accurate. However, that still leaves the question of why did the "developers," per se, choose to use the lot vowel over of the thought vowel for the cloth set. The vowels used are the ones used in RP at the time the dialect was developed. And at that time, the cloth set typically uses the lot vowel in RP. After doing some research, I am only left to assume that it was a variable feature in RP at the time.LakeKayak (talk) 03:06, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
It's possible that it's for the same reason that they chose [a] instead of [ɑ:] for the "bath" vowel--its sound is halfway between General American and regional British [æ] and RP [ɑ:]. RP has the same vowel in "bath" and father/palm. Using the [ɑ:] vowel for the broad "A" in bath, can't, etc. is extremely salient--it's one of the most noticeable differences that Americans notice when hearing RP. [a] on the other hand goes unremarked--in fact people from Canada and the Western US will sometimes pronounce /æ/ as [a] (Canadian shift and California vowel shift). (Conservative) General American pronounces the cloth/caught vowel /ɔ/ as [ɒ]. Far Western American English uses [ɑ] and [ɒ] interchangeably on bother/father/cot/caught, so the Mid-Atlantic spa [ɑ:], father [ɑ:], cot [ɒ] and cloth [ɒ] are all perfectly within acceptable parameters and would not sound accented. Caught, which uses [ɔː] may or may not be noticed. If "cloth" were pronounced as [ɔː] it might stick out a little bit (but not as much as say a New York [ɔə]. Midwestern Americans that speak a non-cot-caught merged dialect with no Northern cities vowel shift normally pronounce "cot" /kɑt/ as [ˈkɑt], cloth /klɔθ/ as [ˈklɒθ], and caught /kɔt/ as [ˈkɒt], so again only the THOUGHT words would be slightly accented. The developers also chose [oʊ] and explicitly say not to use the British [əʊ]. XSAMPA (talk) 04:44, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
I can explain the use [oʊ] instead of [əʊ]. At the time, the British /oʊ/ was actually pronounced as [oʊ]. The fronted /oʊ/ is a phenomenon that occurred in the 20th century.
Also, to my knowledge, the General American vowel in "caught" is traditionally a higher vowel, closer to [ɔː] than [ɒ]. However, it seems that you and I may come from two different areas of the country which made lead to different areas of the country, which may lead to different understandings of "General American."LakeKayak (talk) 16:48, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
@XSAMPA: If the two vowels were not distinguished from each other, why are they regarded as separate lexical sets? The section "from-rum distinction" reads the following:
In the Mid-Atlantic accent, instead of using the vowel in "strut", the "cloth" vowel is used in was, of, from, one, what, everybody, nobody, somebody, anybody.
Also, "Ah, short o and aw vowels" reads as follows:
Words in the cloth set are followed by the fricatives /f/, /θ/ and /s/.
As lexical set says, "[a] lexical set is a group of words that share a similar feature". What words that belong to the CLOTH set have in common is that in some accents, they belong to the THOUGHT set, but in other accents, they belong to the LOT set. Lexical sets are an invention of John Wells that have little to do with any particular accent, let alone an artificial, non-native one like the Mid-Atlantic accent. Mr KEBAB (talk) 06:04, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
@Mr KEBAB: However, if the two lexical sets are not distinguished in the trans-Atlantic accent, why are we regarding them as separate vowel classes for this page in particular?LakeKayak (talk) 14:44, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
@LakeKayak: Most likely because the LOT-CLOTH split is a feature of at least some speakers of General American; it's also a feature of conservative RP. It's relevant. Mr KEBAB (talk) 16:05, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
@Mr KEBAB: I have no objection to mentioning the absence of the lot-cloth split. However, we could possibly change some instances where "cloth" appears to "cot".
For example, the following could be change:
In the Mid-Atlantic accent, instead of using the vowel in "strut", the "cloth" vowel is used in was, of, from, one, what, everybody, nobody, somebody, anybody.
No, of course not. As you know, CLOTH appears only before voiceless fricatives, sometimes before /ɡ/ and before /n/ in gone. Mr KEBAB (talk) 17:01, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
I deliberately used "cloth" instead of "cot".
