User deleted post
are we just gonna ignore the last person's handle
With the Hello Kitty pfp is wild ngl
Yeah, the real Hello Kitty would never use slurs!
Stop, please, this is not ig
What are you even asking them to stop?
i guess i just have a trauma from all the points out pretty obvious thing "is wild ngl" comments on instagram
Instagram is causing trauma now, that's pretty wild ngl
That's not where that phrase originated tho. Maybe just get off IG.
Thats a very good call tho, i did it for fun at first but the raige bait gets addicting
That's pretty wild ngl
If comments are traumatizing you, maybe you shouldn't be on the internet, my guy
Damn man, the pretty wild ngl. Hope you recover LMFAO
Frfr
yes
Since they are a child doing it for attention, yes.
They're probably referring to that "modern American is basically Shakespearean English" myth, therefore are arguing that their version is the real English.
Where TF has this falsehood come from? It seems to be a myth that constantly gains traction with Americans.
I actually know this one. The short of it is because people are exaggerating to the point of insanity.
The longer version is that shortly after the Revolutionary War the ‘standard’ British accent underwent a rather severe shift to a non-rhotic form, basically the under-pronounce/drop their Rs. I believe it was from the French and a desire to sound fancy. The Americans, who didn’t get in on that trend, kept their ‘standard’ accent rhotic and thus remained closer to the older forms of English. No, I don’t know when the intrusive Rs showed up in British English.
The ‘exaggerate to the point of insanity’ part is when people take ‘Closer to the older form’ to mean ‘Is the same as Elizabethan English’ despite the whole 200 years of linguistic drift between the split point thing going on.
A proper Elizabethan accent sounds little like either one, technically the American is closer but not by much. The ‘standard’ Shakespearean accent is all wrong though.
There are linguists who actually have reconstructed what it would sound like and, from my nonlinguist perspective, it actually sounds pretty Irish. The closest American accent to it is kind of Appalachian, which makes sense given that accent’s origin. I would recommend digging it up if you can, the proper accent highlights a LOT of dirty innuendo that the false accents strip away.
It also only really compares it to accents from the south east/home counties. We still have rhotic accents in the UK. These are found primarily in the south west however many accents have a rhotic version that can be found in the more isolated rural areas.
This is part of why it’s so amazing to see Andrew Scott do Shakespeare, not only is his accent very close to Elizabethan English, but he really understands the language and delivers it in the way it’s meant to be delivered, not all hoity-toity like people tend to think of Shakespeare
Not sure entirely abandoning the iambic pentameter, as he did, is how it's meant to be delivered though.
Every good servant does not all commands; No bond but to do just ones.
Appalachian and the weird little isolated island thing off of NC. Linguists actually say the NC one still has the pseudo Irish lilt, and might be even closer to the 'original English' thing. These areas remained extremely isolated, and their language didn't shift.
Overall, the post isn't necessarily incorrect insomuch as it's not contextually... totally correct.
Tangier Island, VA is the isolated island.
Also, Harkers Island
I wanted to hear it, so I looked up a Youtube video. Figured I'd share it here, it's interesting
I remember seeing a documentary on how they figured that out. They essentially looked at a bunch of poetry to learn what words rhymed with what and where emphasis was placed. Then they compared it to accents from all over the English speaking world and found that a pocket of English speakers in a remote area of Appalachia and some Islands around the US that had a very similar way of speaking.
It was so cool.
I had a prof in college who spoke Middle and Old English and I literally described it to people as “drunk with a thick Irish accent.”
Middle English and Old English are separated by about 400 years and are two different languages.
Elizabethan English was halfway through the Great Vowel Shift, so the word ‘twilight’ for instance, would have been ‘tweelicht’ in Middle English; ‘twoiloit’ in EME (Early Modern English - Shakespeare) and ‘twighlight’ in Modern English. The most close sound to shakespearian vowels is in the SW of England; Cornwall, Somerset, Wiltshire, where the kids talk about going out to ride on ‘moi boike’ after school.
Yes thank you I learned that in the class with said professor.
The you must know that they can’t possibly sound the same, drunk or otherwise.
Yeah man I meant they sounds exactly the same. Congrats on winning Reddit.
User deleted comment
25d
The user to whom you replied quite literally said exactly that
There are linguists who actually have reconstructed what it would sound like and, from my nonlinguist perspective, it actually sounds pretty Irish.
To me it sounds a hell of a lot closer to the stereotypical "pirate" accent than Irish.
"pirate" accents are just modern day west country accents.
