Jump to content

Talk:Pittsburgh English/Overhaul 2006

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

!!NOTICE: PAGE OVERHAUL IN EXACTLY ONE WEEK!!

Overview of Below “Analysis” and “Revision”

Hello, in concert with a good number of contributors to this page, I am concerned with the lack of citation, especially since there happens to be a small but nevertheless consequential body of research on Pittsburgh English, or Pittsburgh speech. This is in contrast to, for example, a topic such as the Pittsburgh Pierogie Races, for which there are no published scholarly sources. No doubt, most of us want there to be a Wiki explanation of the races for the curious or uninitiated, even if scholars have not written about it. However, a good number of scholars (around 30) have taken care in documenting and understanding features of Pittsburgh English.

Not citing these sources leads to a number of problems, the largest of which is that, quite plainly, such contributions go directly against the grain of Wiki editing spirit and policy. In the below “Analysis of Pittsburgh English Entry” revision, I use thirty-six published scholarly sources (see "References" at bottom) to determine whether every claim in the introductory explanation, as well as each and every feature, is accurate and documented. (Please note that I highlighted problematic claims by using the "internal link" function. These highlighted strips of text do not link to anything, but instead, they are simply highlighted to show what the subsequent comment is referring to. Also note that the page I critique is not the most current, as I downloaded it about a month ago. If I comment on something already deleted, I've at the least document that it should've been deleted.)

The Wiki guidelines for citing sources suggest at least two ways to deal with lack of citation. The first is to find a source that verifies a given claim and provide that citation along with the claim. The second is to omit items for which there is no citation. In the below “Revision of Pittsburgh English Entry,” I use both of these solutions. If a claim is accurate or a feature documented, I provide the citations. If a claim needs modified in order to be accurate, I modify it and provide the citations. If a claim is simply undocumented, I strike it from the entry. If a feature has not yet been documented, I strike it from the entry. One week from now, I plan to submit this revision over the existing one. If you don’t want me to change something, please read over my Analysis and Proposed Revision carefully, and point out by that time the error I made or the sources I’ve overlooked.

Importantly, in any given case, I do not at all mean to suggest that terms or features I’ve deleted are not heard in Pittsburgh or surrounding areas. Take for example the term buggy, which a contributor claims is used to refer to a "shopping cart." As a resident of Pittsburgh, I’ve heard it used and sometimes use it myself to refer to a shopping cart. However, in the body of published scholarly research I draw upon, such a use has never been documented. Unless I am in error, and someone can point out to me the research that does document it, this particular contribution should be omitted. For the item buggy, however, I did find a source that documents that it is used to refer to a "baby carriage" (Kurath 1949, p. 36) and that this use is restricted to areas within southwestern PA. So, this contribution could be changed to conform with the published scholarly source. It is worth noting that all we can do is simply speculate on the plausible relation between the documented form (i.e., "baby carriage") and the undocumented one (i.e., "shopping cart"), and so the latter should not be included. Another example illustrates other things we gain from citing sources: increased knowledge of the feature, including its precise geographical distribution and sometimes even its origins. A good number of scholars have documented the second-person plural form yinz/youns/you’uns as occurring in southwestern PA (although it is not unique to this area) (Crozier 1984; McElhinny 1999; Johnstone, Bhasin and Wittkofski 2002; Wisnosky 2003; Johnstone and Baumgardt 2004; Johnstone, Andrus, and Danielson 2006). In addition, Crozier (1984) and Montgomery (2001) document that this feature, along with the ya’ll of the South and the yous of New Jersey, is of Scots-Irish origin.

Thank you so much for putting this much effort into the article. Incidentally, I love that you use Pittsburgh English in your analysis section ("Needs cited."). I don't think anyone will oppose your ideas, except for maybe the deletion, but I will back you up on that. --Chris Griswold 22:09, 10 August 2006 (UTC)


Analysis of “Pittsburgh English” Entry

Pittsburgh is the linguistic center of a dialect region within Midland American English covering most of western Pennsylvania as well as parts of northern West Virginia, eastern Ohio, and a small area of western Maryland.

Comment Is this supposed to convey the idea that Pittsburgh is at the center of the southwestern (or just western) PA dialect region, which reaches north to Erie, PA, west to Youngstown, OH, south to Clarksburg, WV, and east to Harrisburg, PA (Labov, Ash and Boberg 2005)? And is it to mean that the southwestern PA dialect helps form the Midland dialect, which ranges from all but the westernmost portion of Nebraska, runs up into South Dakota, and down into the northern half of Oklahoma, and from there, extends in a funneling fashion due east, covering the southern portion of Iowa, most of Missouri, all but the northeast tip of Illinois, all but the northernmost portion of Ohio, Pennsylvania, the southern half of New Jersey, and the morthernmost portions of Maryland, West Virginia, and Delaware?

Pittsburgh English is closely related to the Central Pennsylvania accent.

Comment Needs cited.

The Pittsburgh dialect,

Comment: Nearly all of the features popularly associated with Pittsburgh are spoken in a wider geographic area than the city of Pittsburgh, or even the Pittsburgh metropolitan area (Johnstone 2004). For example, some features found in Pittsburgh are spoken in the western PA dialect region, such as monophthongal /ɑw/. Other features found in Pittsburgh are found throughout the North Midland dialect region, and others are found most generally in the Midland dialect region or across the U.S. Perhaps the only features found near-exclusively in Pittsburgh are monophthongal /ɑw/ and a few local names for commercial goods, such as gumband, chipped ham and jumbo.

often referred to as Pittsburghese,

Comment Because most features are not found exclusively in Pittsburgh but in larger geographic regions, “From the point of view of linguistics there is no ‘dialect’ (no matter how dialect areas are delimited) that is spoken only in Pittsburgh or in the Pittsburgh area. However, local linguistic and cultural history encourages the idea that ‘Pittsburghese’ is unique to the city and the immediate area” (2004, p. 119). For this reason, we should probably state: Pittsburgh speech is often popularly referred to as ‘Pittsburghese.’

contains substrates reflecting the ethnic heritage of the region: Scotch-Irish,

Comment A substrate is typically a language which has influenced a different language. Is it the common understanding among linguists that Scots-Irish is another language? It seems more correct to say that Scots-Irish English speakers settled the area and this variety was influenced by other varieties, such as German and Slavic languages.

German, and most prominently, Slavic.

Comment Though Johnstone et al (2002) speculate that monophthongal /ɑw/ may have arisen from contact with Slavic languages in the early 20th century, there is no concrete evidence of heavy influence from Slavic languages--Slavic is used to describe a language family, not a single language. I can positively document only pierogie and and kolbasi from Polish, babushka from Russian. (While from German we've taken falling intonation at the end of questions.) On the other hand, there is concrete evidence for significant influence from Scots-Irish.
Documented features include:
cruds, cruddled milk, crudded milk (Crozier 1984).
hap (Crozier 1984) .
jag (Johnstone, Bhasin and Wittkofski 2002; Johnstone and Baumgardt 2004; Johnstone, Andrus and Danielson 2006).
jagger (Cassidy and Hall 1996).
like + past participle (Murray and Simon 2002).
nebby, and by extension neb, neb-nose, nebshit, neb out, etc. (Johnstone, Bhasin and Wittkofski 2002; Johnstone and Baumgardt 2004; Johnstone, Andrus and Danielson 2006).
need + past participle (Murray, Frazer and Simon 1996; Montgomery 2001; Murray and Simon 2002).
redd up (Dressman 1979).
slippy (Johnstone, Bhasin and Wittkofski 2002; Johnstone and Baumgardt 2004; Johnstone, Andrus and Danielson 2006).
want + past participle (Murray and Simon 1996 and 2002; Montgomery 2001)
"punctual" whenever (Montgomery 2001).
yinz, yunz, you'uns (Crozier 1984; Montgomery 2001).
Possible or probable features include:
"positive" anymore (Montgomery 1989 and 1999).
leave~let, reversed transitivity (Adams 2000).
n'at (Macaulay (1995) finds it in the regular speech of Scottish coal miners in Glasgow, the principal area from which Scottish settlers came when they emigrated to Northern Ireland, and subsequently, to America).
Note that, in comparison to the Slavic language contributions, many of the Scots-Irish forms are typically more restricted in their geographical distribution, sometimes occuring only in southwestern Pennysylvania. In contrast, pierogie, kolbasi, and babushka are found throughout the United States, pretty much wherever Russian and Polish immigrants settled.