In the Western and Northern US, /ɔ/ is realized as:
It's true that some Northeasterners and Southerners realized the CLOTH vowel as something else, but accents close to General American (Western, Canadian, and Northern) have realize /ɔ/ as [ɑ] or [ɒ]. On the other hand the "cot" vowel is realized as:
Advanced Western US and Candian accent: [ɒ] (cot-caught merger combined with the Canadian shift which also affects the Western US and California vowel shift)
Boston accent: [ɒ] or [ɑ]
Modern RP: [ɒ]
If someone from those areas read the article, and saw that the "cloth" vowel is used for "cot" ['kʰɒt], cloth ['kʰlɒθ], watch ['wɒt͡ʃ], was ['wɒz], and ['noʊbɒdɪ] most would be thinking of the correct vowel: [ɒ]. But a Midwesterner seeing that the "cot" vowel is used for "watch" would mispronounce it in their head as ['wɑt͡ʃ], or even worse as ['wat͡ʃ]. A Westerner or Canadian would of course be indifferent to "cot", "cloth" because both are pronounced sometimes as [ɑ] and sometimes as [ɒ] ("watch" especially would be more often than not pronounced with [ɒ] by a Westerner.)
So in my opinion, it's much better to use the CLOTH example rather than the COT example. And it's just as correct, since in Mid-Atlantic
[ɒ] is used in cot/cloth/watch/was/nobody
[ɑ:] in father and palm
and [a] in dance and ask.
It's true that in some American accents, the "cloth" vowel is pronounced differently such as Southern and NYC but those accents are very far away from General American. Also note that phonemically the CLOTH/CAUGHT vowel is transcribed as /ɔ(:)/ for American English, but phonetically it is not pronounced like that. The old article (see https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mid-Atlantic_accent&oldid=748202470 ) was clearer in my opinion, but people complained that it was being compared to too many other accents, so I had to removed those sections. It was as follows:
Bother-father distinction
Like Received Pronunciation and the Boston accent, Mid-Atlantic English distinguishes the vowels in the words bother and father.
Mid-Atlantic distinguishes the vowels in "cot" and "caught", and merges the "cloth" set with "cot", rather than "caught"[1]. This is the same as in contemporary RP[2]. Most American dialects that distinguish the vowels in cot and caught, on the other hand use the "caught" vowel for the "cloth" set. Approximately half of all Americans can neither produce nor perceive a distinction between these vowels[3].
1 GA here refers to conservative General American speakers who do not have the cot-caught merger or any chain vowel shifts.2[ɔː] is only used by speakers of conservative varieties of Received Pronunciation such as Queen Elizabeth. Most modern day RP speakers use [ɒ].contribs) 02:29, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
Are you sure? I'm pretty sure that Longman Pronunciation Dictionary prescribes /ɔː/ alongside /ɑː/ for the CLOTH words in General American. I don't have it with me at the moment, so I can't check myself... Mr KEBAB (talk) 02:40, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
Note the LOT/PALM as well as the THOUGHT vowel in CLOTH words are considered General American pronunciations by the LPD, not just regionalisms. At least as far as I can remember, as I said I don't have access to the LPD right now, maybe you can check that.
When it comes to my personal opinion, I don't have one. The variety of General American I'm being taught to speak by my teacher has the cot-caught merger, and I can't always hear the distinction in General American. Compare that with RP/Estuary/Australian/New Zealand English, in which the difference is extremely audible (open(-mid), relatively short, weakly rounded vs. (close-)mid, relatively long, strongly rounded). Mr KEBAB (talk) 03:22, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
What I meant was, that whereas the vowel is transcribed as /ɔː/ (notice the / / notation) phonemically, the phonetic realization for the American vowel in the Western and Northern US is not [ɔː] in America. [ɔː] would sound like the British pronunciation of CAUGHT, which is not how it is pronounced in America. In America, the phoneme /ɔː/ is pronounced phonetically (notice the [ ] notation), as [ɒ] or [ɑ]. An exception would be for NYC and the South and a few other areas which do not have a dialect close to General American. However, when transcribing it phonemically, it would be transcribed as /ɔː/ (and dictionaries use phonemic transcription.) If a Midwesterner with the Northern cities vowel shift reads that "watch" is pronounced with the "COT" vowel, they will think to themselves [a]. If they see "CLOTH", they will think [ɒ] (or [ɑ] if they have either the Northern cities vowel shift or the cot-caught merger. Even this is preferable to [a]. [ɑ] is much closer to [ɒ] than [a] is.) XSAMPA (talk) 03:45, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
Maybe we're misunderstanding each other. Wells's CLOTH set (see lexical set) consists of words that are pronounced with /ɒ/ by many speakers and /ɔː/ by some other speakers. That's what I'm talking about. For instance, the word 'cloth' itself is pronounced /klɔːθ/ (with the THOUGHT vowel) by speakers with the LOT-CLOTH split and /klɒθ/ (with the LOT vowel) by speakers without the split. And, according to the Longman Pronunciation Dictionary (written also by Wells), the /ɔː/ variant in CLOTH words (such as cloth, off, etc.), is a part of General American.