So let me get this straight. Americans claim that their accent is closest to “Elizabethan English Accent” which a) is not a thing b) not possible to prove and c) a period which technically ended 4 years before the first English colony.
Seems legit.
a) no b) no and c) the Susan Constant set sail three years after Queen Elizabeth’s death, nobody is suggesting that the British waited until ten minutes after the ship left and suddenly completely changed their accent; the evolution of language takes time
What do you mean no?
Edit: for clarity. 60 of those colonists survived. The colony didn’t have over 1000 people until almost two decades later.
The great migration was from 1620 to 1640 which is closer to the English Civil War than the Elizabethan period. Where 50,000 or so people went to the colonies.
The largest migration from Britain to the Americas was the between 1820 and 1957 where about 4.5 million went.
Pretty sure ‘no’ means ‘no’. As in, your assertion is incorrect.
Which, well, we do know what the assorted accents of the time sounded like so claiming that said accents both didn’t exist and are impossible to know is simply ‘no’. I mean, telling a linguist that Early Modern English wasn’t a thing would really just confuse them.
As is the claim that the language of the time gives a shit about when colony ships set out, languages don’t switch accents when monarchs are replaced. It would be several generations until it would be a notably different accent, those colonists would have the same accents they had before and after she died. Linguistic eras are ‘the language and dialect of this region and time’, not ‘The language and dialect SOLELY found in this region and time’.
I mean, saying Early Modern English didn’t exist or didn’t have known dialects is certainly a claim worthy of a straight ‘no’.
Accent you moron. Elizabethan English Accent. Like current modern English, people speak it differently with different accents, in the 16th century they did also.
You wrote all that out like a condescending prick. What accent is this written in? mOdErn EnGlIsH accent?
Also, only 60 of those first colonists survived. You claiming that those 60 people spread the Elizabethan Accent across the USA while the vast majority arrived a good 40 years later?
Where would we find this? Is there a YouTube video of some reputable guy explaining it?
Are there videos? Oh God, yes
Are they reputable? Wellllllll.....
It's just that American English is rhotic, whereas British English is non-rhotic. And the claim is that Shakespearean English was rhotic. People get a little confused about that, though, and assume that means that American English = Shakespearean English. Sure, they were both rhotic, but that doesn't mean they were the same.
The west country accent is rhotic.
I'm not sure the hillbillies in Yokelsville who claim that American English is somehow the original English would understand that argument.
Someone explained the rhotic / non-rhotic thing to them and it went over their head and they only got "shakespeare pronounced the r like Americans" and now just say that American English = Shakespeare English.
No idea. For all I know, it has some basis in fact, like academics think the US accent or pronunciation is closer to archaic English or something, but I can't imagine it's the direct one-to-one parallel that some people claim it is.
I can't speak to why they think the bostonians are speaking old-school, but just looking over the accentbiasbritain.org summaries the brit side is easy enough to figure out. Since they're saying these accents are at most a couple hundred years old, they could just be running with that. Like, "the British stopped speaking their language the right way right after the revolutionary war so new Englanders probably kept it the same." Or something.
Idk & I’m American.
I've seen it on imgur memes at least three times in the past two weeks, so I guess it's just making the rounds now and will fall out of favor soon.
User deleted comment
25d
Did...did you not read the whole article or...?
Lol, how ironic. You're confidently incorrect about your own article on this sub. Bravo!
Not pronouncing the letter R is a fairly new addition to British English, so that's probably where they're getting it from. The language is the same of course, but the accent is younger than most American accents
The west country accent is rhotic.
Yeah non-rhotic started in the South-East spread north and slightly inland supposedly as well as to Australia and NZ
Not pronouncing the letter R is a fairly new addition to British English
Well, naturally, or we wouldn't have been able to have the golden age of piracy
Bristolians still pronounce the R quite hard tbf and that’s where the pirate accent comes from
The Bristolian pirates stole all our R shipments.
Aint that the gurt trewf mate
Just posted this nativlang video on a similar thread earlier. But this is likely what Shakespeare's English actually sounded like. https://youtu.be/WeW1eV7Oc5A?si=yhngNnrm6JN6v156
It's a half myth. American English is rhotic (broadly) - Shakespeare's English was rhotic and there's mountains of evidence that it remained (in majority) as such until the industrial revolution. The American accent isn't exactly identical and obviously broadly as a language neither are similar in the least, but American pronunciation is more similar.