when a large influx of immigrants arrived and found work in the booming steel industry. There are still vibrant ethnic communities in Pittsburgh, composed of both recent immigrants and third- or fourth-generation Americans, particularly in the South Side and Squirrel Hill, where it is not uncommon to hear people speaking Polish, Russian, and Serbo-Croatian.

Comment Since there is no evidence to date that Polish, Russian or Serbo-Croatian speakers significantly influenced Pittsburgh English, this explanation seems beside the point, more appropriate to the Wiki entry about Pittsburgh.

There are many heritage speakers of Eastern European languages, and some exclamations and babytalk expressions are common even among those who have otherwise been totally assimilated.

Comment: There is no existing research which documents this.

There has also been significant influence, in the speech of younger Pittsburghers, from African American Vernacular English, especially in syntax.

Comment There is no research on the influence of AAVE in Pittsburgh, and consquently, on the influence of AAVE on young Pittsburghers.

With the advent of mass media, along with an influx of technology industry workers, certain localized vocabulary items are becoming less common,

Comment There is no research which documents whether local lexical items are becoming more or less common.

though still definitely noticeable; continuation and even some innovation

Comment: I’m not sure exactly what this means. Does it mean that young Pittsburghers are innovating on existing forms or inventing new ones? While Johnstone et al. (2006) suggest that yinzer may be a relatively new word, there is no other documentation of young Pittsburghers innovating.

are present among young people who feel a strong sense of local pride. Regional features in speech are heavily class-marked; working class Pittsburghers use far more local features than the upper middle class.

Comment It appears that some features are class-marked and some are not. For example, Johnstone (2002) found that at one time, the /ɑw/ monopthong was class-marked, and Layton’s (1999) work confirmed this. But Johnstone et al. (2002, 2004, and 2006) have noted that the feature has come to index ‘localness’ as much or more than class status. In fact, Labov, Ash and Boberg (2005) find that monopthongal /ɑw/ did not show stratification according to age, ethnicity, or social range. In addition, other features have never been class-marked, for example, the /ɑ/~/ɔ/-->/ɔ/ merger, in which Don and Dawn both sound like [dɔn]; or the vocalized /l/, because of which full is sometimes pronounced as [fʊw] instead of [fʊɫ].

Geographically, frequency of regional features is highest in the south and north, weakest in the center and east.

Comment There is no existing research describing where in Pittsburgh regional features are more common.

Such generalizations are hard to make, however, due to the vast number of neighborhoods in Pittsburgh, their insular character, and irregular distribution, with some of the most conservative dialectic regions abutting the most deregionalized.

Comment Again, while this may be true, there is no existing research documenting which neighborhoods or regions in Pittsburgh are more linguistically conservative and which are “deregionalized.”

(A note on terminology: Pittsburgh English is the proper name of the dialect. The term Pittsburghese, though in common use, is considered derogatory,

Comment The only existing study which touches upon this issue is Wisnosky (2003), who shows that many Pittsburghers who are proud of their linguistic heritage use the term Pittsburghese and do not consider it derogatory.

and is most commonly used by Pittsburghers who eschew regional linguistic features; much to their chagrin, these people are quite likely to use the forms they stigmatize themselves.)

Comment There is no existing research which tracks speaker’s use of the term Pittsburghese with the use of Pittsburgh English features.

The dialect is defined by idiosyncrasies of pronunciation, vocabulary and grammar.

Comment Nearly all the features of Pittsburgh English are not at all idiosyncratic but are by definition the result of systematic patterns at many levels of language, including phonological, lexical and grammatical. In other words, Pittsburgh speakers exhibit language patterns consonant with those found in Southwestern PA and elsewhere.

