Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2012 July 19

Language desk
< July 18	<< Jun | July | Aug >>	July 20 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Language Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

July 19

Why do some men lisp

Why do so many gay men have lisps? Is it genetic? cultural? a learned behavior? Also what is it's history? Was there one man who had it and the gay community identified with him and adopted, it or was it simply a cultural way to identify other gay men? I am curious as to its cultural origins and why it is so prevalent in both life and the media.--Found5dollar (talk) 01:35, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

It is a Shibboleth. A shibboleth is a cultural or linguistic trait that marks a person as a member of a particular culture. The so-called "gay lisp" isn't genetic or otherwise linked to a person's sexual orientation. Many homosexual people around the world speak without a lisp, while many straight people have one. Some dialects of other languages are even marked by lisps themselves, such as Castillian Spanish. I am speculating a bit here, but the so-called lisp likely developed as a sign of effeminancy. Of cource, not all gay men are effeminate, and not all effeminate men are gay. But I suspect that the connection has something to do with that. --Jayron32 01:45, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

(And here I thought Shibboleth was one of Yog-Sothoth's buddies!) I would be interested to know at what point the lisp became prevalent in the gay community; somewhere in the 1980s, perhaps? It's worth noting that many lisps are caused by certain genetic or physiological traits. This, however, is not one of them. Evanh2008 (talk|contribs) 01:48, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Indeed. The lisp was indicative of gay culture well before the 1980s, I'm pretty sure. I seem to remember an episode of All in the Family where Archie learns that a longtime friend of his was actually gay. A major part of the plot involved Archie accusing a friend of Meathead as being gay, based on his stereotypical gay mannerisms and lispy speech. The gotcha moment comes when Archies masculine friend turns out to be gay, and Meathead's friend turns out to be straight. So, at least in the 1970s the stereotype was commonplace enough that a sitcom could incorporate it easily. --Jayron32 01:56, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

P.S. Looking at List of All in the Family episodes it was season 1, episode 5 "Judging Books by Covers", originally aired February 9, 1971. It's been some time since I have seen the episode (indeed, it originally aired before I was born), but someone could check it out to see if Meathead's friend does lisp or not. --Jayron32 02:01, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

A distinction should be made between when people first lisped in private and in public. Any public indication of homosexuality was likely to have gotten people killed until relatively recently, so it would have only occurred out of the public eye. StuRat (talk) 02:04, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Camp (style) may have something to add, going back to a 1909 reference. --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:58, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes it's a kind of shibboleth and affected, which in extreme cases can extend to full-fledged secret languages like Polari, Gayle, or Swardspeak (which themselves are usually extremely camp; and despite original intentions, were more commonly used for gossiping undetected). It's also a form of rebellion in a way, as lisping, swishing, hysterics, and camp are highly exaggerated versions of qualities traditionally perceived to be feminine—hence the complete opposite of the masculinity demanded of effeminate gay men, and an "in-your-face nyah nyah I'm sick of pretending to be what you want me to be so ah, shaddap you face" depiction of the stereotype expected. See Lavender linguistics and Swish (slang).

And no, it's not pancultural in gay communities in other countries, though there are cultural equivalents. Here in the Philippines for example, "camp" effeminate gay men do not lisp, they instead deliberately substitute the "harder" vowels and consonants (I, U, P, B, and Z) with the "soft" vowels and consonants (E, O, F, V, and S/Sh respectively) and then lengthening the syllables or turning them into diphthongs. e.g. Lalaki (man), pronounced exactly as spelled, would instead be pronounced Lahlahkweh. Pabango (perfume) would become Favangow, etc. -- OBSIDIAN†SOUL 04:04, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

I am curious, is this not characteristic of women's speech? There is a common phenomenon in many world languages for women's speech to have its own defining characteristics. See these google results [1], ignoring the ones on "women's speeches". Unfortunately, there does not seem to be a wikipedia article on the phonology of women's speech as exemplified in various languages. Yet see the comments on phonology and vocabulary in Language_and_gender. μηδείς (talk) 05:01, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Only in that it's pitched higher than in usual male speech and has freer range in terms of intonation (e.g. squealing is acceptable). And even at that, it's a highly exaggerated version. There are really no differences in the way men and women here speak that I can think of, neither in phonology nor vocabulary. Even our pronouns are all completely gender-neutral. On an interesting note, it's pretty similar to the way native anglophones usually mispronounce our vowels (e.g. pronouncing 'a' as in cat rather than 'a' as in father, or ignoring glottal stops and mangling stresses and whatnot).-- OBSIDIAN†SOUL 05:51, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

