When did Aunt become Ont ?

[Meddle]

I silenced one of my doctoral seminars

Speaking of not exactly making sense. How would a seminar make enough noise that you would have to silence it?

[Trumpeteer]

OK how about the recent change in phrase to say that I will talk to them "ON TOMORROW" or I met with them "ON YESTERDAY".???

[PlymouthRes]

Nice, Meddle. +1

English-

I am sure I will be crucified for saying this, but here goes.

As for aunt or ant, that is a matter of geographical influence, not a black/white/hillbilly thing as you elude to. The subjects of the British Kingdom and just about every person from Europe use that first term [[long au sound) all the time, and a great many of them are white.

As for the word asked, it is my opinion and observation that it doesn't make any difference whether you are black, white or green, if you don't understand that the word asked is pronounced as such and not as "axed", then you are illiterate, period. In any proper application of that word, there is no variant pronunciation of ask, only that one. To "axe"[[or ax), in my opinion and from all of my years of application of the word on this planet, means to hack something down, not inquire about anything.

It is not a matter of "predilections and prejudices", rather, it is a simple matter of completely having missed kindergarden, first, second, third and fourth grade in elementary school or just not having paid attention because a person CHOSE to follow the rest of the illiterates by thinking they knew more than the rest of normal society who took the time to use the proper application of said language. Again, improper useage of the English language should be confronted, not "explained away" as some geographical or social/ economical excuse to do things in a slovenly fashion.

There is only one English language, not the many variants of the language that have been promoted by various groups of people who are simply too lazy to do it the right way. Many of these are slang terminologies that should never have been tolerated to begin with, but have permeated our society to the point that we accept the inadequacy without question, to our detriment.

This isn't or should not be a thread about how white people speak vs. how black people speak, but comments like your first sentence turn it into that right away.

Black English, Appalachian English, or one of the Southern dialects have no place at all in normal discourse, and if blacks or whites or asians or whatever want to be taken in a credible manner, then they should stop being lazy by singling themselves out and start talking and writing as though they did their "homework" and not like some inbred idiot who never cracked a book.

Also, "fitty cent" instead of FIFTY CENTS is unacceptable but people do it all the time.

It is just plain lazy to not make a concerted effort to be proper when speaking or writing to someone. The use of double negatives is at an all time high as well, but we don't confront those that use them as it would be termed not pc. This just plain dumbs-down societial norms to a point where those that do it AND those that fail to correct them are equally at fault.

I do not care where you are from or what colliquialisms you are used to using, if you can't form a literate sentence in writing or in speech than you should refrain from doing either as it is as wierd sounding to me as it is to you. I just don't make it a habit of imposing my opinion on people who do that all the time, as though I were some kind of authority on the matter. If people want to sound stupid, then they may go right ahead. They may get away with that crap with their peers, but in trying to get a job in the real world speak or write like that and you will find yourself a miserable failure.

Sometimes I think that various groups of people who do things like this [[supplant words such as "axe" for ask, "fitty" for fifty, etc.) do so just to draw attention to their DIFFERENCES, rather than their commonality. It is a way of standing out and going against the grain just to be different. Those folks ARE showing they are different just by being ignorant.

Just my opinion after many years of application. Although I don't claim to hold any form of degree or diploma in any college or other institution beyond high school, I learned what was acceptable and unacceptable with language usage by fourth grade at the latest.

Res

[Meddle]

Referring to printing a document, people now seem to say they're going to print it "off". I don't believe I ever heard that until a few years ago. It always used to be print "out" or just print.

I have an entire subset of relatives who say they "seen" something instead of "saw" something, but that might be more of an error than evolution.

Or an error of evolution.

OK how about the recent change in phrase to say that I will talk to them "ON TOMORROW" or I met with them "ON YESTERDAY".???

If we're going to get into this kind of thing [[print off/ print out, seen/saw, etc.) ......

Where did 'cut on' or 'cut off' come from instead of 'turn on/off' "I went into the room and cut on the lights'? 'Did you remember to cut off the lights?' Umm, no. They're still hanging there, but I did turn them off.