Pronunciation

Comment The /u/~/ʊ/merger is part of a more general merger in SW PA and elsewhere (Alabama, Texas, and parts of the Western United States), that of tense vowels becoming lax before the liquids /l/and /ɹ/. Along with /u/~/ʊ/, /i/ merges with /ɪ/. Therefore, a pairs like steel / still is pronounced homophonously as /stɪl/.
Additional citation--Brown (1982); Gagnon (1999); Layton (1999); McElhinny (1999); Johnstone, Bhasin and Wittkofski (2002); Wisnosky (2003); Johnstone and Baumgardt (2004); Johnstone, Andrus and Danielson (2006).
  • Unlike other Midland dialects, /ɑ/ and /ɔ/ are merged as /ɔ/; cot and caught are homophones. (Labov, Ash, and Boberg 2006: 59-60, 271).
Comment It is worth more clearly stating that the merger of these low back vowels is widespread in the United States--not just in the Midland dialect region--but that, in Southwestern PA, the phoneme that results in this merger is a rounded and backed /ɔ/ as opposed to the more common realization of the more fronted, unrounded /ɑ/. Therefore, cot and caught, and Don and Dawn are pronounced as [kɔt] and [dɔn] respectively.
Additional citation--(Kurath (1961); Gagnon (1999); Layton (1999); Johnstone, Bhasin and Wittkofski (2002); Wisnosky (2003); Johnstone and Baumgardt (2004); Johnstone, Andrus and Danielson (2006).
Comment Example? Also, Labov, Ash and Boberg?
Comment Example? Also, Labov, Ash and Boberg? This claim does not seem to square with research. It would mean, for example, that the word boat is not pronounced with the /o/ vowel, but an /ɑ/ or something else, or that the word pool is not pronounced with the /u/ or /ʊ/ vowels.
  • [[General American [ɑw] and [ɑj] often monophthongize to [aː] and [iː] to [ɪː], especially in relaxed speech: Downtown becomes ['dɑːntɑːn]. Recent research by Carnegie Mellon University's Barbara Johnstone (Johnstone et al 2002) has shown that this feature is receding among Pittsburghers born after 1950.]]
Comment /i/ cannot be monopthongized to /ɪ/ because it is not a diphthong in the first place. A diphthong is a sequence of two vowels, or a vowel and a glide such as [y] or [w], as in [ɑʊ] or [ɑw], and [ɑɪ] or [ɑy]. A monophthong can result from a diphthong that is pronounced as a single vowel. So, when speakers pronounce downtown as [dɑːntɑːn], the [ɑw] diphthong is reduced to the [ɑ:] monophthong. Likewise, when speakers pronounce tile as [tɑ:l], the /ɑy/ diphthong is pronounced as the [ɑ:] monophthong. Finally, while [ɑw] is monopthongized in a variety of environments, [ɑy] is monopthongized only when preceding the liquids /l/ and /r/.
Sources for /ɑw/ monophthongization--Kurath (1961); Gagnon (1999); Layton (1999); McElhinny (1999); Johnstone, Bhasin and Wittkofski (2002); Wisnosky (2003); Johnstone and Baumgardt (2004); Johnstone, Andrus and Danielson (2006.)
Sources for /ɑy/ monophthongization--Kurath (1961); Gagnon (1999); Layton (1999); McElhinny (1999); Johnstone, Bhasin and Wittkofski (2002); Wisnosky (2003); Johnstone and Baumgardt (2004); Johnstone, Andrus and Danielson (2006).
  • [[When not monophthongized, the nuclei of diphthongs shift toward [æ], especially in enunciated speech: [eɪ] becomes [ɛɪ] or [æɪ], [iː] becomes [ɪ], [uː] becomes [ɪʊ], and [oʊ] becomes [əʊ] or [ɛʊ]. This appears to be on the increase, used by young people proud of their local heritage]]
Comment I do not believe any research documents this. Could this 'shift toward [ae]' be more properly described as a centralizing and lowering of the nuclei of dipthongs, and is this from Labov, Ash and Boberg? Also, there is no existing research which documents what forms younger speakers tend to use.
  • [[As in many dialects of American English, [æ] before [n] [m] or [ɹ] and [eɪ] before [ɹ] or [l] standardly change to a diphthong [ɛə]. This new phoneme often merges into [æ], especially among younger Pittsburghers. This second merger creates a new set of homonyms such as pal and pale.]]
Comment Is this from Labov, Ash and Boberg? It needs to be clarified if kept. One change it suggests, for example, is that /ae/ changes into [ɛə] and then “merges into /ae/”! It is possible the contributor was referring to the tendency for the tense diphthong [eə] to be reduced and laxed to [ɛə], and further lowered and laxed to [ae], resulting in homonymy between pal and pale, which would both be pronounced [pael]. Also, there is no research which compares the speech of younger to older Pittsburghers.
  • [[[l] is "dark" (i.e. velarized), and sometimes purely velar, postvocalically and often in other positions.]]
Comment This is true, but it is also a regular feature of broadcast American English and the vast majority of American dialects (Johnson and Wyn, forthcoming).
Comment In American English, the only stops that can be flapped are the alveolars /t/, /d/ and /n/. /d/ and /n/ cannot be ‘voiced’ because they are already voiced. Because alveolar flaps are by definition voiced, the /t/ becomes voiced when it is flapped. The typical description is that intervocalic alveolar consonants are pronounced as flaps. Batter is pronounced as [baɾɚ], badder is pronounced as [baɾɝ] and banner is pronounced as [baⁿɾɝ].] Finally, this process is not restricted to rapid speech, but, in American English (as opposed to some dialects in Britain, including Received Pronunciation), is the norm for formal, casual, careful, or rapid speech.
  • [[Epenthetic r occurs after vowels in a small number of words, e.g. wash becomes [wɔɹʃ].]]
Citations--Layton (1999); McElhinny (1999); Johnstone, Bhasin and Wittkofski (2002); Wisnosky (2003); Johnstone and Baumgardt (2004); Johnstone, Andrus and Danielson (2006).
Comment There is no existing research which documents this is used in or specific to Pittsburgh or SW PA.

Further information can be found in chapter 19 of Labov et al. (2006).

Comment There is no need for this reference once items are properly cited. Existing research includes much more than this single reference.

For information on IPA symbols used, see International Phonetic Alphabet for English. [edit]


Dialectal terms

Please do not add items to this list that cannot be verified in print.