I am sorry, but this has got to be some of the worst speculation I have read at wikipedia. First, the Spanish use of the 'th' sound in 'thin' for the sound spelt with the letters z and c before i and e has absolutely nothing to do with lisping phonologically or historically--it's simply a natural linguistic development from ts to th. See Castilian 'lisp' Second, lisping is a very rare activity among actively homosexual males. It is simply one sign which, due to its obviousness, has been assigned via confirmation bias by society to active homosexuals in general. If anything, this discussion should be held in the context of transvestism and transexualism--even then it would be misinformed--but that is a very different subject from homosexuality. μηδείς (talk) 04:49, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Stephen Sondheim seemed to make some kind of connection between Ceceo and "gay lisp" in the song The Boy From..., but purely for comedy value... AnonMoos (talk) 15:34, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

But the OP is not exactly asking if all or even if a majority of gay men speak with a lisp (which is obviously not the case), but on why it seems to be prevalent in a visible subset of effeminate gay men given that it doesn't seem to be intrinsic.-- OBSIDIAN†SOUL 01:37, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

There's a lot of conjecture in this answer. Permit me to throw in some more! There's the Polari slang language to throw in here, too, which was predominately spoken amongst gay men via theatre and showbiz circles, which are notoriously more likely to be 'camp' than the general population. Throw in too the fact that one of the first opportunities for the general population, gay or straight, to hear Polari was through the radio characters Julian and Sandy, who spoke with a highly affected camp and lisp style. If there's anything here, it's Medeis' theory above about "confirmation bias" via another means. We've no idea how gay men spoke to each other from industrial northern England. We do know, through countless television programmes and films, how gay men from high society, literature and politics spoke, and as such I wouldn't be surprised if this somehow "trained" gay people in this country to talk. How or why there's a patten across the world of this style of speaking is a flaw in my theory, but that's for someone else to speculate over ;) doktorb _words^deeds 05:23, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Isn't a lisp childish rather than effeminate? Bus stop (talk) 21:41, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

A few quick points. There are different types of behavior called lisping. Certain developmental issues such as l/r>w and s>th are described as lisps. There is also the whispering type speech patterns of certain females such as Marilyn Monroe and Jayne Mansfield which when used by men is described as lisping. Speech patterns are acquired, so one can learn to speak in a hushed voice. But speech patterns are not necessarily acquired consciously, so to describe them as affected in all cases is untrue. There are many different phenomena dealing with sexual behavior with many different causes. It is possible for males to have feminized brains and females to have masculinized brains. This is a different matter from sexual orientation. Most people who engage in homosexual behavior do not identify with the opposite sex or adopt its characteristics--but those who do are more obvious and hence are associated in the public mind with what they think is typical homosexuality. Most people homosexual or bisexual people "pass" however. As for Spanish, English speakers perception of ceceo is colored by our expectations from English as it is influenced by French. We expect c before i and e to make an s sound. We find it odd when Spaniards pronounce it as th. But this the older sound of c/z in Spanish was like that of z in Italian. In SApanish, the ts sound of these letters developed into th according to a normal process of phonological change. The sound spelt with s is still an s, although it may approach what seems like an sh sound in some dialects to English speakers. Foreigners and homosexuals and other minorities make some people uncomfortable, and this results often in comedy. Scientific study leads to other reactions. μηδείς (talk) 22:05, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm not persuaded that any speech issue other than substituting /θ/ and /ð/ for /s/ and /z/ (or other deformations of /s/ and /z/) is typically specifically called a lisp. Wikipedia's own lisp article states that a lisp involves substitutions of sibilants (interdentally, laterally, or palatally) and the OED defines a lisp as "To speak with that defect of utterance which consists in substituting for /s/ and /z/ sounds approaching /θ/ and /ð/ ; either by reason of a defect in the organs of speech or as an affectation. Also, loosely, to speak with child-like utterance, falteringly or imperfectly." (The /w/ for /r/ subsitution is (illogically) called rhotacism (although that article states some speech therapists prefer the more logical de-rhotacization). The use in the term gay lisp seems to very much be a (loose) reference to the loose sense of "speak with child-like utterance, falteringly or imperfectly" rather than a specific defect of the sibilants to my ears, though apparently - as per the article - others feel differently. Julian and Sandy mentioned above - who are the ur-stereotypes of British gay speech - were indisputably camp and used a lot of polari, but neither had anything resembling a deformed sibilant. (Clips are available on Youtube). What is distinctive is the over-enunciation, the drawing out of long vowels and the high register. If anything, the voice is overly emphatic, like a hammy actor rolling the words, rather than "faltering or imperfect". Valiantis (talk) 23:11, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