And pay the 'light bill'? You get a separate bill for your lights? What about the rest of the electricity you use?

"I saw them yesterday night". You mean last night? Or maybe last evening?

"Stand on line" Unless there is a line painted on the floor that you are standing on, you are standing IN line; as in you are part of a line of people.

[kathy2trips]

Steers/Stairs, Pellow/Pillow, Skeered/Scared. I think those are some Appalacian-isms that have migrated North. My sister has lived in Texas for 30 years, and she still says "pellow". Makes me nuts. And what's with making verbs plural [["I loves you", "I goes to work."). I didn't say that, but lots of kids I went to school with did.

[gazhekwe]

Ekcetra is another one.

My personal pet peeve that is becoming universal, Preventative. Next up: I will do anything to preventate bugs from getting in my house. Or, don't forget to get a flu shot to preventate your getting the flu this fall and winter.

[Crystal]

I also never heard of "on accident" until recently. It used to be more common to say "I broke it by accident", but now I hear "I broke it on accident".

And there's the increasingly common misuse of appraise and apprise.

I was going to end with don't get me started on my language pet peeves, but I see I have already started...

[English]

Nice, Meddle. +1

English-

I am sure I will be crucified for saying this, but here goes.

As for aunt or ant, that is a matter of geographical influence, not a black/white/hillbilly thing as you elude to. The subjects of the British Kingdom and just about every person from Europe use that first term [[long au sound) all the time, and a great many of them are white.

As for the word asked, it is my opinion and observation that it doesn't make any difference whether you are black, white or green, if you don't understand that the word asked is pronounced as such and not as "axed", then you are illiterate, period. In any proper application of that word, there is no variant pronunciation of ask, only that one. To "axe"[[or ax), in my opinion and from all of my years of application of the word on this planet, means to hack something down, not inquire about anything.

It is not a matter of "predilections and prejudices", rather, it is a simple matter of completely having missed kindergarden, first, second, third and fourth grade in elementary school or just not having paid attention because a person CHOSE to follow the rest of the illiterates by thinking they knew more than the rest of normal society who took the time to use the proper application of said language. Again, improper useage of the English language should be confronted, not "explained away" as some geographical or social/ economical excuse to do things in a slovenly fashion.

There is only one English language, not the many variants of the language that have been promoted by various groups of people who are simply too lazy to do it the right way. Many of these are slang terminologies that should never have been tolerated to begin with, but have permeated our society to the point that we accept the inadequacy without question, to our detriment.

This isn't or should not be a thread about how white people speak vs. how black people speak, but comments like your first sentence turn it into that right away.

Black English, Appalachian English, or one of the Southern dialects have no place at all in normal discourse, and if blacks or whites or asians or whatever want to be taken in a credible manner, then they should stop being lazy by singling themselves out and start talking and writing as though they did their "homework" and not like some inbred idiot who never cracked a book.

Also, "fitty cent" instead of FIFTY CENTS is unacceptable but people do it all the time.

It is just plain lazy to not make a concerted effort to be proper when speaking or writing to someone. The use of double negatives is at an all time high as well, but we don't confront those that use them as it would be termed not pc. This just plain dumbs-down societial norms to a point where those that do it AND those that fail to correct them are equally at fault.

I do not care where you are from or what colliquialisms you are used to using, if you can't form a literate sentence in writing or in speech than you should refrain from doing either as it is as wierd sounding to me as it is to you. I just don't make it a habit of imposing my opinion on people who do that all the time, as though I were some kind of authority on the matter. If people want to sound stupid, then they may go right ahead. They may get away with that crap with their peers, but in trying to get a job in the real world speak or write like that and you will find yourself a miserable failure.

Sometimes I think that various groups of people who do things like this [[supplant words such as "axe" for ask, "fitty" for fifty, etc.) do so just to draw attention to their DIFFERENCES, rather than their commonality. It is a way of standing out and going against the grain just to be different. Those folks ARE showing they are different just by being ignorant.