As for which is real English is actually irrelevant to the claims in the post. The post specifically said the modern British accent is younger than "American Language" which is true (broadly, some of the US isn't rhotic like Boston and some of the UK is), but that said it's worded worded intentionally to bait people (British accent vs American Language).
Here's a very digestable British source talking about as much- https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20180207-how-americans-preserved-british-english
The statement that "American Language is older than British Language" which wasn't made, would be wrong.
Tbf English accepts are older than Shakespeare and English. There's Lancashire accents that are from before the English language as we now know it
It works if they ignore Celtic, Geordie and Cornish accents exist.
Wait, what? I'm American and have never heard that. Also, there's a ton wrong with that. I mean, there is no "real" English. Language evolves over time and, eventually, our version of English will be called something like 21st Century English (like Old or Middle English).
Also, has anyone who thinks that read Shakespeare?
As an American I really enjoyed our country being described as younger than Greenlands oldest shark
It lives a remarkably long life so it’s not even really an insult, just kinda a fun fact about the shark.
And an accurate reflection on the age of a nation. Little baby bird cheep cheep
Very few countries are today to be fair, the countries that have supposedly been around far longer have gone through so many leadership/government changes I feel like it wouldn’t be accurate to say for instance the modern UK is the same thing as Britain was a few hundred years ago. I might be wrong tho
Ah yes, THE British accent. The one accent used by people in London, Manchester, Newcastle, Glasgow, Swansea, Belfast, Birmingham, the Black Country, Leeds, Penzance, Orkney… you get the picture. The British accent.
What do people who are learning English learn?
Truck or lorry?
Elevator or lift?
Chips or crisps?
Fries or chips?
Cookie or biscuit?
I suppose they target one more than the other, along the lines of learning the Spanish of Spain or of the Americas.
Don't forget apartment or flat.
And definitely don't forget "fanny"!
Fanny means your arse over there, not your minge
There we go.
Unrelated to that, I’ve been rewatching the League of Gentlemen (again), nearly finished S2. Hope you and Edward can find a notail for David!
Fanny in England apparently is like saying c*nt in the US, I was told once by an English girl I worked with years ago.
Well, it means the same thing but is much more polite. I'd say fanny is more like pussy.
"Smack on the fanny" is still perfectly acceptable to do to kids in the US (esp red states).
Apparently it's straight up sexual assault in England.
Also, fanny packs.
That's what I would have guessed until someone in our group related a story about someone falling hard on their "fanny" and English girl made a face like someone just kicked a puppy.
It was the "I don't believe this guy just kicked a puppy", face that led to the whole fanny/c*nt discussion.
I'm not surprised she pulled a face, it'd be similar to getting a kick to the balls.
Why the downvotes? Must have offended some snowflake with the word fanny.
Yeah, I’m sure there are a ton, those are just the ones that came to mind.
I listen to Spanish podcasts and there are a lot more that are done in Spain’s Spanish. One of the series I watch even has people from Mexico, Argentina, and Colombia discussing their different terms for the same things, though they say most of the terms would be understood even if not commonly used.
I think it’s a pretty interesting meta topic on top of just learning “Spanish.” I’m sure the same dynamic applies to different “flavors” of English.
I don’t think flats and apartments are the same thing though, my whole family’s British and don’t use the two interchangeably.
In the UK i think of apartments as holiday flats, but I think others (estate agents) use it for flats in general.
ESL Teacher here. Can't speak for native speaking schools (I specialise in Teaching English as a Second or Other Language) but in ESL programs it's completely up to the teacher. Most will teach in their accent and the students usually just imitate what they were taught.
As much as it pains me to say this (I'm British) there's no wrong way to teach English as long as it's getting through to them.
That’s what I figured.
Apparently there was a big deal, as far as these things go, anyway, that a bunch of kids in Spain were learning to speak English like Peppa Pig.
I suspect most ESL in Europe get a Spain version and most in the Americas get a US version. I try to focus more on Latin American Spanish because that’s where I spend my time, but pretty much anything helps, imo.
Can't speak much on Spanish but that peppa pig story does sound familiar.
When I did my degree there was emphasis to try to stick to "BBC English" at least in written form. But an American teacher will never stick to that and there's as many US teacher as there are British.
Issue is that when you teach in a school the whole team is usually a mixed bag of native speakers and so their former teacher might be from New Zealand and pronounce "desk" like "disk" and so you have to spend time explaining there's many ways to pronounce things.
I teach Thai students, their language is VERY tonal (they use 5 tones and it changes the meaning of the word) so it can be hard to fathom for some.