To clarify my own comment, Medeis appears to be correct (based on a little googling) that many people use the term "lisp" to refer to the /w/ for /r/ defect, though this seems a misuse to my mind, though I guess usage trumps etymology. I say etymology as the cognate German and Dutch words lispeln and lispelen both specifically refer to mispronouning sibilants as dentals [2] [3]. The figure in British culture who I'd associate lisping with would be the 18th Century fop, or any similar portrait of the aristocracy. (They would also often exhibit rhotacism). Fops might certainly be viewed as effeminate and clearly there is an overlap between effeminacy and some traditional views of gayness. The link beween lisping, foppishness and effeminacy seems to be long established (predating the term "fop" in its current sense indeed). Shakespeare refers to "lisping hawthorn-buds, that come like women in men's apparel" in The Merry Wives of Windsor and other uses of the word lisp in his works [4] also suggest effeminacy and/or an excess of concern with appearance and fashion (especially, it would seem French fashion and manners). There does seem to be a whole complex of prejudices tied up with lisping and they all map onto what constitutes the stereotype of homosexuality in British culture (effeminacy, decadence, excessive concern with appearance and manners, "foreignness"). Italians [5] and Frenchmen [6] - typically portrayed as effeminate in British culture - are often described as "lisping" - illogically as (unlike Castilian) neither French nor Italian has a /θ/ in its phonology. Valiantis (talk) 23:57, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

I have to agree with you that I find the description of the (l/r)>w defect or dialect as a "lisp" unsatisfying. But I haven't been able to find a better name for it either. My big problem with describing the assumption of the opposite sex's speech patterns as "gay" is that "gay" is a term that originates in the 1950's (so far as I can tell) and is hugely anachronistic, political, and "now"centric. I prefer a view of humanity which doesn't assume that what is familiar to people born in the West since theAssassination of Buckwheat by John David Stutts is the entirety of history of mankind. μηδείς (talk) 22:18, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Not sure if the comment about the issue of assuming the opposite sex's speech pattern as "gay" is addressed to me or to the discussion in general. I'm aware of the historicity of the word "gay". I also didn't express any opinion as to whether "lisping" was typical of female speech in English. In fact, I would suggest that it's not typical of English female speech generally, but might be used by some women to give an impression of childishness for the purposes of sexual allure, which you allude to above - and which Shakespeare has Hamlet allude to (in one of the quotes I linked to above) in his "to a nunnery" speech - and which is a whole other discussion! However, there is clearly a perceived connection between lisping and effeminacy (or perhaps I should say "unmanliness") which seems independent of the suggestion that lisping is adopting a specifically female mode of speech. I feel I'm safe using the term "effeminate" in a discussion going back to at leats Shakespeare's time as, according the to the OED the term dates back to the 15th C, though it initially carried both its current sense and now obsolete competing senses of "soft", "voluptuous", "tender" and even - as a translation of the Latin uxorius - "devoted to women"). Homosexual men (and I'm aware that's another term that has a historical limit) are rightly or wrongly typically depicted as effeminate in recent (e.g. 20th C) Anglophone culture. However, as I commented above the archetypical British camp voice does not lisp either in the /θ/ for /s/ sense or in the child-like, faltering or imperfect utterance sense. Valiantis (talk) 03:54, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

I segued from a direct response to you to a general one. It was the OP who started the thread who use the word gay. Regarding lisping, although it has been about a year since I watched the Best of Ernie Kovacs, whose Dovetonsils character I think did actually lisp, gay men almost never do in the sense of Thindy Brady. The phenomenon in modern English is that of a hushed (whispered) feminized voice, not a confusion of s/th. μηδείς (talk) 04:08, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