Comment This pronunciation is not restricted to the word iron, but is one of many examples of the monophthongization of the diphthong /ɑy/. Because this not a lexical process, but a phonological one, this word is not necessary in this section, even misleading. Perhaps we could use it as an example in the above pronunciation section.
Comment This pronunciation is not restricted to the word out, but is one of many examples of the monophthongization of the diphthong /ɑw/. Because this not a lexical process, but a phonological one, this word is not necessary in this section, even misleading. Perhaps we could use it as an example in the above pronunciation section. In any case, out is not a verb.
Comment There is no existing research documenting this feature as found in or specific to Pittsburgh or southwestern PA. In either event, that is a demonstrative or relative pronoun.
  • babushka n. headscarf. Occasionally refers to an elderly woman or your grandmother, based on the commonality of wearing a headscarf.
Citation--Cassidy (1985), who notes that the word in Russian means "grandmother."
Comment Existing research does not document this particular use. However, Kurath (1949) does mention that the use of ‘baby buggy’ or just ‘buggy’ for ‘baby carriage’ is found in a large portion of PA, but is “very common in the Pittsburgh area and the adjoining counties of Ohio and on the lower Kanawha” (36).
Comment Not documented for Pittsburgh or PA. Cassidy (1985) does note that this variant is found in GA, NC, MS, MO, LA, New England, England, East Texas, and north Georgia.
  • chipped ham (pronounced "chipp'tam") or chip-chopped ham n. very thinly sliced ham for use on sandwiches.
Citations--Johnstone, Bhasin and Wittkofski (2002), Johnstone and Baumgardt (2004), and Johnstone, Andrus, and Danielson (2006) document ‘chipped ham’, but no existing research documents the ‘chip-chopped’ variant.
Comment There is no existing research documenting this feature as found in or specific to Pittsburgh or southwestern PA.
Comment There is no existing research which documents this variant as used in Pittsburgh, or elsewhere for that matter.
  • crick n. creek
Citation--Cassidy (1985), who notes that this pronunciation is also used in the South and parts of the Midlands area.
Comment This is probably referring to the variable pronunciation of the word as [kiupɑnz] or [kupɑnz]; need to document where specifically these forms occur, or if they are simply in free variation everywhere.
  • da 'burgh n. Pittsburgh.
Citations--Johnstone, Wittkofski and Bhasin (2002), Johnstone, Andrus and Danielson (2006).
Comment This pronunciation is not restricted to the word down, but is one of many examples of the monophthongization of the diphthong /ɑw/. Because this not a lexical process, but a phonological one, this word is not necessary in this section, even misleading. Perhaps we could use it as an example in the above pronunciation section.
Comment This pronunciation is not restricted to the word downtown, but is one of many examples of the monophthongization of the diphthong /ɑw/. Because this not a lexical process, but a phonological one, this word is not necessary in this section, even misleading. Perhaps we could use it as an example in the above pronunciation section.
Comment There is no citation specifically for dippy eggs. However, Cassidy and Hall (1991) do list the adjective dippy, which is used to describe anything you can dip something in--gravy, coffee, etc., and which is used chiefly in southwestern PA.
Comment There is no existing research which documents this.
  • gumband n. a rubber band.
Citations--Johnstone, Bhasin and Wittkofski (2002), Wisnosky (2003); Johnstone and Baumgadt (2004), Johnstone, Andrus and Danielson (2006).
  • hoagie n. a submarine sandwich, always served toasted.
Citation--Cassidy (1991) claims that the word is used “chiefly in PA and NJ” but “becoming more widely recognized."
  • jag-off n., vulgar an asshole; an extremely disagreeable person; jackoff
Citation--Citation: Cassidy (1996).
  • jagger bush n. any shrub with thorns
Citation--Cassidy (1996).
  • jag around v. 1) to waste time; 2) to mess with someone in a non-serious fashion
Citation--Cassidy (1996).
Comment There is no existing research documenting this feature as found in or specific to Pittsburgh or the Pittsburgh area. Cassidy (1996) claims this form is found primarily in the northeast U.S.
  • jumbo n. synonym for bologna lunchmeat. Isaly's, a local chain of delis, sells a popular variety known as square jumbo
Citations--Cassidy (1996); Johnstone, Bhasin and Wittkofski (2002); Wisnosky (2003); Johnstone and Baumgadt (2004), Johnstone, Andrus and Danielson (2006).
Comment There is no existing research documenting this feature as found in or specific to Pittsburgh or the Pittsburgh area.
  • kolbassi n. kielbasa
Citation--Cassidy (1996).
  • n'at contraction "and that". Means, "along with some other stuff", as in, "Yinz wanna go dahn ta Isaly's n'get sommadat square jumbo n'at?" (Do you all want to go down to Isaly's and get some of that square baloney, and a few other things?)
Citations--McElhinny (1999); Johnstone, Bhasin and Wittkofski (2002); Wisnosky (2003); Johnstone and Baumgardt (2004), Johnstone, Andrus and Danielson (2006).
  • neb v. to investigate or take interest in things which are none of one's business. He was nebbin' around in my business.
Citation--Cassidy (1996).]
  • nebby adj. Given to prying into the affairs of others; nosy.
Citations--Cassidy (1996); McElhinny (1999); Johnstone, Bhasin and Wittkofski (2002); Wisnosky (2003); Johnstone and Baumgardt (2004), Johnstone, Andrus and Danielson (2006).
  • nebshit n., vulgar An individual who persistently or habitually cannot mind their own business.
Citation--Cassidy (1996).
Comment There is no existing research which documents this particular use in Pittsburgh or the Pittsburgh area.
Comment This pronunciation is not restricted to the word pile, but is one of many examples of the monophthongization of the diphthong /ɑy/. Because this not a lexical process, but a phonological one, this word is not necessary in this section, even misleading. Perhaps we could use it as an example in the above pronunciation section.
  • pierogie (often shortened to progie) n. a Polish pasta product usually filled with mashed potatoes and cheese. See Pierogi.
Citation--Hall (2002).
Comment There is no existing research which documents this particular use in Pittsburgh or the Pittsburgh area.
  • pop n. carbonated soft drink
Citation--McElhinny (1999). But Hall (2002) shows that this word is “widespread” across the U.S.
Comment There is no existing research which documents this particular use in Pittsburgh or the Pittsburgh area.
  • redd up v. intermediate step between tidying and cleaning ' Yinz better redd up this room ' From Scots English.
Citations--Dressman (1979); McElhinny (1999); Hall (2002); Johnstone, Andrus and Danielson (2006).
Comment There is no existing research which documents this particular use in Pittsburgh or the Pittsburgh area.
Comment There is no existing research which documents this particular use in Pittsburgh or the Pittsburgh area.
Comment There is no existing research which documents this particular use in Pittsburgh or the Pittsburgh area.
  • slippy adj. slippery
Citations--McElhinny (1999); Johnstone, Bhasin and Wittkofski (2002); Wisnosky (2003); Johnstone and Baumgardt (2004); Johnstone , Andrus and Danielson (2006).
Comment There is no existing research which documents this particular use in Pittsburgh or the Pittsburgh area.
Comment This pronunciation is not restricted to the word Stillers, but is one of many examples of the laxing of [i] before the liquids /l/ and /ɹ/. Because this not a lexical process, but a phonological one, this word is not necessary in this section, even misleading. Perhaps we could use it as an example in the above pronunciation section.
Comment There is no existing research which documents this particular use in Pittsburgh or the Pittsburgh area.
Comment The distribution for this word may well appear in the yet-to-be-released volume of the Dictionary of American Regional English: Si-Z. Otherwise, there is no existing research documenting this feature. Or have I overlooked a source?
Comment This entry is presumably referring to the monopthongization of /ɑy/ before the liquid /l/. Because this not a lexical process, but a phonological one, this word is not necessary in this section, even misleading. Perhaps we could use it as an example in the above pronunciation section.
Comment There is no existing research which documents this particular use in Pittsburgh or the Pittsburgh area.
Comment There is no existing research which documents this particular use in Pittsburgh or the Pittsburgh area.
Comment There is no existing research which documents this particular use in Pittsburgh or the Pittsburgh area.
Comment There is no existing research which documents this particular use in Pittsburgh or the Pittsburgh area.
Comment There is no existing research which documents this particular use in Pittsburgh or the Pittsburgh area.
Comment There is no existing research which documents this particular use in Pittsburgh or the Pittsburgh area.
Comment There is no scholarly evidence that these forms are losing ground to you guys and yall.
Citations for yinz, yunz, and yunz guys--Crozier (1984); McElhinny (1999); Johnstone, Bhasin and Wittkofski (2002); Wisnosky (2003); Johnstone and Baumgardt (2004), Johnstone, Andrus and Danielson (2006).
Comment There is no existing research which documents this particular use in Pittsburgh or the Pittsburgh area.
Comment This pronunciation, along with this particular lexical example, have already been mentioned in the pronunciation section under “Epenthetic r.”
Comment This pronunciation has already been mentioned in the pronunciation section under “Epenthetic r.” Perhaps we could include this in that section as another example.

Older idioms not used much among younger generations

Comment There are no published scholarly articles which documents that this feature is found in or specific to Pittsburgh or the Pittsburgh area.
Comment There is no existing research which document that this feature is found in or specific to Pittsburgh or the Pittsburgh area.
  • '''Kiss my ass under Kaufmann's Clock'''! "Go to hell!" Refers to an ornate clock on a busy streetcorner in downtown Pittsburgh attached to the Kaufmann's department store.[4] The clock is a popular meeting place for people to find each other downtown, and the public nature of it makes it part of a mock bet often made by Pittsburghers. "You make that shot again and I'll kiss your ass under Kaufmann's clock."
Comment There are no published scholarly articles which document that this feature is found in or specific to Pittsburgh or the Pittsburgh area.
Comment There are no published scholarly articles which document that this feature is found in or specific to Pittsburgh or the Pittsburgh area.
Comment There are no published scholarly articles which document that this feature is found in or specific to Pittsburgh or the Pittsburgh area.


Grammar

Comment I’m not sure what the term ‘dependent’ is meant to refer to here. The term could possibly be used to refer to main verbs in a clause that is dependent; for example the verb shot in “He thinks that she shot the bird” is in a dependent or subordinate clause in which the verb of the independent clause is think. But the main verbs in dependent (or independent) clauses cannot contain to be because they must be conjugable. In addition, Murray, Frazer and Simon (1996) and Murray and Simon (1999, 2002) have noted that it is not clear whether such constructions are simply elliptical versions ones with “to be”. A more straightforward way of stating this entry is to say that in southwestern PA (and elsewhere) we find need + past participle, want + past participle and like + past participle constructions. As just implied, there are only three constructions that are documented in published scholarly articles:
needs + past participle (Murray, Frazer and Simon 1996; Tenny 1998; McElhinny 1999; Murray and Simon 1999; Montgomery 2001; Johnstone, Bhasin and Wittkofski 2002; Murray and Simon 2002; Wisnosky 2003; Johnstone and Baumgardt 2004; Johnstone, Andrus and Danielson 2006).
wants + past participle (Tenny 1998; McElhinny 1999; Murray and Simon 1999; Adams 2002; Johnstone, Bhasin and Wittkofski 2002; Murray and Simon 2002; Wisnosky 2003; Johnstone and Baumgardt 2004; Johnstone, Andrus and Danielson 2006).
likes + past participle (Murray and Simon 2002).
Comment There are no published scholarly articles which document that this feature is found in or specific to Pittsburgh or the Pittsburgh area.
Comment There are no published scholarly articles which claim that, in Pittsburgh, speakers use zero auxiliary in the perfect or that the perfect has merged with the simple past. The perfect is have seen or had seen, as in “She had seen the dirty dishes earlier but decided someone else could wash them.” In some dialects, seen is an acknowledged simple past alternative to saw. But no research has documented this feature in Pittsburgh.
Comment The pluperfect is also known as the past perfect, so the first claim is redundant and unsubstantiated. There are also no published scholarly articles which document that Pittsburgh speakers use “will see” to mean “will have seen.” The contributor may be making an observation about casual speech, in which forms like the future perfect are used, but this has not been claimed to be associated with Pittsburgh in the scholarly literature.
  • Pittsburgh English also contains the "positive anymore" construction. While in Standard English anymore must be used as a negative polarity item (NPI), Pittsburgh English does not have this restriction. When not used as an NPI, anymore means approximately the same as "these days". For instance, a Pittsburgher may say "It seems I always wear these shoes anymore."
Citations--Maxfield (1931); McElhinny (1999); Montgomery (2001).