Just my opinion after many years of application. Although I don't claim to hold any form of degree or diploma in any college or other institution beyond high school, I learned what was acceptable and unacceptable with language usage by fourth grade at the latest.

Res

Why do you applaud what Meddle said? Was it because he/she clearly demonstrated that they did not understand the reference or the context?

Let me review what you've just posted. The way that you use language is "proper" and "normal." You learned everything that you needed to know about this supposed proper and normal English in fourth grade, and anyone who doesn't speak your kind of English is lazy. Aren't there different language usages for different purposes?

Why is a speaker of a dialect inherently lazy? Why does their speech incite anger, ridicule, or assumptions about their cognitive ability? How on earth can you make judgments about a person's character, ethical values, or morals from their speech?

How about those who speak English that is accented? The original poster raised the question of pronunciation. Who is less acceptable, the speaker of Black/Southern/Appalachian/New England/Brooklyn/Sea Island English, or the speaker of English as a foreign language?

Are we talking about questions of morality here, or mutual intelligibility?

What is proper and normal English? Is it the nasal Midwestern American English, spoken in Charleston or Savannah? The English of Brooklyn, spoken in Nebraska? The English that is spoken in the East End of London? Where does Singaporean English fit in? How about the English that Afrikaners speak? How about the English of Hong Kong?

All of these are different Englishes. From a linguistic perspective, most of what you assert so confidently in your post just isn't correct.

The original question was "why do Black people say 'ont' instead of 'aunt?" What does that have to do with a double negative or saying "fiddy cents?" Should a person who talks about their Ont Jane instead of their Ant Jane not be employed in metro Detroit, even if the other features of their language are considered to be standard? What if I am in a position to hire, but believe that Ant Jane sounds nonstandard?

There is a wonderful video presented by PBS that everyone should watch. It's called Do You Speak American? Here's a link to factual information about what is supposedly "Standard American English": http://www.pbs.org/speak/seatosea/standardamerican/

[English]

Speaking of not exactly making sense. How would a seminar make enough noise that you would have to silence it?

Send me a PM and I'll send you some links if you're really interested.

[English]

More great information about language myths, courtesy of linguist Walt Wolfram:
http://www.pbs.org/speak/seatosea/americanvarieties/

Dialect Myths and Reality

MYTH: A dialect is something that SOMEONE ELSE speaks.

REALITY: Everyone who speaks a language speaks some dialect of the language; it is not possible to speak a language without speaking a dialect of the language.

MYTH: Dialects always have highly noticeable features that set them apart.

REALITY: Some dialects get much more attention than others; the status of a dialect, however, is unrelated to public commentary about its special characteristics.

MYTH: Only varieties of a language spoken by socially disfavored groups are dialects.

REALITY: The notion of dialect exists apart from the social status of the language variety; there are socially favored as well as socially disfavored dialects.

MYTH: Dialects result from unsuccessful attempts to speak the "correct" form of a language.

REALITY: Dialect speakers acquire their language by adopting the speech features of those around them, not by failing in their attempts to adopt standard language features.

MYTH: Dialects have no linguistic patterning in their own right; they are derivations from standard speech.

REALITY: Dialects, like all language systems, are systematic and regular; furthermore, socially disfavored dialects can be described with the same kind of precision as standard language varieties.

MYTH: Dialects inherently carry negative connotations.

REALITY: Dialects are not necessarily positively or negatively valued; their social values are derived strictly from the social position of their community of speakers.

[English]

Last post - found some lay information about the Northern Cities Vowel Shift. This is why many white Midwesterners pronounce vowels differently than in other varieties of English. It is a linguistic phenomenon that is fairly recent. Most Black English speakers in the North did not participate in this shift, which is why our vowel pronunciation reflects pre-Shift sounds.

