MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W292545276

"Spayk the Speech Oy Prithee": Dialects of Shakespeare's England and the American South

2006· article· en· W292545276 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alexander Harrington, Justin Ames, Margaret McGill, Corrina Miller

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLinguistic Variation and Morphology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiphthongScotsPronunciationStress (linguistics)HistoryIrishAmerican EnglishVarieties of EnglishClassicsLiteratureLinguisticsArtVowelPhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In their 1986 television series, The Story of English, Robert MacNeil, Robert McCrum, and William Cran make reference to the belief that a dialect of Elizabethan England survives in the Appalachian Mountains. While they refute this notion (countering that the Appalachian dialect is Scots-Irish in origin), they contend that dialects in Eastern seaboard communities from Chesapeake Bay to the Carolinas have evolved relatively slowly since the of the English settlers of the Stuart era. Longtime director and teacher with the Royal Shakespeare Company, John Barton, who is interviewed in The Story of English, says in his 1985 television series Playing Shakespeare that the American accent is closer to the Elizabethan accent than current British Received Pronunciation. These two claims and Assistant Professor Alexander Harrington's work with Southern students on speeches from Shakespeare's plays prompted the formation of a research group consisting of Professor Harrington and a number of students. The group conducted research on early modern English and dialects of the Southeastern United States. In the Playing Shakespeare program and his book based on it, Barton points out that the i in time is a diphthong and that Elizabethans pronounced it so that the two constituents were perceptible to the ear. (1) Later in the book, he spells Shakespeare's pronunciation of the word as Tay-eme. The contemporary English long i in time is a diphthong--rendered by linguist Helge Kokeritz as [ai]. In his book, Shakespeare's Pronunciation, Kokeritz holds that the diphthong was subtly different in early modern English. According to Kokeritz, in early modern English (from approximately the late fifteenth century to the seventeenth century), the first constituent of the diphthong was either the [^] of cut or the [e] of the second syllable of better. He renders the diphthong as [ei]. (2) This sound is somewhere between the contemporary English long i and the [ai] in boy and coin. As evidence of this, Kokeritz points to the rhymes die: joy: annoy, exploit: right (1 Henry VI, 2.3.4), groin: swine (Hamlet, 3.3.24); the puns bile: boil (Twelfth Night, 2.5.2-4), fine: foin (Comedy of Errors, 2.2.73), vice: voice (Cymbeline, 2.3.33); the spelling of smile as smoile in the Folio version and smoyle in the Quarto version of King Lear, voyage as viage (Hamlet, 3.3.24), employ spelled imply in the quarto of 2 Henry IV, 4.2.24; and imply and employ listed as homonyms by orthographers Hodges (1643) and Cooper (1685). (3) Barton focuses on the i in the word time because of the importance of the concept of in Shakespeare's plays. While he does not spend as much (or Tay-eme) on other sounds, he does recite seven lines of the Act 4 chorus from Henry V and reproduces five lines in the book. In the book, Barton phonetically spells now.... ne-ow. The contemporary English diphthong in now and house is pronounced [au]. Helge Kokeritz renders the early modern English pronunciation of the same diphthong as [eu], a sound between ow in house and the oo in loo--essentially, the sound in the much-maligned Canadian about. (4) In listening to Barton on his TV program, the authors perceive his pronunciation of the diphthong in now as the sound Kokeritz represents as [[??]u]. In the transcription of Romeo and Juliet he did for Shakespeare's Globe, found in his Pronouncing Shakespeare, David Crystal uses the same representation for the ou in household. (5) In his transcription, David Crystal only uses phonetic symbols in the spelling of words whose pronunciation was different in early modern English from what it is in contemporary British Received Pronunciation (RP). He renders both and Verona as bo[??]th and Vero[??]na. Since in contemporary British RP, the o in these words is pronounced [o[??]] and not [ai] or [e], it is reasonable to assume that Crystal is indicating a longer sound than is currently used. …

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.137
Threshold uncertainty score0.272

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.257 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLinguistic Variation and MorphologyFrench-language works237,207