Proposed Revision of Pittsburgh English Entry

Many of the features found in the speech of Pittsburghers are popularly thought to be unique to the city, as is reflected in the term "Pittsburghese," the putative sum of these features in the form of a dialect. However, few of these features are restricted solely to Pittsburgh or the Pittsburgh metropolitan area, but instead are found throughout southwestern Pennsylvania, the North Midland dialect region, the Midland dialect region, or even large parts of the United States (Johnstone, Bhasin, and Wittkofski, 2002; Wisnosky 2003; Johnstone and Baumgardt, 2004). Perhaps the only feature whose distribution is restricted near-exclusively to the Pittsburgh metropolitan area is /ɑw/ monopthongization, in which a words such as house, down, found, or sauerkraut are pronounced with an "ah" sound instead of the more standard pronunciation of "aw."

The language of the early Scots-Irish settlers had the greatest influence on the speech of southwestern and western Pennsylvania, an influence reflected mainly in the retention of certain lexical items (cruds or cruddled milk, hap, jag, jagger, nebby, neb, neb-nose, nebshit, redd up, slippy, yinz/yunz/you’uns, "punctual" whenever and possibly "positive" anymore and reversed leave~let transitivity), but also in the like, need, or want + past participle grammatical constructions and the discourse marker ‘n’at. The dialect region of western Pennsylvania ranges north to Erie, Pennsylvania, west to Youngstown, Ohio, south to Clarksburg, West Virginia, and east to Harrisburg, Pennsylvania (Labov, Ash and Boberg 2005).

The terms Scots-Irish or Scotch-Irish are used interchangeably to refer to those who emigrated to the Ulster area of Northern Ireland from Scotland—mainly into Counties Down and Antrim (Montgomery 2001)—during the late 1600’s and early to mid 1700’s. Many of these settlers, or their descendents, subsequently emigrated to America. By the 1730’s, they were established in southeast Pennsylvania, especially Lancaster County. For the next thirty years, they radiated westward across the Alleghenies, as well as southwestward into Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Kentucky, and Tennessee (Crozier 1984; Montgomery 1989, 2001).

Documented contributions from other languages are "pierogie" (Hall 2002) and "kolbassi" (Cassidy and Hall 1996) from Polish, "babushka" from Russian (Cassidy 1985), and, from German, falling intonation at the end of questions with a definite yes or no answer (Fasold 1980). Possible contributions from other languages are reversed leave~let transitivity from German (Adams 2002) and monophthongal /ɑw/ from Slavic languages (Johnstone 2002; Labov, Ash, and Boberg 2005), though these influences are openly posited as speculative.

The features described below have been documented in the speech of white Pittsburghers. There is no published research to date on African American Pittsburghers’ speech. For each feature, examples and further explanation are provided when necessary, while approximate geographic distribution and origins are provided when possible.

Please do not add items to this list that cannot be verified through published scholarly sources.

Phonology

  • /ɑ/~/ɔ/ --> /ɔ/ merger (Kurath 1961; Gagnon 1999; Layton 1999; Johnstone, Bhasin and Wittkofski 2002; Wisnosky 2003; Johnstone and Baumgardt 2004; Labov, Ash and Boberg 2005; Johnstone, Andrus and Danielson 2006).
Examples: cot and caught are pronounced [kɔt]; Don and dawn are pronounced [dɔn].
Further explanation: Speakers who use the /ɔ/ instead of the /ɑ/ sound round their lips and/or produce the vowel further towards the back of their mouths.
Geographic distribution: While the merger of these low back vowels is widespread in the United States, the phoneme that results from this merger is typically the more fronted and unrounded /ɑ/. In southwestern Pennysylvania, speakers display the less common realization of /ɔ/ (Johnstone, Bhasin and Wittkofski 2002; Johnstone and Baumgardt 2004; Labov, Ash and Boberg 2005; Johnstone, Andrus and Danielson 2006).


  • /ɑw/ monophthongization (Kurath 1961; Gagnon 1999; Layton 1999; McElhinny 1999; Johnstone, Bhasin and Wittkofski 2002; Wisnosky 2003; Johnstone and Baumgardt 2004; Labov, Ash and Boberg 2005; Johnstone, Andrus and Danielson 2006).
Examples: house is pronounced [hɑ:s]; out is pronounced [ɑ:t]; found is pronounced [fɑ:nd]; downtown is pronounced [dɑ:ntɑ:n].
Further explanation: The diphthong /ɑw/ (also rendered as /ɑʊ/) becomes the monophthong /ɑ/. The /ɑ/ sound is often depicted orthographically as “ah.” The colon after the /ɑ/ indicates that the the vowel is long.
Geographic distribution: One of the few features, if not the only one, restricted near-exclusively to southwestern Pennsylvania (Johnstone, Bhasin and Wittkofski 2002; Johnstone and Baumgardt 2004; Labov, Ash and Boberg 2005; Johnstone, Andrus and Danielson 2006).
Origins: May be the result of contact from Slavic languages during the early twentieth century (Johnstone, Bhasin and Wittkofski 2002; Labov, Ash and Boberg 2005).


  • /ɑy/ monophthongization (Kurath 1961; Gagnon 1999; Layton 1999; McElhinny 1999; Johnstone, Bhasin and Wittkofski 2002; Wisnosky 2003; Johnstone and Baumgardt 2004; Johnstone, Andrus and Danielson 2006).
Examples: tile is pronounced [tɑ:l]; pile is pronounced [pɑ:l]; tire is pronounced [tɑ:ɹ]; iron is pronounced [ɑ:ɹn].
Further explanation: Before /l/ and /ɹ /, the diphthong /ɑy/ (also rendered as /ɑi/ or /ɑɪ/) is monophthongized to /ɑ/. The /ɑ/ is often depicted orthographically as “ah.” The colon after the /ɑ/ indicates that the the vowel is long.
Geographic distribution: Southwestern Pennsylvania and elsewhere, including the southern states (see above citations).


  • Epenthetic /ɹ / (Layton 1999; McElhinny 1999; Johnstone, Bhasin and Wittkofski 2002; Wisnosky 2003; Johnstone and Baumgardt 2004; Johnstone, Andrus and Danielson 2006).
Example: wash is pronounced as [wɔɹʃ].
Further explanation: Occurs after vowels in a small number of words. Sometimes also called “intrusive r.” The /ʃ/ sound is often depicted orthographically as "sh."
Geographic distribution: Southwestern Pennsylvania and elsewhere (see above citations).