Adapting is the key to being a good teacher imo, a good philosophy to take into any language learning as a teacher is your a guide, the students are the ones teaching themselves.
Agree with all of that. I listen to Spanish speakers from all over the world to try to understand different accents and gather up some different vocabulary.
Then I proceed to dump my non-R-rolling Texas accent on it all and sound like I just suffered a concussion or something. But I can understand almost anything and I can speak well enough to convey at least the gist of what I’m trying to say. To me, that’s a success, even though I have plenty of room to get better.
One of my favorite examples of being understood is from a Spanish podcast where the host was talking about how he wanted to be able to use the Spanish equivalent of “Excuse me, sir, can you give me directions to the main plaza downtown?” Then he saw a guy roll up, ask in Spanish “Downtown?” and shrug his shoulders. He got just as good an answer and was on his way.
Yeah it's interesting how we as humans tend to simplify things in every dialect, and as you just stated there's a language that we all speak! And that's body language. You can convey meaning purely through gestures to help provide a better understanding.
A linguist we studied alot at uni is a well known man called Stephen Krashen and his idea on Comprehensible Input. He's really good to read when trying to broaden your horizons on how we learn or 'cognitively develop' if your into understanding how your mind works when taking in new languages.
Comprehensible input is my go to. It worked when I was a baby. It seems to be working for now.
Most of the time it is American we learn at least in Sweden but I had a friend who's teacher was obsessed about England and would not give you the point on a test if you answered with the American option. And my friend ended up having a British accent and I am very jealous of her, I much rather speak British than American
That’s interesting. The teacher’s policy seems a little counterproductive, though. I’d be annoyed if a Spanish teacher accepted “playera” but not “camiseta” or vice versa, for example.
It's very counterproductive, it's straight up stupid. The point of learning English as a second language is just to communicate in English not sound like a native of any region of the world.
She even taught her students to say wo'er instead of water.
This depends on who's teaching them and where. I know ESL people who have learned british english and I know ones who have learned american english.
In europe we learned british in school and american on the tv.
Speaking from my experience with education in Poland, we mostly learnt British English in schools but if you knew and used American English words/spellings, there were no problems. A lot of the time you didn't even know which one it was because when it comes to learning proper English (as in not slang/casual), there's very little difference between British and American. Even now, I use both without even realizing it and I would struggle if you were to ask me which words/spellings are from which version.
In your examples, I would mostly pick those on the left (which are American judging by the fries) and checking the internet for examples, I mostly see myself using American words (flashlight, not torch; corn, not maize) but there are cases where I would use both (crossroads and intersection, lift and elevator, holiday and vacation) or only British (cinema, not movies). It gets even more confusing with spellings, like defense and defence are both the ones I use, same with realise and realize.
Basically, I believe that for non-native speakers, it doesn't really matter which type of English you use, ultimately it's nothing more than additional words that you can use as synonyms and alternative spellings that you need to get used to.
Given that no one alive before the US split from Britain is currently learning English, whether the inventions were post-separation is irrelevant to learning the language.
I am only 33 and I certainly exclusively learned British English in school. I also had a game boy colour and enjoyed going to the city centre.
It all fell apart later in school though when some kids had gone to America for a high school exchange year and others went to Great Britain. And of course people started to play internet games and things like youtube became a thing. The teachers had to accept both the American or British English, but some grammar nazis would yell at you if you mixed them. e.g. if you wrote "I will buy some colours at the city center" they'd legit lose their shit.
PS: In my first interaction with Americans they were legit rolling on the floor when I asked them if their mum was coming over later and if we could go to the mall to buy trousers ...
"welcome to the conversation. Hope your brought popcorn"
As an American, please accept my formal apology for this person. Some of us are, well, stupid.
This reads like a Ken M post.
Do they just think British people spoke "American" before the revolution?
School'nt
There is some evidence of American accent (or, at least, parts of it; ex. rhoticity) being closer to historical British accent than contemporary British.
The west country accent is rhotic.
A vowel used in tiny, isolated areas of the US doesn't magically make American English closer to Shakespear.
A vowel
I didn't know "r" is considered a vowel.
I, for one, am really curious what you think a vowel is.
"tiny, isolated areas"
come over here, we all use a rhotacized accent except for a couple guys
It's a concenant that's pronounced most English speaking places other than England...
Seems like you didn't even read your own article, or the other one linked above your other post. I suggest you to follow the hints others have already provided you, and read all the sources you try to provide 😂
How so? The article outlines exactly what the comment you first replied to said
The stereotypical British accent, where they drop the Rs, is actually pretty recent and post dates the Revolutionary War. There was a fad in Britain to sound fancier(I.E. more French) and it just sort of spread then stuck around. There are some American accents that are closer to the older English but, well, that’s just because they are the older English and haven’t changed as drastically.