The Midwest Accent - A Land Without An Accent
http://www.pbs.org/speak/seatosea/am...eties/midwest/

I found this bit particularly interesting:

While people who have NCS in their own speech are generally unaware of it, the shifted pronunciations are noticeable to people from other parts of the country, and occasionally misunderstandings arise as a result of these shifts. For example, John Lawler of the University of Michigan reports that he is sometimes asked why his son, Ian, has a girl’s name. Apparently, Michiganders hear the name as “Ann” which, following the NCS, they pronounce as “eeyan”.

The fact that the NCS is well established in Michigan is particularly interesting in light of the dominant beliefs about local speech. As research by Dennis Preston has shown, Michiganders believe they are “blessed” with a high degree of linguistic security; when surveyed, they rate their own speech as more correct and more pleasant than that of even their fellow Mid-westerners. By contrast Indianans tend to rate the speech of their state on par with that Illinois, Ohio, and Michigan. Indeed, it is not uncommon to find Michiganders who will claim that the speech of national broadcasters is modeled on their dialect. Even a cursory comparison of the speech of the network news anchors with that of the local news anchors in Detroit will reveal the fallacy of such claims.

[PlymouthRes]

English-

First, I was agreeing with what Meddle had said in regard to the fact that she/he made sense to me with their response to you. I don’t understand your need to show how superior you are in the knowledge of all things “English”, as I presumed you were just doing some chest-thumping by telling us all how you were able to “silence one of your doctoral seminars” because you knew more than the person [[obviously ALREADY a Doctor of some sort to have been presenting at a DOCTORAL level presentation) that was actually holding the seminar and that silence was somehow a “show stopper” of some sort.

In my experience, when there is silence, it is sometimes in response to the statement being made and the fact that the person who made the remark was not in context to what had been presented. Rather, most in the room are struck by the fact that the person commenting apparently was not in the same general mindset with all of those present and threw out something that was a bit off the wall to them, and their silence is to keep from laughing aloud as to what was said, not the profundity of the statement itself. I will not directly state here that this is what happened when you made you “silencing” statement, as I was not there to hear it and was only applying the other side of what I was hearing to your statement.

Secondly, the ENTIRE BODY of what I wrote had to do with writing and speaking skills and their application to my experiences in life, which is an overall compendium of 50 years, from birth until now. Yes, all of those years have been spent studying and applying “standard” components of the English language, which I am quite familiar with, and tried to point out in what I wrote.

Even though I qualified that I am no expert, by any means, in my last paragraph, you somehow seem to take personal umbrage with what I have said by making statements like “You learned everything that you needed to know about this supposed proper and normal English in fourth grade” [[not exactly what I said), and further, “Why does their speech incite anger, ridicule, or assumptions about their cognitive ability?” [[Again not my intent or what I wrote). Later, you followed by saying: “How on earth can you make judgments about a person's character, ethical values, or morals from their speech?” [[Because of my personal observations, teachings and applications, that’s why.) And, finally, this gem “Are we talking about questions of morality here, or mutual intelligibility?” [[The latter is EXACTLY what I was referring to).

For you to have presumed that I meant morality rather than mutual intelligibility clearly illustrate to me that you don’t have a clue in regard to my statement and jumped to some very broad conclusions on your own, with no support in basis to what I was trying to say.

You do also understand that ALL the components of English [[reading, writing, speaking, etc.) are inter-related, don’t you? None are independent from the other.

After all of that verbal assailing you add this as your coup de gras “From a linguistic perspective, most of what you assert so confidently in your post just isn't correct.” [[I'll stick by my belief, thanks).

I did take the time to read ALL of the links you posted, and, in addition, looked up their individual works. Almost the entirety of what all of them were alluding to has to do with dialect and application of speech and its components [[a dipthong, if you will), BY REGION compared to “proper” or “normal” English usage techniques. I perhaps did get off the subject that the OP was posting on a bit, but I felt it was relevant to the conversation. I even asserted that I somewhat agreed with the regional dialects when I said this:

“As for aunt or ant, that is a matter of geographical influence, not a black/white/hillbilly thing as you allude to. The subjects of the British Kingdom and just about every person from Europe use that first term [[long au sound) all the time, and a great many of them are white”.