By the way, the contemporary standard British pronunciation of /ɔː/ is not at all [ɔː] but [ɔ̹˔ː] or even [oː] (a vowel that is more rounded and higher than the cardinal [ɔ]), and that has been the case for many decades. Mr KEBAB (talk) 04:31, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
@XSAMPA: I can't hear the difference between the two audio files except for vowel length. Also, to my knowledge, the term "General American" is vague. Speakers of "General American" can still vary in phonological features. Also, I don't really know of [ɒ] is used in General American as the vowel in "cloth." For one, [ɒ] is not a stable vowel. In RP, /ɒ/ can be pronounced as high as [ɔ̝ː].LakeKayak (talk) 13:50, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
@XSAMPA: As an American myself, I use the pronunciation [ɔ] for "thought" all the time. What part of the country are you from? I am a little curious.LakeKayak (talk) 13:53, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
@LakeKayak: "In RP, /ɒ/ can be pronounced as high as [ɔ̝ː]" - no, it can't. The RP /ɒ/ is [ɒ~ɑ] for older speakers and [ɔ] for younger speakers. It's the RP /ɔː/ that is rarely more open and less rounded than [ɔ̝ː]. Mr KEBAB (talk) 15:01, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
Where should information about the "Classical American accent" (Fletcher) or "Western Standard" (Skinner) be put? Lots of the examples of a "Mid-Atlantic" accent are actually the Classical American accent, such as Fraiser or "The Guiding Light". The "Classical American accent" is a rhotic or partially rhotic variety and sounds more American than the Mid-Atlantic/Eastern standard accent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by XSAMPA (talk • contribs) 23:17, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
I don't think either term should be used. It only complicates the article for laymen. It would be easier to identify them as different varieties of the same accent.LakeKayak (talk) 17:29, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
Why are there all these sections?
Why does this page, but virtually no other dialect page, have section after section of phonological explanation? Why does every split or merger merit its own section? Can't this all be compiled neatly under a single "Phonology" section? I'm also wondering why so much careful attention has been given to phonology (which is great, of course), and yet still no one can add a single citation here that shows the British perspective on the term "Mid-Atlantic accent", though Britons ensure me that the phrase is used in their own country to mean a British accent with American features. Wolfdog (talk) 12:56, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
@Wolfdog: I have replaced some of the sections with bullet points. Unfortunately, I was only able to do the vowel changes before r. It will take some time for the other sections to be replaced.LakeKayak (talk) 14:15, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
I have decided to remove the section for the following reasons:
This vowel has no variation in American or British English that I am aware of.
This would exclude vowel differences before /l/, which is mentioned in the section "Distinctions before l" anyway.
The section may have been instated to mention the protruded rounding of the vowel, as opposed to compressed rounding. However, it seems that back vowels rarely encounter compressed rounding.
I feel that this page seems to be too much of a guide on how to speak the Transatlantic accent, and that therefore the page may be losing its neutral point of view. In order to mimic the structure used on the other dialect pages, in essence, I am going have to redo the entire "Phonology section".LakeKayak (talk) 01:27, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
Requested move 21 February 2017
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: Not Moved per Commonname. Three RMs in slightly over a year suggests that this one should be left alone unless overwhelming evidence to the contrary surfaces. Mike Cline (talk) 13:08, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
Support move, but this has been proposed before without success. I don't think enough has changed since the last RM, but if you want to propose this, then by all means do so. ONR (talk) 12:01, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
Comment. Surely Transatlantic is more ambiguous than Mid-Atlantic? Transatlantic means "concerning countries on both sides of the Atlantic" or "relating to or situated on the other side of the Atlantic" whereas the Mid-Atlantic states is a defined area (as I write this I was expecting Mid-Atlantic states to be WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for Mid-Atlantic. The phrase Mid-Atlantic pertains more to the US than Transatlantic). Zarcadia (talk) 18:51, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
Comment. @Zarcadia: This page is about a blend of American and British English, hence the ambiguity where Mid-Atlantic can mean two things: this accent and Mid-Atlantic American English. This accent does relate to both sides of the Atlantic, by blending the features of American and British English. Therefore, the accent does fit the definition of the word transatlantic which you have provided.LakeKayak (talk) 20:38, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
*Oppose, Mid-Atlantic is more wildly used than Transatlantic. Just researching and searching articles you will see that as well. Reb1981 (talk) 01:51, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
Counterpoint. @Reb1981: While Mid-Atlantic is more widely used, it can be two different things: the Transatlantic accent and Mid-Atlantic American English. Labov et al. refer to the latter simply as Mid-Atlantic. The suggested move is solely to avoid ambiguity.
