4 ms·

I think you underestimate how much people already adapt their dialect in function of the context. Most people speak a different dialect (or in many cases, diffe

I think you underestimate how much people already adapt their dialect in function of the context. Most people speak a different dialect (or in many cases, different language) at home, or back home, than whatever the norm happens to be. People then lessen their dialect if they are talking to people who have different dialects. They drop vocabulary and grammar specific to their dialects and only retain a mild version of the accent. This happens almost unconsciously, and I imagine mostly comes from a desire to be able to communicate effectively. That people still take the effort to go beyond this step and effectively remove all local traces from their accent can only be understood in the framework of social pressures. Because people tend to make all kind of assumptions about you based on your accent, it makes perfect sense if you want to get rid of it. But for intelligibility, you can stop way short of this goal.

jhanschoo 6y ago
> I think you underestimate how much people already adapt their dialect in function of the context. Most people speak a different dialect (or in many cases, different language) at home, or back home, than whatever the norm happens to be. I understand this, but you have a point that I didn't really communicate it. I don't take issue with local accents and dialects when intelligibility is reasonably presumed not to be an issue. Hence my chosen example of the writer thinking that primarily using a local accent on TV is ethically beneficial, for the intended audience of TV. > That people still take the effort to go beyond this step and effectively remove all local traces from their accent can only be understood in the framework of social pressures. Because people tend to make all kind of assumptions about you based on your accent, it makes perfect sense if you want to get rid of it. But for intelligibility, you can stop way short of this goal. I agree with this. I think you also have a point regarding my criticism of the example, that Colbert for instance ethically shouldn't need to extinguish all traces of his accent on TV: just to the extent that it doesn't cause intelligibility problems to a weak English speaker (if it does in the first place).

jhanschoo 6y ago

> I think you underestimate how much people already adapt their dialect in function of the context. Most people speak a different dialect (or in many cases, different language) at home, or back home, than whatever the norm happens to be. I understand this, but you have a point that I didn't really communicate it. I don't take issue with local accents and dialects when intelligibility is reasonably presumed not to be an issue. Hence my chosen example of the writer thinking that primarily using a local accent on TV is ethically beneficial, for the intended audience of TV. > That people still take the effort to go beyond this step and effectively remove all local traces from their accent can only be understood in the framework of social pressures. Because people tend to make all kind of assumptions about you based on your accent, it makes perfect sense if you want to get rid of it. But for intelligibility, you can stop way short of this goal. I agree with this. I think you also have a point regarding my criticism of the example, that Colbert for instance ethically shouldn't need to extinguish all traces of his accent on TV: just to the extent that it doesn't cause intelligibility problems to a weak English speaker (if it does in the first place).