The lisp stereotype was certainly already well-established by the 1950s, as this clip of Ernie Kovacs as "Percy Dovetonsils" shows.[7] It's not a real "strong" lisp, but it's there - along with making no attemp to hide the character's orientation. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:38, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Again I have to emphasize that there is a difference between men's and women's speech in many, if not all languages. Consider the falsetto voice of the traditional Japanese woman and the difference in vocabulary (the first person atashi, vs. watashi or boku), the apocope and "jalado" typical of Mexican males, or the difference between men's and women's speech in the Muskogean Koasati language of the American South East, documented by Mary R. Haas in 1944, where words which end in nasal vowels in women's speech end in s in the speech of men, and so forth. The phenomenon of certain men and women adopting the speech patterns of the opposite sex is hardly limited to the modern world of the 1950's in the West. It is attested in classical cultures, and attested in the neolithic peoples of Siberia and the Americas. See shamanism and berdache. Lev Shternberg documents men living as women (by dress and speech) among the Nivkh people in his classic work, The Social Organization of the Gilyak (Anthropological Papers of the American Museum of Natural History). μηδείς (talk) 04:16, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Old thread, but I thought I should share this. Last night, I was watching a Hebrew language film. In the film there was a character of the stereotypical gay hairdresser persuasion, and he clearly had the "lisp" discussed above. I find it very interesting that the speech attributes have actually managed to transcend language barriers within (presumably) just a couple generations of it becoming prominent in the Anglosphere. Evanh2008 ^{(talk|contribs)} 01:33, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Are you literally saying he pronounced his esses as tee aitches, or just that he spoke effeminately? μηδείς (talk) 04:28, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes, there were definitely some dental fricatives where there otherwise would have been alveolar sibilants (and possibly palato-alveolar sibilants as well, though I couldn't swear to that). Generic effeminacy in articulation and such would be understandable, maybe even expected, but this was essentially the same lisp that you would hear among English speakers who have it. Evanh2008 ^{(talk|contribs)} 06:29, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

correct form

• In which day this area remain closed?
• Which day this area remain closed?

Which one should I use in both spoken and written English? Thanks--180.234.35.27 (talk) 09:54, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Neither. Try "On which day will this area close ?" (if it's currently open) or "Until which day will this area remain closed ?" (if it's currently closed). Note that the "On which day" part sounds a bit formal, as does "remain closed", and in casual speech you might just say "When will it close ?"/"When will it open ?" or "When does it close ?"/"When does it open ?". StuRat (talk) 10:01, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Psst. I think you meant "remain", not "remained". :-) Evanh2008 ^{(talk|contribs)} 10:05, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, fixed. StuRat (talk) 10:08, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

I agree with StuRat. Both of those sentences are poor English. However, the second option should be "Until which day will this area remain closed?". But depending on what you're actually trying to say, something different again might be better. Can you tell us what your original sentence was, in the language you first thought of it, please? Thanks. AlexTiefling (talk) 10:07, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

I guess that the idiomatic English version of what you want to say is "Which days is this area closed (on)?" But that has to be a guess, because I don't know the context.

Particular points I can make, though are:

• "Which day" is grammatical, but strongly suggests that you are asking about exactly one day: if it might be more than one day, then "Which days" would be more normal.
• English speakers do not use "in" with "day" except in some special meanings. "On" is what you almost certainly want; but for your probable meaning "on" is optional. Also, colloquially, it can come at the end, though many would not accept that in formal use.
• "Remain closed" is not a common phrase, and if used it would imply that this was contrary to expectations. If you just mean "does not open today" then "be closed" (i.e. "is closed" or "are closed" or "will be closed") would be more normal.
• In any case, your verb "remain" would require a plural subject, and would have to be "remains" with the singular subject "this area". --ColinFine (talk) 14:57, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

I read the intended meaning as "which day or days of the week is the area closed?" to which an answer might be "Mondays". If this is the case, I suggest "On which day(s) is this area closed?" Bazza (talk) 15:41, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Do you speak Bangla? If you tell us what you want to say in your native language we may be able to translate it for you. See this website: http://translate.google.com/?hl=en&tab=wT#bn%7Cen%7C μηδείς (talk) 18:00, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Not sure that a machine translation would help, as what they started with rather already looks like one. When I did a round trip translation from English to Bengali and back, at that site, I get this nonsense: "Days of the close of this area?". StuRat (talk) 18:18, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

I am sure that knowing what he actually wanted to say is his own language can't hurt, even if I can only count to ten in Bangla. Next time I want to tell someone to rely solely on a machine translation I will remember to make that point myself. μηδείς (talk) 20:32, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Machine did not show me the proper translation of above mentioned statements. It showed me wierd meaning This area is never closed...?. I think I'll use:

• On which day will this area close ? (if it's currently open). Actually, it was my point.
• Until which day will this area remain closed ? (if it's currently closed)

Some areas in my region are usually remain closed on specific days(is there anything wrong with this statement?). I visited one of those areas and then questions raised in my mind. Thanks StuRat.--180.234.238.160 (talk) 15:33, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Those two sentences are grammatically acceptable as you have given them, and you should feel free to use them as you have written them.