  • /i/~/ɪ/ and /u/~/ʊ/ tense-lax mergers (Brown 1982; Gagnon 1999; Layton 1999; McElhinny 1999; Johnstone, Bhasin and Wittkofski 2002; Wisnosky 2003; Johnstone and Baumgardt 2004; Labov, Ash and Boberg 2005; Johnstone, Andrus and Danielson 2006).
Examples: steel and still are pronounced [stɪl]; pool and pull are pronounced [pʊl].
Further explanation: Before the liquids /l/ and /ɹ /, the tense vowels /i/ and /u/ are laxed to /ɪ/ and /ʊ/, respectively. In standard American English, /i/ is the sound in beet, /ɪ/ the sound in bit, /u/ the sound in food, and /ʊ/ the sound in good. Finally, in constrast to the /i/~/ɪ/ merger, the /u/~/ʊ/ merger appears to be more advanced. On the /i/~/ɪ/ merger, Labov, Ash and Boberg (2005) note, "the stereotype of [this merger] is based only on a close approximation of some forms, and does not represent the underlying norms of the dialect."
Geographic distribution: The /i/~/ɪ/ merger is found in southwestern Pennsylvania (Brown 1982; Gagnon 1999; Layton 1999; Johnstone, Bhasin and Wittkofski 2002; Wisnosky 2003; Johnstone and Baumgardt 2004; Johnstone, Andrus and Danielson 2006) as well as parts of the southern United States, including Alabama, Texas and the west (McElhinny 1999; Labov, Ash and Boberg 2005). On the other hand, the /u/~/ʊ/ is consistently found only in southwestern Pennsylvania (Labov, Ash and Boberg 2005).


  • /i/~/ɪ/ merger in eagle (Gagnon 1999; Johnstone, Bhasin and Wittkofski 2002; Wisnosky 2003; Johnstone and Baumgardt 2004).
Geographic distribution: Southwestern Pennsylvania (see above citations).


  • /l/ vocalization (Hankey 1972; Layton 1999; McElhinny 1999; Johnstone, Bhasin and Wittkofski 2002; Wisnosky 2003; Johnstone and Baumgardt 2004; Johnstone, Andrus and Danielson 2006).
Examples: well is pronounced something like [wɛw]; milk something like [mɪwk] or [mɛwk]; role something like [ɹow]; and color something like [kʌwɚ].
Further explanation: When it occurs after vowels, /l/ is vocalized, or "labialized,” sometimes sounding like a /w/, or a cross between a vowel and a velarized, or“dark,” /l/.
Geographic distribution: Southwestern Pennsylvania (Hankey 1972; Layton 1999; McElhinny 1999; Johnstone, Bhasin and Wittkofski 2002; Wisnosky 2003; Johnstone and Baumgardt 2004; Johnstone, Andrus and Danielson 2006) and elsewhere, including many African American varieties (McElhinny 1999).


  • /o/~/u/ and ~/ʊ/ merger (Labov, Ash and Boberg 2005).
Examples: Polish is pronounced [pʊlish] or [pʊwish]; cold is pronounced [kʊld] or [kʊwd]
Further explanation: As the examples suggest, this merger only occurs when /o/ precedes /l/.


  • /ʌ/ lowering (Labov, Ash and Boberg 2005).
Example: When found is monophthongized, it might be nearly homonymous with fund. Found would be pronounced [fɑ:nd] and fund closer to this than a typical [fʌnd].
Further explanation: While the /ʌ/ sound may sometimes sound approximately like an /ɑ/, a listener could easily distinguish between the two words by noting the length of the vowel. Labov, Ash and Boberg (2005) explain that the longest lowered /ʌ/ they encountered was shorter than the shortest monophthongized /ɑ/ they encountered. So, to speakers and listeners, the sounds are distinct.
Geographic distribution: Southwestern Pennsylvania (Labov, Ash and Boberg 2005).


For information on IPA symbols used, see International Phonetic Alphabet for English.


Vocabulary

  • Babushka n. headscarf (Cassidy 1985).
Further explanation: In Russian, the word means “grandmother.”
Geographic distribution: Predominantly used in northeast U.S., Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin and Michigan (see above citation).
Origins: Russian (see above citation).


  • (baby) buggy n. baby carriage (Kurath 1949).
Geographic distribution: Kurath (1949) mentions that speakers in a large portion of Pennsylvania use the term, but that it is “very common in the Pittsburgh area[,]…[in] the adjoining counties of Ohio and on the lower Kanawha.”


  • the 'Burgh n. Pittsburgh (Johnstone, Wittkofski and Bhasin 2002; Johnstone, Andrus and Danielson 2006).
Geographic distribution: Pittsburgh and surrounding areas (see above citations).


  • chipped ham n. very thinly sliced ham for use on sandwiches (Johnstone, Bhasin and Wittkofski 2002; Johnstone and Baumgardt 2004; Johnstone, Andrus and Danielson 2006).
Example: “I like to have a chipped-ham sandwich.”
Geographic distribution: A trade-name specific to Pittsburgh and surrounding areas (see above citations).


  • carbon oil n. kerosene (Kurath 1949).
Geographic distribution: From the western edge of the Alleghenies to beyond the Ohio line (see above citation).


  • cruds, crudded milk, or cruddled milk n. cottage cheese (Kurath 1949; Crozier 1984).
Geographic distribution: Kurath(1949) claims these forms are used from the western edge of the Alleghenies to beyond the Ohio line; and Crozier (1984) claims that they are restricted to southwestern Pennsylvania.
Origins: Scots-Irish (Crozier 1984).


  • dippy adj. anything you can dip something in—gravy, coffee, etc. (Cassidy and Hall 1991).
Example: “I like my eggs dippy.”
Geographic distribution: Pennsylvania (see above citation).


  • grinnie n. chipmunk (Kurath 1949).
Geographic distribution: From the western edge of the Alleghenies to beyond the Ohio line (see above author).


  • gumband n. rubber band (Cassidy and Hall 1991; Johnstone, Bhasin and Wittkofski 2002; Wisnosky 2003; Johnstone and Baumgadt 2004; Johnstone, Andrus and Danielson 2006).
Geographic distribution: Southwestern Pennsylvania (see above citations).


  • hap n. comfort (Maxfield 1931); comforter, quilt (Crozier 1984).
Examples: to mean "comfort," “He’s been in poor hap since his wife died” (Maxfield 1931); to mean "comforter, quilt," “It was cold last night but that hap kept me warm.”
Geographic distribution: hap is used for "comfort" in western Pennsylvania (Maxfield 1931); and a "quilt" is known as a hap only in western Pennsylvania (Crozier 1984).


  • hoagie n. a submarine sandwich (Cassidy and Hall 1991).
Geographic distribution: Used “chiefly in PA and NJ” but is “becoming more widely recognized” (see above citation).


  • jag v. prick, stab, jab (Cassidy and Hall 1996); tease (Johnstone, Andrus and Danielson 2006).
Further explanation: The form is often followed by off to mean "to annoy, irritate, play tricks on; to disparage; to reject," as well as around to mean "annoy, or tease." These phrases are probably influenced by jack off and jack around, respectively (Cassidy and Hall 1986).
Geographic distribution: Chiefly Pennsylvania, especially southwestern Pennsylvania, but also portions of Appalachia (see above citations).
Origins: Scots-Irish (see above citations).


  • jagger n. any small, sharp-pointed object or implement (Cassidy and Hall 1996).
Further explanation: The word applies mainly to thorns and briars, and is used as an adjective to describe bushes with thorns or briars, as in a jagger bush (see above citation).
Geographic distribution: Chiefly Pennsylvania (see above citation).
Origins: Scots-Irish (see above citation).