Hey /u/EnvironmentalEar293, thanks for submitting to /r/confidentlyincorrect! Take a moment to read our rules.
Join our Discord Server!
Please report this post if it is bad, or not relevant. Remember to keep comment sections civil. Thanks!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
The British accent. You know, THE British accent; used across all of Britain universally.
God, why do I have to belong to the people who are so f***ing stupid. Like I know I’m not the smartest person but Jesus Christ on a Cross playing lacrosse with a vase.
“What is widely thought of today as the standard British accent evolved quite recently, as languages go. It developed in the 1800s among the upper class in Southern England, and was first called “public school pronunciation”.” -BBC
He’s confusing accents with languages.
According to linguists, American English is more easily learned than British English. There is less dropped consonants and less blending of adjacent words. Combine that with the fact that there are way more American English speakers than British English speakers, and it's easy to see the confusion.
Go ahead and downvote me now. English is named after England and therefore only they have the authority as to how a language is used apparently.
According to linguists, American English is more easily learned than British English.
No, that effect is about cultural exposure and familiarity. You can definitely argue that US accents are more popular to learn, but it's not because there are fewer dropped consonants.
People typically rate whatever is more common locally and for their cultural context as the "easier" or "more logical" or "more natural" one.
I mean, they’re linguists, so I feel like they probably know how people rate familiar languages vs unfamiliar, but chose to say specifically that the American version was easier to learn anyway.
Did you hear a linguist say this?
Edit: This person blocked me because I asked this question about what linguists made that commenter's claim.
Apparently, a random internet commenter saying "according to linguists," is enough to settle the matter of whether American English is "easier" to learn than British English. What linguists? Who knows? (Linguists don't actually say that British English is practically harder to learn than other dialects. UK kids seem to be able to communicate in English in a similar way to US kids learning English.)
And as I said, in surveys, :People typically rate whatever is more common locally and for their cultural context as the "easier" or "more logical" or "more natural" one.
But, according to linguists, Nerevarine91 is maybe too thin-skinned to discuss linguistics.
I feel like you understood my point and knowingly chose not to engage with it. I guess you’d rather believe linguists just, like, forgot how language learning works, lol
Combine that with the fact that there are way more American English speakers than British English speakers,
Yeah, I'm going to need a citation on that please
There are 239million English speakers with in the American dialect and 60million English speakers with a British dialect
Yeah, I thought as much. You said one thing when you really meant another. There are more native American English speakers than native British speakers. I want to know numbers in total (including people speaking one of these dialects as a second language) which should be counting in the billions.
As far as English as a second language, I'd imagine the split between those learning American English and those learning British English is pretty even. If you're trying to claim that Indians, Pakistanis, Nigerians, Singaporeans, etc speak British English, that's highly inaccurate. They have their own varieties of English, although yes, they do tend to follow British spelling conventions.
I can’t speak for the whole world but in the EU, British English is being taught in most schools. I’ve never heard that “American English” would be a part of a school’s curriculum (elementary/high school).
People in Latin America would probably be taught the American dialect. I think Asians are probably fairly evenly split between British and American English, Europeans mostly are taught British English, and I honestly have no idea what's more common in Africa. British, I guess, at least in the places that used to be colonized by the UK.
UK is the 5th in English speakers. There are literally 5x as many American English speakers than British.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_English-speaking_population
You do understand that bears no relevance to what’s being discussed, right?
How so? Guy asked for a source that there are more American English speakers than British English speakers. Source provided. I'm not sure how that could possibly be irrelevant.
To those who are confused,what he means is this: Today's brittish accent is a modern invention. When the America's were colonized by the English, they spoke with an accent more similar to the modern American accent. In short. American English is (kinda) older than the modern British accent. He just failed to explain that at every turn.
There’s not really much explanation necessary, unless you assume you’re talking to a moron incapable of understanding the very language they’re discussing.
What’s referred to today as “the British accent” is more recent than the creation of the language referred to today as “American English”.
In other words, the American language is older than the British accent.
Any person capable of understanding English who isn’t stupid should be capable of getting from one to the other without needing an explicit explanation.
So then why did OP post this? Also, are you ok?
I’m fine?
And I have no idea what the OP had to do with this conversation.