What does make me somewhat angry, though, is this idea that because of different language backgrounds, we should somehow excuse the improper application of terminology or usage in regard to the accepted language of this country because of those people who are not native speakers or writers, and that we should accept their mis-usage in a kind of “tower of Babel” approach to explaining away the deficiencies that exist in today’s English language applications. Writing and speaking “normally” or in a “standard” fashion, would alleviate a lot of our current misunderstandings and errors that are made daily, but to apologize or try to cover for other peoples inadequacies by trying to establish a Black English or an Appalachian English or ANY other type of English other than “standard or normal” is inviting disaster.

As should be obvious to you if it isn’t already, I really don’t agree with the ideals presented by anyone who would not endorse that we all try to do things in a similar, more precise way. It is derisive, serving to divide rather than unite, and has been a failing principle from biblical times. It is getting worse every day, as well, when “scholars”, such as those you linked to, identify and condone these types of irregular applications without correction. Even though these incorrect applications do exist, there seems to be no one “correcting” them and many who rise up against the voice of “normality” because they fear being called a racist or xenophobic [[thanks ...!).

I also believe that applications of syntax, spelling and usage [[as well as speech) have hit an all time low, and I wish that people pay better attention to some kind of “standard or normal” which we ALL were taught throughout our early elementary school years. Just one look at some of the posts on this forum back that assertion as well, so there are plenty of examples floating around. People either don’t take the time to proofread what they have written or don’t have enough pride in themselves to check for accuracy in ALL of what they write, let alone their pronunciation or enunciation techniques. I am guilty of that myself, to some extent, but at least I try to “be proper” even when I am in a hurry. That was what I was vaguely referring to by saying they were lazy.

And yes, I do believe that a failure to demand anything less than a “standard or norm” is not in our best interest, as it belies all that we are taught and makes a mockery out of our educational system. As an “English expert”, I would have presumed that you would have agreed with my statements, rather than deride them. It is my personal belief that people that make the types of presumptions that you have about me are part of the problem, not the solution. You may disagree, but that is my opinion, of which I am entitled.

I sincerely hope and pray that those who think that giving a pass to the abusers that I’ve mentioned are not entertaining “educating” anyone in the usage and application of the English language, as I would think that they would be of no benefit to those they are teaching in any manner. Believing that anything other than a “standard or norm” should be imposed and enforced strictly is to dumb down the system further, which will certainly lead to even more catastrophic results than we already have.

Res

[Ravine]

I have some remarks on this topic, but right now my head hurts.
Serious on both counts.

[Stosh]

To my ears, pronouncing aunt as "ant" sounds wrong and weird. But I've never begun a thread asking why white people do or say certain things, either.

Whenever people talk about language, it simply reveals their own language predilections and prejudices. Some of those who criticize Black English, Appalachian English, or one of the Southern dialects the most engage in lapses of grammar or dialect. I silenced one of my doctoral seminars @ Michigan by pointing out that certain groups love to transcribe the speech of people of color and poor folks phonetically -- but their own speech, if accurately transcribed, isn't exactly standard, either. Pot, meet kettle.

Ok, I'll bite.Which "certain groups" do this in real life? Is this in an academic setting, or the Freep message boards? And please provide specific examples. Also, please remain within the current day time frame.

A TRUE phonetic transcription would look like this.using your post as an example:

tu may ɪrz, prənawnsɪŋ ænt æz " ænt" sawndz rɒŋ ænd wɪrd. bət ayv nɛvər bɪgən ə θrɛd æskɪŋ way wayt pipəl du ɔr se sərtən θɪŋz, iðər.