Weak Support, On futher review and consideration. I still go by what I have said before, however to help with ambiguity. I will go along with this, but Mid-Atlantic is still wildly used as opposed to the later. Reb1981 (talk) 22:02, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
Weak support. On one hand, "Mid-Atlantic" is what I'm used to hearing (but this is not really my area, and I also live on that side of the pond where the Mid-Atlantic dialect is less prominent a topic), and it is a term that receives more hits on google scholar (3x) and google books (1.5x). On the other hand, "Transatlantic accent" seems to be more common on the web (see previous RM), and it nicely avoids the ambiguity, which, given the start of this discussion, apparently could not be handled with hatnotes to a sufficient standard of clarity. – Uanfala (talk)00:34, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
Support. Unsurprisingly (see my past nomination), I still support this move. (1) "Transatlantic accent" is much more prevalent on Google than "Mid-Atlantic accent". (2) "Mid-Atlantic accent" can refer to either this page OR Mid-Atlantic American English (the regional accent of Philadelphia, Balitmore, etc.), making it unclear: i.e, ambiguous. The term "Transatlantic", on the other hand, does NOT allow for such ambiguity. Based it on its name, a "Transatlantic accent" could never be mistaken for a regional Philly accent. Therefore, the name "Transatlantic accent" is prevalent and unambiguous. Wolfdog (talk) 21:41, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
Oppose Mid-atlantic is the more used term for this accent. Many of the sources also use 'mid-atlantic.' Even many dialect coaches call the accent mid-atlantic. Also, look above. This was decided as and oppose just a few months ago. And even a year before that it was opposed. Why does this need to be asked 2-3 times a year? Kevinfromtx (talk) 22:03, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
Counterpoint. @Kevinfromtx: Also, I asked before moving the page because I thought there would be some controversy. Also, regardless of which one is used more, the name "Mid-Atlantic" is still ambiguous, meaning potentially two things: the Transatlantic accent and Mid-Atlantic American English. The sole purpose of the move to avoid ambiguity. And on top of that, as "Transatlantic accent" is not an original name, it wouldn't be unsafe to use it for the page.LakeKayak (talk) 02:21, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
I agree with LakeKayak here. What is your proof that Mid-Atlantic is the more used term? I'm arguing it is not through a simple Google search. Also, as LakeKayak and I continue to try to argue, there is still a second reason to move the page: Mid-Atlantic is ambiguous; Transatlantic is not. So far, no one has been able to refute this. Wolfdog (talk) 02:36, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
@Wolfdog: I am not arguing whether or not "Transatlantic" is used more. I am saying that is a commonly used synonym. For my argument, if "Transatlantic" were a name that we coined, I could see why it would be safe not to use it. I don't want to mislead anybody here.LakeKayak (talk) 21:37, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
Having the same proposal threetimes on the same talk page makes my life easier because I copy and paste my vote here: Oppose. Most of the article's sources use "Mid-Atlantic". The hatnote should deal with any ambiguities. I will notify previous participants as well. — AjaxSmack02:36, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
The ambiguity issue continues to be problematic and not clearly solved by a simple hatnote. That's the point here. In previous discussion, editors tend to state their opposition and then walk away from the conversation permanently. We are trying to have a conversation here. The term "Mid-Atlantic accent" has two well-established meanings; we are presenting a more effective way to disambiguate the term by using a more or less (I'd argue more) common synonym. What is the opposing side's better solution? Wolfdog (talk) 17:42, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