It shows. I'm addressing the OP, who doesn't get that this is less confidently incorrect and more just an incredibly stupid point to make. I'm not sure why you're so bothered by that incongruity.
He is definitely trolling
We live in an age of wilful ignorance. In a few years there will be Americans claiming the USA is the oldest country in the world and nothing will dissuade them from that opinion.
They're not entirely wrong. IIRC, the broad family of modern American accents sound closer to what 1500-1700 British people sounded like, than the family of modern British accents.
The historical colonial accents have stayed more or less the same, while British accents have evolved away. So if you teleported a 16th-century Brit to the modern era, it would sound more like Obama than Sunak.
Of course, 'more like' doesn't mean 'exactly like'. Henry VIII didn't have a thick caligirl accent or w/e. But our accents have evolved a lot more than the Americans'.
As a Brit, Americans sometimes sound faintly Irish, which always tickles me.
Yeah I read somewhere that the closest to the 16th century british accent is spoken in new england today
Now wait a minute, I'm not sure if this is true but I've heard a thing or two about this. The British accent used nowadays used to be used by the higher classes because they wanted to separate themselves from the rest of the people. Then after the latter Americans left, the British people started coping the higher classes. However both the American accent and the British accent have evolved after that, so there isn't really a point in arguing.
This argument is quite absurd. Have you ever heard a Geordie, a Scouser, or a Brummie speak? They sound COMPLETELY different. Think as different as a New Yorker vs someone from the deep south of the USA. THERE IS NOT ONE SINGLE ACCENT IN ENGLAND! Much less Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. The idea that all over Britain people thought, "Let's all speak like the poshos do" is frankly laughable.
That's kinda what I said at the end...
He’s so obviously trolling and everyone here is either ignoring that so they can be mad or they’re as dumb as they think OOP is.
The current British accent is newer the the American accent TECHNICALLY because Americans still speak the way British people used to speak with words like yall and ain’t but we have added some weird things to how we speak but fundamentally speaking it’s the same as the old British accent
The map in the following post seems a bit suspicious... E.g. there is an Australian English and a New Zealand English variety/variant, so why would those countries still teach British English?
That map doesn’t seem to be about actual dialects. It looks like they’re just going by whether a country used British or American spelling. That’s the only reason I can think to group Canada with British considering that most Canadian dialects are far closer in pronunciation to General American than to any of the major British dialects. The map is really just a map of which countries spell color/colour with a u and which ones don’t.
Literally second post down on my feed after this one, only an ad in between:
The american accent has changed less from the common ancestor of modern received english and modern american englishn than received modern english. So I sound more similar to a 1600s englander than a modern englander would. I wonder if this guy has partial information, is getting confused or is just a hardcore freeDUMBer blinded by his own inferiority complex induced arrogance?
Americans spell more effeciently though and if it wasn't for Americans, modern British English would have prussian accent.
wdym "prussian accent"
He's literally not wrong though. Until after the industrial revolution the English had a rhotic accent like most American accents.
Meaning the modern British Accent is younger than the "American Language."
https://www.babbel.com/en/magazine/rhoticity-in-british-and-american-english
Neither is older or younger than the other. People left the UK and went to America. Their accents gradually changed over time in both places. Americans in 2024 don't sound the same as British people did in 1600. British people in 2024 also don't sound like British people did in 1600. Both versions of English have some features that existed then and some that didn't. Additionally, both have a lot of different accents within them.
Except you're falling for the bait in the post.
The claim made is that the American Language (a vague thing that is hard to exactly define) is older than the (modern) British accent - which is true.
It's a meaningless claim but it's objectively not wrong.
Wrong claims with similar wording that the bait is meant to trick you into conflating:
The British accent is younger than the American accent (The American accent is probably broadly younger due to radio influence and rising Californian cultural domination throughout the 20th century)
The British Language is younger than the American Language (duh. This is wrong.)
Yeah, "the American language is older than the British accent" is a kinda true statement in the sense that people have been speaking English in America longer than the RP British accent has existed in its current form. But it's still a somewhat nonsensical thing to say.
Yup. Sure is. I'm like 90% sure the point of the comment was to get a rise out of people.
I've got acquaintances who write the same way and brag about trolling people constantly.
4 missing replies
Hello! Thank you for submitting to /r/confidentlyincorrect, however, you post has been removed for violating one or more of our rule(s):
Please Censor all personal information and usernames, to make sure no one online gets harassed. The only exception to this are verified accounts.
Please contact the mods if you feel this was wrong.
All chat requests and pms about your removed post will not be answered. Contact the mods instead!