  • kolbusy or kolbassi n. sausage (Cassidy and Hall 1996).
Further explanation: Pronounced [kolbɑsi]; is a variant of the more common pronunciation of kielbasa, which is pronounced [kiəlbɑsə] or [kɪlbɑsə].
Geographic distribution: Chiefly Pennsylvania (see above citation).
Origins: The OED (1991) lists kolbasa as a variable pronunciation of kielbasa, and notes that the former pronunciation is Polish and the latter Russian.


  • jumbo n. bologna lunchmeat (Cassidy and Hall 1996; Johnstone, Bhasin and Wittkofski 2002; Wisnosky 2003; Johnstone and Baumgadt 2004, Johnstone, Andrus and Danielson 2006).
Geographic distribution: Southwestern Pennsylvania (see above citations).


  • neb v. "to put ones 'neb' [nose] into a discourse or argument intrusively or impertinently; to pry, to nose around; hence v. phr neb out to mind one's own business"; n. busybody (Cassidy and Hall 1996).
Geographic distribution: Pennsylvania (see above citation).


  • neb-nose or nebby-nose (also nebshit) n. the kind of person who is always poking into peoples’ affairs (Cassidy and Hall 1996).
Geographic distribution: Chiefly Pennsylvania (see above citation).


  • nebby adj. given to prying into the affairs of others; nosy (McElhinny 1999; Johnstone, Bhasin and Wittkofski 2002; Wisnosky 2003; Johnstone and Baumgardt 2004, Johnstone, Andrus and Danielson 2006).
Geographic distribution: Pennsylvania, especially the southwest portion of the state (see above citations).
Origins: Scots-Irish (see above citations).


  • pierogie (also pirogi, padogie, pirohi, or pirotti) n. "a filled dumpling, usually boiled" (Hall 2002).
Geographic distribution: Chiefly in Polish settlement areas such as Maine, New York, Connecticut; but especially Pennsylvania (see above citation).


  • redd up (also ret, rid(d)) v. "also with out; to tidy up, clean up, or out (a room, house, cupboard, etc.); to clean house, tidy up; hence v bl. redding up housecleaning; tidying up" (Hall 2002). Also see Dressman (1979); McElhinny (1999); Johnstone, Andrus and Danielson (2006).
Example: "Yinz better redd up this room."
Geographic distribution: Dressman (1979) notes that it is common to the Pittsburgh area and throughout Pennsylvania, but less so in Philadelphia. It is also scattered about New England States and in New Brunswick, though its occurrence is heaviest in Pennsylvania. Hall (2002) states that its distribution is “scattered, but chiefly N. Midland, esp PA.”
Origins: Scots-Irish (Dressman 1979).


  • slippy adj. slippery (McElhinny 1999; Johnstone, Bhasin and Wittkofski 2002; Wisnosky 2003; Johnstone and Baumgardt 2004; Johnstone, Andrus and Danielson 2006).
Example: "Be careful going down those steps because they’re real slippy."
Geographic distribution: Southwestern Pennsylvania (see above citations).
Origins: Scots-Irish (Johnstone, Bhasin and Wittkofski 2002; Johnstone and Baumgardt 2004; Johnstone, Andrus and Danielson 2006).


  • "punctual" whenever sub. conj. "at the time that" (Montgomery 2001).
Example: "My mother, whenever she passed away, she had pneumonia."
Further explanation: punctual descriptor refers to the use of the word for "a onetime momentary event rather than in its two common uses for a recurrent event or a conditional one" (see above citation).
Geographic distribution: In the Midlands and the South (see above citation).
Origins: Scots-Irish (see above citation).


Grammar

  • "positive" anymore adv. these days; nowadays (Montgomery 1989; McElhinny 1999; Montgomery 1999)
Example: "It seems I always wear these shoes anymore."
Further explanation: While in Standard English anymore must be used as a negative polarity item (NPI), some speakers in Pittsburgh and throughout the Midland area do not have this restriction. When not used as an NPI, anymore means something like "these days."
Geographic Distribution: Midlands (Montgomery 1989).
Origins: Likely Scots-Irish (Montgomery 1999).


  • Reversed leave~let transitivity (Maxfield 1931; Adams 2000; Johnstone, Bhasin and Wittkofski 2002; Wisnosky 2003; Johnstone and Baumgardt 2004; Johnstone, Andrus and Danielson 2006).
Examples: "Leave him go outside”; “Let the book on the table.”
Further explanation: Essentially, leave is used in contexts in which, in standard English, let would be used; and vice versa.
Geographical distribution: Southwestern Pennsylvania and elsewhere (see above citations).
Origins: Either from Pennsylvania German or Scots-Irish (Adams 2000).


  • like, need, or want + past participle (Murray, Frazer and Simon 1996; Tenny 1998; McElhinny 1999; Murray and Simon 1999; Montgomery 2001; Johnstone, Bhasin and Wittkofski 2002; Murray and Simon 2002; Wisnosky 2003; Johnstone and Baumgardt 2004; Johnstone, Andrus and Danielson 2006).
Examples: “Babies like cuddled”; “The car needs washed”; “The cat wants petted.”
Further explanation: More common constructions are “Babies like cuddling” or “Babies like to be cuddled”; “”The car needs washing” or “The car needs to be washed”; and “The cat wants petting” or “The cat likes to be petted.”
Geographic distribution: Found predominantly in the North Midland region, but especially in southwestern Pennsylvania (Murray, Frazer and Simon 1996; Murray and Simon 1999; Murray and Simon 2002). Need + past participle is the most common construction, followed by want + past participle, and then like + past participle. The forms are "implicationally related" to one another (Murray and Simon 2002). This means the existence of one construction in a given location entails the existence (or not) of another in that location. Here’s the implicational breakdown: where we find like + past participle, we will also necessarily find want and need + past participle; where we find want + past participle, we will also find need + past participle, but we may or may not find like + past participle; where we find need + past participle, we may or may not find want + past participle and like + past participle. Put another way, the existence of the least common construction implies the necessary existence of the two more common constructions, but the existence of the most common construction does not necessarily entail existence of the two less common constructions.
Origins: like + past participle is Scots-Irish (Murray and Simon 2002); need + past participle is Scots-Irish (Murray, Frazer, and Simon 1996; Murray and Simon 1999; Montgomery 2001; Murray and Simon 2002); Adams (2002) argues that want + past participle could be from Scots-Irish or German, but Murray and Simon (1999 and 2002) argue it is Scots-Irish. Since like and need + past participle are Scots-Irish, the distribution of all three constructions are implicationally related, and the area where they are predominantly found is most heavily influenced by Scots-Irish, it seems unlikely that want + past participle is from German. Also, a related construction, want + directional adverb, as in “The cat wants out,” is Scots-Irish (Crozier 1984).


  • yinz, you’uns, or yunz pr. Second person plural (Crozier 1984; McElhinny 1999; Johnstone, Bhasin and Wittkofski 2002; Wisnosky 2003; Johnstone and Baumgardt 2004; Johnstone, Andrus and Danielson 2006).
Geographic distribution: Southwestern Pennsylvania and elsewhere in Appalachia (see above citations).
Origins: Along with the yous of New Jersey and the ya’ll of the South, yinz is Scots-Irish (Crozier 1984; Montgomery 2001).