No, the term "Mid-Atlantic accent" has one well-established meaning. "Mid-Atlantic American English" is a creation of the Atlas of North American English and the article's only source is that work. The Mid-Atlantic accent article, on the other hand, presents a well-known topic with numerous citations, the overwhelming majority of which use the term "Mid-Atlantic". Comparing the relative weight of the two topics, there is no problem with the current situation with a hatnote header. — AjaxSmack23:09, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
@AjaxSmack: The section in the Atlas of North American English where Mid-Atlantic American English is discussed is entitled "The Mid-Atlantic states". This name comes from that the "Mid-Atlantic States" is the name of the region where this accent/dialect is spoken. Therefore, naturally to call this accent a "Mid-Atlantic accent" makes the most sense because it is native to the "Mid-Atlantic states". It should not be regarded as an original name used by Labov, Ash, and Boberg.LakeKayak (talk) 23:19, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
Firstly, Labov et al. (p. 236) refer to a "Mid-Atlantic dialect region", not a "Mid-Atlantic accent". Saying that "naturally to call this accent a 'Mid-Atlantic accent' makes the most sense" is original research as it does not derive from the article's single source. Secondly, "Mid-Atlantic dialect" almost always refers to the blend of American and British English Pronunciation as seen in these Google Books results. Ditto for "Mid-Atlantic accent". In short, both of these terms refer almost exclusively to one thing. — AjaxSmack20:09, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
@AjaxSmack: I see no reason for you to shout. This is uncivil. Labov et al. refer to the section as "Mid-Atlantic". They don't use the term "accent", "dialect region", or anything. I can't see how it is originally research to call Mid-Atlantic American English, a Mid-Atlantic accent. The accent of New York City is a New York accent. The accent of Boston is a Boston accent. The accent of the South is a Southern accent. So, therefore, by this convention, the accent of the Mid-Atlantic States would be a Mid-Atlantic accent.
Shifting matters entirely, where are you from? This may be the result of our difference in opinions. I myself am from New Jersey.LakeKayak (talk) 20:25, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
Comment. @Derickchetter: The idea is to keep a neutral ground. In America, the term "Mid-Atlantic accent" is sometimes used for Mid-Atlantic American English. Therefore, the name "Mid-Atlantic accent" is ambiguous. The requested move is only for the sake of clearing up the ambiguity, which in Uanfala's words "could not be handled with hatnotes to a sufficient standard of clarity".LakeKayak (talk) 16:11, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
Oppose. The above discussion demonstrates that the current name is the WP:COMMONNAME in reliable sources. It is also the only name used on the UK side of the pond - "transatlantic accent" is not used here. So per WP:RETAIN we shouldn't change it anyway. Hatnotes can clarify any confusion that may exist with Mid-Atlantic American English, over which this is a primary topic. — Amakuru (talk) 15:41, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
Side-note: @Derickchetter and Amakuru:: As an unrelated side-note, are there any sources you can find which show the British perspective on this accent? This would be very helpful for the article overall (regardless of the name we go with). I've been looking for British-based articles on this topic for a while now. Thanks. Wolfdog (talk) 18:16, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Capitalization of transatlantic
According to every dictionary the term transatlantic is an adjective and not a proper noun even when included with accent, as LakeKayak has stated. Just as prior example that I included on a revert. Webster states, crossing or extending across the Atlantic Ocean, example: a transatlantic cable. You can not use example as Mother Jones, which is a name and title of a person. Refer to https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/transatlantic. Reb1981 (talk) 21:41, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
"Mother Jones" is one of the sources on the page. The article uses the term "Transatlantic accent", capitalizing the initial t. My argument is not that "transatlantic" is a proper noun. My argument is that "Transatlantic accent" is a proper noun.