wɛnɛvər pipəl tɒk əbawt læŋgwəǰ, ɪt sɪmpli rɪvilz ðɛr on læŋgwəǰ prɛdəlɛkšənz ænd prɛǰədəsəz. səm əv ðoz hu krɪtəsɑyz blæk ɪŋglɪš, æpəlečən ɪŋglɪš, ɔr wən əv ðə səðərn dayəlɛkts ðə most ɛngeǰ ɪn læpsəz əv græmər ɔr dayəlɛkt. ay saylənst wən əv may dɑktərəl sɛmənɑrz mɪšɪgən bay pɔyntɪŋ awt ðæt sərtən grups ləv tu trænskrayb ðə spič əv pipəl əv kələr ænd pʊr foks fənɛtɪkli -- bət ðɛr on spič, ɪf ækyərətli trænskraybd, ɪzənt ɪgzæktli stændərd, iðər. pɑt, mit kɛtəl.

I believe what you are speaking of is the use of grammar, not phonetics.

[fryar]

Your pipe, sir.

There is such a thing as standard American English. Pronouncing Aunt as Ant is not exactly highly uncommon, but Aunt was always properly Aunt, like Maul, or Paul, which is why it isn't Ant.

But not like Raul. See, makes perfect sense.

I never did like aksing, I just thought that was silly, but I also don't like people routinely saying irregardless instead of regardless. Like, hello, engage brain, then mouth?

Printing something off entered my bubble only within the last couple of years as well, but has stuck remarkably well. Speaking of which, isn't that a superfluous, what is that thing, a pronoun or whatever? Can't one just print something and be done with it?

[Jimaz]

What's the proper British pronunciation of "Thales," the Greek philosopher? ˈθeɪliːz or ˈtælʌs?

Sincerely.

[RaumVogel]

Jimaz is correct.It's all the fault of those Brits.

[Jimaz]

Ha! That really was a sincere question though.

Retry in a different way: Is it thae'-leez or tal'-us in British English?

Slim odds getting an answer from a true Brit here but I had to give it a shot.

[Ravine]

OK, OK, I'll do it. I'm living on borrowed time, anyway.

Let's not bullshit around with this topic. Black folks tend to have their own way of expressing themselves, their own variant on standard English. The reasons for that are open for discussion, but I think it is fair to say that there is nothing nefarious about it. Some of it is derived from southern dialects, some of it is not.

Any American wishing to get anywhere would do well to know how to speak & write in standard English, but there is no compelling reason-- at least not in my eyes, or to my ears-- why folks shouldn't talk, with each other, in whatever fashion suits them and communicates their expression. Sometimes, when an outside observer is confounded by what they are hearing, it is a classic "I wasn't talking to you" situation.

Ahnt, ant. Who gives a damn.

A funny thing about white folks. White folks would like to be selective about when, and in which situations, black folks do as white folks do.
Ask a deaf person how it feels to be always left on the outside, to be right next to, but essentially separate from, the world in which the rest of us happily bounce around, yakking with each other, laughing, listening to music and gluing cell phones to our heads. Ask them how that feels, and then ask yourself if you think they really give a damn if you can understand their Sign Language, or if maybe they would just as soon prefer that you didn't understand it, so they could have, with each other, one little corner of the universe wherein they can block out the rest of us who couldn't care less if they feel blocked out of so much of the universe which we take for granted.

Everybody would be well-served to know how to use standard English; that's a fact. But, if black folks choose to frequently employ their own little idiomatic & idiosyncratic way of talking with each other, that's their goddam business, and any white folks who have a problem with it do, indeed, have a problem, and that problem has nothing to do with idioms.

[1KielsonDrive]

OK, OK, I'll do it. I'm living on borrowed time, anyway.

Let's not bullshit around with this topic. Black folks tend to have their own way of expressing themselves, their own variant on standard English. The reasons for that are open for discussion, but I think it is fair to say that there is nothing nefarious about it. Some of it is derived from southern dialects, some of it is not.

Any American wishing to get anywhere would do well to know how to speak & write in standard English, but there is no compelling reason-- at least not in my eyes, or to my ears-- why folks shouldn't talk, with each other, in whatever fashion suits them and communicates their expression. Sometimes, when an outside observer is confounded by what they are hearing, it is a classic "I wasn't talking to you" situation.