But using the word "what" instead of which would sound better to my ear because you are not implying any contrast or choice of days, just requesting simple information. (On the other hand you might ask, "On which days will the area be closed?" if you expected to be given a list of days.)

It might also be better for the second sentence to ask, "On what day will this area reopen?"

Finally, in informal speech, you would sound more natural if you moved the prepositions to the end: "What day will this area close on?" "What day will this area reopen on?" or you can just omit the prepositions. "What day will this area close?" is perfectly acceptable.

There was indeed a problem with Some areas in my region are usually remain closed on specific days. You have two main verbs, "are" and "remain" and can only have one main verb. You would say either Some areas in my region are usually closed on specific days or Some areas in my region usually remain closed on specific days.μηδείς (talk) 16:27, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Why do Europeans speak American so poorly?

Here's a perfect example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZXcRqFmFa8 Can anyone transcribe it? μηδείς (talk) 23:23, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Why can't Americans speak English at all? HiLo48 (talk) 23:47, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

User:Medeis has linked to an excerpt of an Italian comedian doing a parody of American English. I don't think there's a legitimate question here, beyond the obvious, that for most Europeans, English is a second language. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:54, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

It’s not surpring that non-anglophones have trouble picking up what Americans say, when anglophones sometimes struggle to understand them. Let me use Revenge (TV series) as an example. I always hear clearly what the Graysons (Victoria, Conrad, Daniel, Charlotte) say. Jack, Tyler and Ashley are all OK. Nolan is usually OK but he can mumble a bit sometimes. But the two I have the greatest difficulty understanding are Emily (the real Amanda), and most particularly Declan. I hear them saying ... something ... but I often have literally no idea what they said, because they both (Declan more than Emily, but she's bad enough) can’t seem to wait to get their words out, almost before they’ve opened their mouths. The high pitch of both their voices (again, Declan wins hands-down here) doesn’t help either with my high-end hearing loss. And the camera is often not on their faces as they're speaking, which immediately disenfranchises a whole lot of viewers with hearing issues who depend on lip reading to enhance their understanding. But my partner, whose hearing is perfect, has the same problem with these two actors, and he's lived in the USA and Canada for significant periods. (Is this an unsigned fragment of an interrupted comment by JackofOz?)

Ahem. The actress who plays Emily (the real Amanda) is Canadian. And the actor playing Declan is using an accent which is not his own, attempting one supposedly similar to the "locals" in the Hamptons. It's not his natural accent. 69.62.243.48 (talk) 02:08, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

She plays an American. Viewers are invited to believe she's American. For the purposes of this question, she is effectively an American. And Declan: whether that's how Connor Paolo normally speaks or not is not the point. I know only what I see and hear of this American actor portraying an American subject, 95% of whose utterances are lost on me. -- ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ ^{[your turn]} 23:21, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Here he comes through clearly, but that’s a staged interview, which is not how we mostly see actors. Here's some stuff about the accent he adopted for the show. But regardless of the accent, if an actor does not make himself comprehensible to the audience, he really needs to work on that. He can't use it as an excuse for a basic failure of communication, as you seem to be allowing him to do. -- ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ ^{[your turn]} 23:33, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

There are many other examples of what I call a cutesy-girly voice that a lot of younger-end American actresses have (or affect), and it’s mostly associated with speaking almost too quickly for people who don’t spend their lives in the company of such people to understand with comfort. I previously mentioned the film The Social Network, which I bought on DVD, and I’m glad I did, because had I seen it at the cinema I’d have been ripped off because I understood hardly anything anyone said, mainly because they all spoke much too fast. Five minutes into the DVD, I had to stop, go back to the start, put the subtitles on and try again. Even then, some of what they were talking about was lost on me, but at least I knew what words they were using. -- ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ ^{[your turn]} 00:03, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