If I follow your logical, then I would capitalize the initial "s" in "Southern American English" or Southern accent, either.LakeKayak (talk) 22:16, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
I am sorry, but just because another webpage uses it that way does not mean it is proper English. That would mean that we would have to capitalize transatlantic cable. That is per every dictionary I have looked up. How do you say if you follow my logic that you would captalize that too? In any case if you pull up it's same case I'm trying to explain southern accent does not need to be capitalized. Just as transatlantic accent. Reb1981 (talk) 22:58, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
You have no evidence to say that accent names are not capitalized. In the vernacular, I think they may be used to interchangeably. Also, starting a sentence "I am sorry" is a little fresh.LakeKayak (talk) 21:17, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
Seems pretty simple to me: "Transatlantic" in this case is clearly a proper noun. Proper nouns are capitalized. Sources agree with this. Why argue over it? It's not like the Republic falls over capital T's. Eggishorn(talk)(contrib)21:58, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
@Eggishorn: We resolved the issue. The agreement was that both "Mid-Atlantic" and "Transatlantic" be capitalized consistently. Also, try to avoid saying that something "is clearly" something. It can be taken the wrong way too easily.LakeKayak (talk) 22:03, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
@XSAMPA: Just so that we're on the same page, it seems that /juː/ is not recognized on the RP page (or any other dialect) as a separate phoneme. As RP, in particular, has a strong resistant to yod-dropping, if /juː/ were to be recognized as a separate phoneme on any dialect page, it would be RP. Therefore, it seems that the sound is realized as /j/ followed by /uː/. With this in mind, I don't think that /juː/ should be instated as a diphthong of the Transatlantic accent.LakeKayak (talk) 02:07, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
RE: phonemes are not enclosed in brackets
@Mr KEBAB: I only used the word "phoneme" because the word "phoneme" was used on other dialect pages like New York English and General American. I only request for consistency from page to page. If the word in "phoneme" should not be used here, then we probably should change the word "phoneme" on the other pages. Either way, it's your call.LakeKayak (talk) 20:59, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
Does anyone know, beyond original research, the reason for the decline of the Mid-Atlantic accent? Scholars seem to agree that it declined sharply after WWII, but do they also have any strong theories about why? I can think of many sensible theories off the top of my head for this postwar change (aversion to British sounds, embracing of more "middle-America" patriotism, resistance to upper-class norms, etc.), but does anyone know what the scholarly research actually has to say? Wolfdog (talk) 13:36, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
Just my opinion but I rather doubt you will find a scholarly investigation of the decline as the reasons seem fairly obvious and it was really just an isolated fad. You can view its dying out as part of the larger trend that caused non-rhotic speech to mostly die out in America. --MC 141.131.2.3 (talk) 16:47, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
What is the evidence that it was "just a fad"? Are you sure the mid-Atlantic accent wasn't in use for some decades of the 1800s? And what exactly is the source of "the larger trend that caused non-rhotic speech to die out in America"? I'd still like to know why this seemed to occur so abruptly right around the end of WWII. Wolfdog (talk) 22:35, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
Reverts
I recently made a couple of edits which Wolfdog asked to be discussed. The first was removing some plagiarism, changing
... but an affected set of speech patterns whose "chief quality was that no Americans actually spoke it unless educated to do so".
to
... but rather an affected set of speech patterns that are learned in order to appear cultured.
Obviously the quote cannot be included without explicit attribution. In this case I see no reason to include a quote at all, hence my edit. Wolfdog did not explain a reason for re-introducing the plagiarism (so I have removed that part again since it is a serious violation).
The other edit was changing the lead sentence from
The Mid-Atlantic accent, or Transatlantic accent, is a style of speech, once popular among educated classes in parts of the United States, that is intended to blend together the standard speech of both American English and British Received Pronunciation.
The original version using a phrase like "consciously acquired" seems a tad confusing for a lead sentence. This phrasing is fine for later in the article but for somebody unfamiliar with the topic reading the article for the first time one would probably have to read that a few times to understand what was meant. Additionally, the lead did not provide any insight as to who used this accent which made it a somewhat incomplete lead sentence. Wolfdog seems to dislike my choice of the word style. I am OK with choosing another word but I am unclear as to why that required reverting the whole thing.
@141.131.2.3: Hello. Since you are considering the presence of a citation but absence of in-text attribution a "serious violation" (I admittedly didn't read up on Wikipedia quoting policy before this talk), we certainly can do so. Honestly, however, I thought the quoted phrase itself was perfect as it stood: concise, straightforward, and "catchy" (which is why I verbatim quoted it to begin with). Next, I think "consciously acquired accent" is much more exact than "style of speech," which can vaguely seem to mean anything ranging from intonation to natural accent to vocal register to something else entirely. The page Style (sociolinguistics) defines "style" as "a set of linguistic variants with specific social meanings", so if the vagueness of the term can be avoided with a more precise term, this is preferable. As for your lead-sentence addition of "once popular among educated classes in parts of the United States," this does not need to be jam-packed into the first sentence, because all that information (with further detail and clarification) appears already in the larger lead section anyway, which presents the fuller reality that the "educated classes" are only one group that has typically used the accent. Wolfdog (talk) 22:24, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
Can't agree that this accent is always consciously acquired. If a child's parents and peers spoke this way, of course the child would do the same unconsciously. Are we really to believe that everyone had to consciously learn the accent with each succeeding generation even if their grandparents and parents had already done so, and they had been hearing it spoken in their own home from earliest infancy? 2606:A000:8948:A100:8DB7:F8B6:2A4B:4A2 (talk) 04:07, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
Affectation
The article hints at but does not clearly expound the difference between these patterns of speech as affected and as natural. Is there any chance that perhaps we could have a special section about its conscious acquisition, and then one about its natural occurrence? Many thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iohannes Grammaticus (talk • contribs) 10:20, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
Don't think there's anything natural about it. It's completely affected or, at best, learned at a very young age. Wolfdog (talk) 18:18, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
Obviously one can unconsciously inherit an "affected" accent from one's family and peers. The fact that its origin is artificial does not preclude this accent's being "naturally" passed down to succeeding generations. 2606:A000:8948:A100:8DB7:F8B6:2A4B:4A2 (talk) 04:00, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Mid-Atlantic accent. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
This note has to do with two aspects of the claim that Grover Cleveland is from Central New York.