Discourse and Intonation

  • n'at a "general extender" (McElhinny 1999; Johnstone, Bhasin and Wittkofski 2002; Wisnosky 2003; Johnstone and Baumgardt 2004; Johnstone, Andrus and Danielson 2006).
Example: "We bought a notebook and some pencils n’at."
Further explanation: Reduction of and that, which can mean "along with some other stuff," "the previous was just an example of more general case," or (at least in Glasgow, Scotland) something like "I know this isn’t stated as clearly as it might be, but you know what I mean."
Geographic distribution: Southwestern Pennsylvania (see above citations).
Origins: Possibly Scots-Irish. Macaulay (1995) finds it in the regular speech and narratives of Scottish coal miners in Glasgow, the principal area from which Scottish settlers came when they emigrated to Northern Ireland, and from there, to the American colonies.


  • Falling intonation at the end of questions (Maxfield 1931; Fasold 1980; Layton 1999; Johnstone, Bhasin and Wittkofski 2002; Wisnosky 2003; Johnstone and Baumgardt 2004; Johnstone, Andrus, and Danielson 2006).
Example: "Are you painting your garage?" (with pitch rising in intonation up to just before the last syllable and then falling precipitously).
Further explanation: Speakers who use this intonation pattern do not do so categorically, but instead also end many questions with a rising pitch (Fasold 1980). Such speakers typically use falling pitch for yes/no questions for which they already are quite sure of the answer. So, a speaker uttering the above example is simply confirming what they think they already know, that yes, the person they’re talking to is painting his/her garage.
Geographical distribution: Most common in areas of heavy German settlement, especially southeastern Pennsylvania (Fasold 1980)—hence its nickname, the "Pennsylvania Dutch question"—but also found elsewhere in Pennsylvania, including Pittsburgh (Maxfield 1931; Fasold 1980; Layton 1999; Johnstone, Bhasin and Wittkofski 2002; Wisnosky 2003; Johnstone and Baumgardt 2004; Johnstone, Andrus and Danielson 2006).
Origins: German (Fasold 1980).


References

  1. Adams, M. (2000). Lexical doppelgangers. Journal of English Linguistics 28(3): 295-310.
  2. Brown, C. (1982). A search for sound change: A look at the lowering of tense vowels before liquids in the Pittsburgh area. Master’s thesis. Pittsburgh, University of Pittsburgh.
  3. Cassidy, F. G., Ed. (1985). Dictionary of American Regional English: Introduction and A-C. Cambridge, Harvard UP.
  4. Cassidy, F. G. and. J.H. Hall., Eds. (1991). Dictonary of American Regional English: D-H. Cambridge, Harvard UP.
  5. Cassidy, F. G. and J.H. Hall, Eds. (1996). Dictionary of American Regional English: I-O. Cambridge, Harvard UP.
  6. Crozier, A. (1984). The Scotch-Irish influence on American English." American Speech 59: 310-331.
  7. Dressman, M. R. (1979). ‘Redd up.’ American Speech 54(2): 141-145.
  8. Fasold, R. W. (1980). The conversational function of Pennsylvania Dutch intonation. Paper presented at New Ways of Analyzing Variation (NWAV), Ann Arbor, MI.
  9. Frazier, T. C. (1978). South Midland pronunciation in the United States. American Speech 53: 40-53.
  10. Gagnon, C. L. (1999). Language attitudes in Pittsburgh: 'Pittsburghese' vs. standard English. Master’s thesis. Pittsburgh, University of Pittsburgh.
  11. Hall, J. H., Ed. (2002). Dictionary of American Regional English: P-Sk. Cambridge, Harvard UP.
  12. Hankey, C. T. (1965). Miscellany: ‘tiger,’ ‘tagger,’ and [aɪ] in western Pennsylvania. American Speech 40: 226-229.
  13. Hankey, C. T. (1972). Notes on west Penn-Ohio phonology. Studies in Linguistics in Honor of Raven I. McDavid, Jr. Ed. by L.M. Davis. Alabama UP: 49-61.
  14. Johnson, W. and D. Britain. (Forthcoming). "L vocalisation as a natural phenomenon: explorations in sociophonology." Language Sciences.
  15. Johnstone, B., N. Bhasin, and D. Wittkofski. (2002). ""Dahntahn" Pittsburgh: monopthongal /aw/ and represenations of localness in southwestern Pennsylvania." American Speech 77(2): 148-166.
  16. Johnstone, B., and D. Baumgardt. (2004). ‘Pittsburghese’ online: vernacular norming in conversation. American Speech 79(2): 115-145.
  17. Johnstone, B., J. Andrus and A. Danielson. (2006). Mobility, indexicality, and the enregisterment of "Pittsburghese." Journal of English Linguuistics 34: 77-104.
  18. Kurath, H. (1949). Western Pennsylvania. A Word Geography of the Eastern United States. Ann Arbor, University of Michigan Press: 35-36.
  19. Kurath, H. and R. I. McDavid. (1961). Western Pennsylvania. The pronunciation of English in the Atlantic United States. Ann Arbor, University of Michigan Press: 17-18.
  20. Labov, W., S. Ash and C. Boberg. (2005). Atlas of North American English: phonetics, phonology, and sound change. Mouton-de-Gruyter.
  21. Layton, N. N. (1999). The dialect of western Pennsylvania: evaluation of ten sounds. Master’s thesis. Goteburg, Sweden: University of Goteburg.
  22. Macauley, R. (1985). The narrative skills of a Scottish coal miner. Focus on: Scotland. Ed. by M. Gorlach. Philadelphia, John Benjamins: 101-124.
  23. Maxfield, E. K. (1931). The speech of south-western Pennsylvania. American Speech 7(1): 18-20.
  24. McElhinny, B. (1999). More on the third dialect of English: linguistic constraints on the use of three phonological variables in Pittsburgh. Language Variation and Change 11: 171-195.
  25. Montgomery, M. B. (1997). A tale of two Georges: the language of Irish Indian traders in colonial North America. Focus on: Ireland. Ed. by J. Kallen. Philadelphia, John Benjamins. 21: 227-254.
  26. Montgomery, M. B. (1989). Exploring the roots of Appalachian English. English World-Wide 10(2): 227-278.
  27. Montgomery, M. B. (2001). "My mother, whenever she passed away, she had pneumonia": The history and functions of whenever. Journal of English Linguistics 29(3): 234-249.
  28. Murray, T. E., T. C. Frazer, and B. L. Simon. (1996). Need + past participle in American English. American Speech 71(3): 255-271.
  29. Murray, T. E. and B. L. Simon. (1999). Want + past participle in American English. American Speech 74(2): 140-164.
  30. Murray, T. E. and B. L. Simon. (2002). At the intersection of regional and social dialects: the case of like + past participle in American English. American Speech 77(1): 32-69.
  31. Newlin, C. (1928). Dialects on the western Pennsylvania frontier. American Speech 4(2): 104-110.
  32. Shields Jr., K. (1985). Germanisms in Pennsylvania English: an update. American Speech 60(3): 228-237.
  33. Shields Jr., K. (1989). A note on the greasy/greazy isogloss in east-central Pennsylvania. American Speech 64(3): 280-284.
  34. Simpson, J.A. and E.S.C. Weiner, Eds. (1991). Compact Oxford English Dictionary. 2nd Ed. Cambridge: Oxford UP.
  35. Tenny, C. (1998). Psych verbs and verbal passives in Pittsburghese. Linguistics 36: 591-597.
  36. Wisnosky, M. (2003). ‘Pittsburghese’ in Pittsburgh humor. Master’s thesis in Linguistics. Pittsburgh, University of Pittsburgh.

Pittsp 21:29, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Pittsburgh_English/Overhaul_2006&oldid=171985535"