Ahnt, ant. Who gives a damn.

A funny thing about white folks. White folks would like to be selective about when, and in which situations, black folks do as white folks do.
Ask a deaf person how it feels to be always left on the outside, to be right next to, but essentially separate from, the world in which the rest of us happily bounce around, yakking with each other, laughing, listening to music and gluing cell phones to our heads. Ask them how that feels, and then ask yourself if you think they really give a damn if you can understand their Sign Language, or if maybe they would just as soon prefer that you didn't understand it, so they could have, with each other, one little corner of the universe wherein they can block out the rest of us who couldn't care less if they feel blocked out of so much of the universe which we take for granted.

Everybody would be well-served to know how to use standard English; that's a fact. But, if black folks choose to frequently employ their own little idiomatic & idiosyncratic way of talking with each other, that's their goddam business, and any white folks who have a problem with it do, indeed, have a problem, and that problem has nothing to do with idioms.

Ravine, excellent comments. Most of this thread has been relatively fight free and quite fun and enjoyable. Tanks ya'll.

[Meddle]

But, if black folks choose to frequently employ their own little idiomatic & idiosyncratic way of talking with each other, ....

It isn't just any one group though. There's a lot of Hispanics that don 't really speak either English or Spanish. They've evolved a new mix known as Spanglish.

Same with Arabs; if you listen close enough you'll notice a mixture of both English and whatever else.

Then you can get into the whole aspect of regional dialects, north vs south, east vs west, et al.

I have a hard time understanding some people from Nu Yawhk.

[Fury13]

OK, OK, I'll do it. I'm living on borrowed time, anyway.

Let's not bullshit around with this topic. Black folks tend to have their own way of expressing themselves, their own variant on standard English. The reasons for that are open for discussion, but I think it is fair to say that there is nothing nefarious about it. Some of it is derived from southern dialects, some of it is not.

Any American wishing to get anywhere would do well to know how to speak & write in standard English, but there is no compelling reason-- at least not in my eyes, or to my ears-- why folks shouldn't talk, with each other, in whatever fashion suits them and communicates their expression. Sometimes, when an outside observer is confounded by what they are hearing, it is a classic "I wasn't talking to you" situation.

Ahnt, ant. Who gives a damn.

A funny thing about white folks. White folks would like to be selective about when, and in which situations, black folks do as white folks do.
Ask a deaf person how it feels to be always left on the outside, to be right next to, but essentially separate from, the world in which the rest of us happily bounce around, yakking with each other, laughing, listening to music and gluing cell phones to our heads. Ask them how that feels, and then ask yourself if you think they really give a damn if you can understand their Sign Language, or if maybe they would just as soon prefer that you didn't understand it, so they could have, with each other, one little corner of the universe wherein they can block out the rest of us who couldn't care less if they feel blocked out of so much of the universe which we take for granted.

Everybody would be well-served to know how to use standard English; that's a fact. But, if black folks choose to frequently employ their own little idiomatic & idiosyncratic way of talking with each other, that's their goddam business, and any white folks who have a problem with it do, indeed, have a problem, and that problem has nothing to do with idioms.

Now, that is good. Well done.

[Fury13]

I have a hard time understanding some people from Nu Yawhk.

I have no problem understanding people from NY. I do, however, have issues with the SoCal surfer/hippie dialect.

[Fury13]

It isn't just any one group though. There's a lot of Hispanics that don 't really speak either English or Spanish. They've evolved a new mix known as Spanglish.

Same with Arabs; if you listen close enough you'll notice a mixture of both English and whatever else.

A lot of groups do this. Italian-Americans? Fuggetaboutit! Capeesh?

[Pam]

Printing something off entered my bubble only within the last couple of years as well, but has stuck remarkably well. Speaking of which, isn't that a superfluous, what is that thing, a pronoun or whatever? Can't one just print something and be done with it?

You are right. Another along the same line that irks me is "change out". I changed out that light bulb etc. You don't need the out.