First, Grover Cleveland moved to Central New York at about 13 years of age. He was born in Caldwell, New Jersey (about 15 miles due west of Manhattan). The age is significant because accents are often set by the age of 13. They can and do change but typically not. Therefore, unless the editor had something in mind wrt talking about Central NY, it would probably make sense to say that he was from Caldwell, New Jersey.
Second, Caldwell, New Jersey may have played a significant role with his accent. I don't know of historical data but during the 20th century residents of New Jersey's Ramapo Ridge (which includes Caldwell) had an accent that could read as mid-Atlantic. For example, this region pronounces words like Florida with an "ah" sound before the "r" (flahridda). In addition, this region pronounces words like cot and caught differently. Mary, merry, and marry are also distinct. Many US speakers of English collapse the pronunciation of these sets of words and others like them. I would imagine that Grover Cleveland could easily have spoken with a similar accent.
It may be worth pointing out that some recent work (Coye's Dialect Boundaries in New Jersey, American Speech, 2009) suggests that younger people in this region may be collapsing pronunciation like the rest of the country. However, the sample size was small and arranged by county boundaries rather than established dialect boundaries. This same article does cover some of the dialect variants in pronunciation.
I'll add one more thing. There are at least two meanings for "Mid-Atlantic accent". There is that notion of an accent somewhere between the received pronunciations in the US and the UK but there is also the notion of a set of accents found in the mid-Atlantic region of the US.
Hi. I think all your comments are already duly noted except the Caldwell, New Jersey comment; you're right that that should be changed assuming you're correct. But actually the WP article on Cleveland contradicts this: "In 1841, the Cleveland family moved to Fayetteville, New York, where Grover spent much of his childhood." This article is specifically about the Transatlantic accent, not the Mid-Atlantic States regional accent. A quick listen to Cleveland's voice to me reveals happY-laxing, flapped R, and a curl-coil distinction. Yet I would expect a true Caldwell speaker from this era not to have these features, which are instead more in line with the affected Transatlantic accent. So we're dealing here with the affected accent, not the regional accent. Wolfdog (talk) 16:27, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
References
^Dialect Boundaries in New Jersey. Dale F. Coye, American Speech (2009) 84 (4): 414-452.
In contrast to this article's (American) definition, in British usage it is not necessarily, though may be, consciously acquired and may blend any of the two forms of accent, standard or otherwise. In fact, the usage of RP in the blend would seem pretty unlikely, outside of Sloaney types. Again, as above, the term tends to be used of singing accents adopted by British musicians or of the accents acquired by Brits living in or spending substantial time in America, thus a blend of their own accent with an American one or an outright attempt at impersonation of the latter.
Per the example sentences at the Oxford dictionary above, the term is often prefixed to "twang"; not something that would seem descriptive of the examples given in the article.