If any of you had bothered to read the video description, you would have seen that this is a parody, it's a song that's made up entirely of gibberish. So, while it sounds like English, it is actually just a collection of random sounds. Since the lyrics are gibberish, there are no proper lyrics, but, obviously, people have attempted to find some, as in this video. V85 (talk) 00:17, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

I, for one, did "bother to read" the video description, and I made my comments because I believe they are apposite to the topic. -- ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ ^{[your turn]} 00:58, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

There is also this video of what some Brits think American English sounds like. Like the video Μηδείς posted above, it is not intended to contain actual English, so there is little point in transcribing it (though some words were obviously based off, or copied from, real words, like "today" and "yeah"). In short, I suppose this kind of language-impression is not too different from the way Chinese is often characterized by English speakers as "ching chong aaahhh" or whatever.  dalahäst ^{(let's talk!)} 00:11, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

I disagree. There are Europeans who speak almost perfect American.-- OBSIDIAN†SOUL 00:48, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Actually, there's just as wide a difference between the standard Spanish of Spain and French of France and the American dialects of those languages as there is between average American and Received Pronunciation, and apparently even more between the Portuguese of Portugal and Brazil, to the point that the last are taught as separate standards. Some Spanish of the Americas is such as colloquial Puerto Rican and Dominican might as well be Geordie. μηδείς (talk) 02:42, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

There's your answer then. Dialects. And I know hence the "almost". The point was you calling American English, "American", as if it's a completely different language. Were you even including the UK when you said "European"? It's simply because it's a second language to most continental Europeans. In the same way that most Americans speak French, German, Italian, Japanese, Chinese, or Spanish quite badly, if at all. -- OBSIDIAN†SOUL 06:36, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

I meant what I said and I said what I meant. The section title was considered and ironic. I was indeed including Brits as Europeans, since had Dalahäst not posted skwerl, I would have done so as my followup. As for your contention that Americans speak other languages badly, that is pure OR. Children forced to take a language in school are one thing. And people who want to learn a foreign language may be a small group. But those who do make the effort fare no worse than, say, Yorkshiremen.μηδείς (talk) 21:30, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Likewise with your contention that Europeans speak "American" badly. :P -- OBSIDIAN†SOUL 23:31, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

You seem totally oblivious to irony. The video is a parody, the "badly" refers to the fact that the words are not real words--the performance itself is actually quite good. Please note that in not a single one of my comments here have I actually "contended" that Europeans do anything bad—but plenty of others have complained about Americans. The purpose of the thread was to elicit comments and information on the video itself and doubletalk and impressions of languages in general. Given the upset asking the titular question seems to have caused some people, I suggest we all consider how effing insulting it is when question are asked such as "Why do Americans (or Israelis, or gays)," for example all "do X?" Questions like this, while they are probably 50% trolling, are posed like that here all the time, and answered in all seriousness. μηδείς (talk) 19:22, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Medeis, I think the internet is demonstrating its poor capacity to transmit irony here. I appreciate what you have tried here; I shan't condone the posting of a misleading question, but I am impressed. Please accept my sincere apologies for our earlier disagreement elsewhere. AlexTiefling (talk) 20:03, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

I vaguely remember something and I am sure I was provocative, so apology accepted and reciprocated but not necessary on your part. Regarding the irony of the title, I thought it was entirely explained by watching the video I linked to. I was indeed interested in the "lyrics" and found the best version of "them" here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9EsTeKt134o μηδείς (talk) 21:47, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I did misread it as an entirely serious question, and you have to admit it's quite inflammatory if it was. Anyway, thanks for the explanation. Like AlexTiefling says, irony does not translate well into text (at least not without emoticons, lol). I apologize as well.-- OBSIDIAN†SOUL 01:45, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Well, thanks and mine in return if I upset you, but apologies and upset are not what I am looking for. I really did expect people to watch the video and offer a "transcription". I think Celentano's video really is quite a brilliant bit of impressionistic comparative linguistics. I learnerd Spanish as a child. When my familiy moved back to the North East after we had lived in the Texas area and the Caribbean I remember crying because people did not understand half of what I said to them. Then, when I worked as a cook and waitress after I moved out of the house I spent a long time working, and six months living with Mexican immigrants, to the point of dreaming in Spanish, and asking people, "How you say in Inglish?" At one point I asked some of my Mexican friends what they thought it sounded like when they listened to peopel speaking (American) English. I told them Spanish speakers sounded like they were saying "diga-diga-diga." My best friend said AMericans say "ger-ger-ger." From a Spanish standpoint that makes sense to me, but it's not very informative from a British to American viewpoint--unless you consider the rhotacism. (For Brits, if you want to know what Americans think of your speech, watch the Monty Python Upper-Class Twit sketches.) So I was very impressed when I heard the Prisencolinensinainciusol video. I really would like to know, are there other such videos by speakers of other languages besides Italian and the British video "skwerl."? μηδείς (talk) 02:44, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