I'd suggest that the initial paragraph note that what is currently there is the American definition, note the simpler British definition, per the refs, and in regard to the latter, we can probably only leave it at that as there is little else to say. Mutt Lunker (talk) 20:43, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
@Mutt Lunker: Hi! I love the bit of informal research you've done. I basically agree with your conclusion that we keep this about the more fully fleshed-out American perspective. However, I do think we can use a source or two you found to at least give the British side a quick one- or two-sentence mention in the lead section. Doesn't seem like that could hurt. Wolfdog (talk) 11:42, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
Sorry if there was some confusion but that is basically what I am suggesting. Along the lines of, appended to the initial paragraph:
"In American English the Mid-Atlantic accent, or Transatlantic accent is..."
with a following paragraph:
"In British English the term simply refers to any accent or dialect which features a mixture of American and British words or sounds,[1][2][3][4] not necessarily of the standard varieties or consciously acquired." Mutt Lunker (talk) 12:40, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
You may want to end the sentence before the "not necessarily of the..." section and just start a new sentence there. That seems a little confusing as one long sentence. Wolfdog (talk) 15:28, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
I don't understand how you came to the conclusion that the difference was in the varieties of English and not the usage. Your addition strikes me as WP:SYNTH (if not simply WP:OR) to me, because those dictionary definitions of "mid-Atlantic" can still describe the Mid-Atlantic accent as defined in the article, at least in terms of its intended effect, and don't talk at all about it being (or not being) acquired or consciously acquired. US-oriented dictionaries give similar definitions too: [10][11]. In other words, as far as I can tell, "mid-Atlantic accent" could refer to any accent that is "mid-Atlantic" (i.e. a mixture of British and American) in both British and American English, but the article talks about a specific kind of mid-Atlantic accent, with a capital M. (If calling it "Mid-Atlantic accent" is entirely an American thing, then what is it called in British English? It seems to me it's just that the Mid-Atlantic accent is discussed less often in the UK simply because it's encountered less often.) Of course the article may discuss other English accents that have characteristics of both British and American English, regardless of where it's spoken or whether it is acquired or not, as long as there are reliable sources that discuss them, but I just don't see how the dictionaries you cited support the sentence you added. Nardog (talk) 01:59, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
In that case, if the term is also widely employed in a broader, generic usage in America, as it is in Britain, this should be clarified at the start of the article. Then, it can be related that in America the term is also applied to an accent with these narrower and much more specific characteristics, with the current content following on.
As far as I'm aware, this narrower definition is all but unknown in Britain so it is not called anything in British English. Generic mid-Atlantic speech is however widely referred to in Britain though, so from a WP:WORLDVIEW perspective, should be reflected in the article. As I was when I first encountered it, without this clarification at the outset, British users will be confused at the narrower specific designation laid out herein. Mutt Lunker (talk) 13:43, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
In that case I'd suggest:
"A Mid-Atlantic accent is one which features a mixture of American and British words or sounds.[2][3][4][5][6] In North America, this term, or Transatlantic accent,[7][8][9] is applied to a consciously..." or "may be applied to" if that is considered more accurate. Mutt Lunker (talk) 18:51, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
@Mutt Lunker: If you're saying the above should be the first two sentences, I disagree with that. The entire page is already about the American perspective, so I like where the British perspective sentence is already located. Wolfdog (talk) 23:32, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
Can you clarify which sentence you are referring to as the British perspective sentence please? Since I self-reverted on Monday, pending any further discussion here, there isn't anything about the British perspective any more, is there? Mutt Lunker (talk) 08:08, 4 October 2018 (UTC) Mutt Lunker (talk) 08:08, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
@Nardog: seemed above to be maintaining that this general usage is universal and that it shouldn't just be stated as being the British perspective. Can you clarify please Nardog? Also, I'd like it to be clarified that the definition outlined in the first paragraph is a more specific and American usage, or the American usage, whichever is correct. Mutt Lunker (talk) 11:21, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
Right, but why can't the Americanness be stated later on? After all, the scope this article covers is really an American phenomenon. The British perspective here will just be a side-comment. Can't that suffice? (Perhaps you'd prefer a clarifying hatnote of some kind?) Stating in the lead sentence what this article is not about doesn't really follow WP norms, though I understand you desire to be clear for confused British readers. And the way I worded it in the article does show the universality but simply emphasizes that it is especially common in British English. Wolfdog (talk) 14:06, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
Not sure why you think I don't want the Americanness to be stated but thatt's probably academic as I realise I hadn't clocked a couple of significant aspects to how you'd rephrased my original statement. I reckon your edit covers matters now. To note, the refs appear to be displaying incorrectly. Can't address that right now but will look later if I have time... Mutt Lunker (talk) 14:28, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
All looks good now, though I'm a bit concerned we've stripped the British perspective from the article entirely. Do we not want, in that new sentence, to say anything like "particularing in British English" or "as most commonly used in the UK"? Wolfdog (talk) 20:25, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