The video I posted at the top of the thread is of the song Prisencolinensinainciusol by Adriano Celentano. I found it a strikingly good imitation of American, although it does vary between a Texas accent and SAE, and the blonde sounds much more like Marlene Dietrich than an American. μηδείς (talk) 02:42, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

I sometimes wonder whether ability to speak the target language impairs ability to generate convincing gibberish "in" that language. —Tamfang (talk) 07:16, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

I agree. I have noticed that once I learn a foreign language it loses its mysterious foreignness. I was just watching Eartha Kitt sing C'est si bon with someone and only realized after the song was half over that they couldn't understand what she was saying because it wasn't English.

Actually, Europeans speak American so poorly because manifest destiny convinced them that they wouldn't have to learn it. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 08:29, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

lulz.-- OBSIDIAN†SOUL 11:54, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

? --Michael Fleischhacker (talk) 12:12, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

I guess he is referring to the indigenous languages of the Americas -- Q Chris (talk) 12:51, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

I am curious if anyone can name any films of the 30's and 40's that have doubletalk in them. I remember a scene from one with a guy giving directions at an information desk, but haven't been able to track it down. μηδείς (talk) 19:22, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Regarding your question of 'similar skits', I thought of this skit made by a group of Norwegian comedians about the Danish language being incomprehensible to the extent that even the Danes can't use it to communicate with each other. The joke is that Norwegian and Danish languages are so close that one should be able to understand the other language without resorting to English, but here the 'Danish' they speak is complete gibberish, while (to the Norwegian listener) still retaining 'Danish qualities'.

Similarly, Norwegian comedian Harald Heide-Steen Jr. made this sketch where he speaks something that sounds like Sami language. (As some of the comments say: It's not Sami.) The joke is that he inserts the odd Norwegian phrase, such as Jahn Otto Johansen getting completely drunk and getting arrested. (Sami has some loans from Norwegian, especially when it comes to politics and government.) V85 (talk) 17:50, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Okay, that was hilarious. I know just enough Danish to know that some of the words (Kamelåså) were nonsense. The interesting thing with Danish compared to the rest of Scandinavian, English compared to German, Portuguese compared to Spanish, and Russian compared to the rest of Slavic is the reduction of unstressed vowels in the prior languages and the effect this has on mutual comprehensibility. For example, I can understand written Portuguese with no problem whatsoever, and have made myself clear to Portuguese immigrants to the US. But I find spoken Portuguese about as comprehensible as Dutch; that is, not at all. As for Russian, half the fun of it is learning how to (mis)pronounce it according to its spelling. Who could imagine that the word tongue, spellt Язык ('yazɨk'), is normaly pronounced ʲə'zɨk, except when it's pronounced ɪzɪ'kʲɛ or otherwise? μηδείς (talk) 02:48, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

I used to consider Gaelic strange because the spelling and pronunciation seem to be totally divorced from each other. But then I realized English isn't really that different. Having been exposed to English since childhood, I've never fully appreciated the fact that English is really quite difficult for a non-native speaker. Anyway, no videos but I once saw a local comedian depict a German tourist. Lots of sounds like /f/, /ʒ/, /ʃ/, /ts/, /tz/, /ɔɪ/, /st/, /x/, /v/ and schwas interspersed with der, die, ja, nein etc. The humor being in the way he "Germanized" native words and phrases (usually by adding ge- or -en). It convincingly sounded German to our non-German ears, though they were mostly nonsense words.-- OBSIDIAN†SOUL 19:57, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

That reminds me of Vee heff miet hier in ze buildink! and

FUNEX?

SVFX.

FUNEM?

SVFM.

OK,LFMNX.

μηδείς (talk) 04:04, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

If they existed in the same universe it would go like this:

FUNEX?

Que?

-- OBSIDIAN†SOUL 06:16, 24 July 2012 (UTC)