The British Used to Sound Like We Did

New York times ^ | 4th June 2026 | John McWhorter

[Cronos]

You might think that early Americans sounded like Anthony Hopkins and Helen Mirren, and that the American accent developed after independence. It was probably the other way around. Up until the early 1800s, you couldn’t tell whether a person was British or American from their accents. When naval officers tried to free sailors who had been shanghaied into service in the War of 1812, they said they couldn’t tell for sure who was American or British by the way they spoke.

The hallmark of the British accent — pronouncing words like “path” and “fast” as “pahth” and “fahst” or “fah” for “far.” — developed only at the end of the 18th century. English in the United States and Canada sound so much alike because their language started as British English in the 1700s. Australian English sounds much like today’s British English because by the time British people were sent there after the 1820s, what we know as a British accent had emerged.

All of this allows some informed guesses on what the American language will be like in the future. Plenty of words are teetering into new meanings, the way “sensible,” which once meant “sensitive,” now means “having good sense.” Usages that were once derided as misimpressions become so common that we come to accept them and admit that the horse is out of the barn. For Americans in 2076, the first meaning of “aesthetic” that comes to mind may well be “attractive,” the way many young people use it today. Any sense that “nonplussed” means “perplexed” will be forgotten in favor of the common impression today that it means “unimpressed.” And the most intuitive meaning of “swipe” will relate to computer screens rather than stealing or a movement of the hand.

---

TOPICS: Travel
KEYWORDS: blm; crt; english; epigraphyandlanguage; godsgravesglyphs; johnmcwhorter; newyorktimes

[Cronos]

John McWhorter book "The Power of Babel" is a fascinating and fantastic step into the wonder of linguistics

[nwrep]

Using the words fascinating and fantastic together is rather gauche.

[ConservativeMind]

This is exactly what I heard, decades ago, but haven’t seen confirmation, again, until now.

[Repeal The 17th]

Yes, all languages evolve over time,
in pronunciation, meaning, and introduction of new words...

[Cronos]

“Using the words fascinating and fantastic together is rather gauche.”

Frankly, finding fault for freepers following flowery, fantastic, fascinating forms feels foolishly fussy.

[Charles Martel]

Interesting, particularly the mention of sailors and the War of 1812 (sometimes mentioned as a "minor theatre" of the wider Napoleonic Wars). According to the linked brief video below, the British accent morphed into the Virginia Tidewater accent, then changed more dramatically as it spread geographically.

It may be more accurate to think of the Virginia Tidewater accent as closest to the way the Brits spoke at that time, and that the geographical changes in the language weren't only in North America. Either way, port cities played a part in the evolution.

Southern Linguistics

[alexander_busek]

Having geographically removed myself from the Anglosphere in the late-1970s, and until the advent of the Internet, I was pretty much isolated, linguistically, from the continued evolution of the (spoken) English language and the U.S.-American variant thereof for several decades.

Upon returning to the States for annual vacations starting in the 2000s, I was occasionally appalled by what I perceived as improper usage.

Top of my list:

1. "I need to have you" or "You need to" as euphemisms for "I am hereby ordering you to..." Heard especially in the service sector.

I could swear that that construction had never been used before in that sense.

2. Speaking of "swearing": "I promise you that..." when actually "I solemnly affirm that" / "I swear that" is meant. Especially egregious when used to aver that one did not do something in the past: "I promise you that I didn't...", which is simply nonsensical ("to promise" always has a future sense).

I expect that people simply became increasingly averse to using the verb "to swear" because of its proximity to "to curse." Now, one almost never hears someone use it correctly. (And this I still count as an error rather than as merely a shift in usage.)

3. "As far as..." (in the sense of "to the extent that") used without the necessary terminal "is concerned" or at least "goes."

4. "Awesome" in the sense of "outstanding" - often used as a stand-alone expression of assent: "Do you want to go to the movies tonight?" "Awesome!" "Would you like another helping of soup?" "Awesome!"

I distinctly remember being frankly dumbfounded when a university professor described my sister as "awesome" - which, for me, had previously been reserved as a synonym for "awe-inspiring."

5. Incorrectly conjugating the verb "to lie" (in the sense of "to rest in a reclined position") and/or confusing it with the very distinct verb "to lay" (e.g., "to lay bricks").

6. The use of the construction "I'm good" in the sense of "No, thank you!"

"Would you like another portion?" "I'm good!"

O course, I won't bother pointing to gross shifts in the meanings of individual words, such as the displacement, by the word "partner," of "lawfully wedded spouse."

Anyone else here able to cite specific instances of shifts in usage since mid-century?

Regards,

[Celtic Conservative]

Language is a moving target.

CC

[Cronos]

1812 was related to the Napoleonic wars. The USA is lucky that the hyper paper, the UK didn’t decide for revenge after waterloo

[Celtic Conservative]

Annoying, aggravating alliteration. 😉

CC

[Governor Dinwiddie]

The Yorkshire and the north of England is more rhotic than the rest of England.
Rhotic means "r" is pronounced. It used to be more so. America, Canada, Scotland,
and Ireland speak rhotic English.

[sauropod]

Who cares? McWhorter was making nascent right of center noises back in the day. Then he let loose with a bunch of black victimhood pailful shortly after that.

No use for him. At all.

[7thson]

BRAVO!

[equaviator]

Beatnik and hippie culture? “Like, wow...Far out, man!” and “Dig that crazy sound!”.

[Cronos]

We need to separate out the insights the person brings from the person themselves.

I can’t stand Nikki Minaj’s “music”, but her latest overtures rightward i do like.

Now as to McWhorter - his insights into linguistics are really very good.

[TalBlack]

“I could swear that that construction had never been used before in that sense.“

It was t generally but it wasn’t unheard of. I recall it being used, probably mostly by southerners, to convey strong belief of dire consequences. I’ve had plenty of occasion to think about it because it grates on my ear the way it’s used today.

[sauropod]

I understand your point, and it is well made,

A counterargument would be the ‘famed’ economist Paul Krugman, He certainly doesn’t separate out his ‘insights’ from who he is.

See, for example, his pronouncement this week.

God will hold all of us to account for our speech. Even Paul.

Judgment Day is coming.

‘Pod.

[Cronos]

Regarding Krugman,

I don’t fully understand economics theory - I understand investing and micro-economics but macro stuff is hazy for me.

I have, at points, read Krugman’s articles on economics and then, just as I do with McWhorter, I look at the opposing view (if any) and try to arrive at my own opinion

[yldstrk]

I can’t stand the “word” “horrific” and girls calling mountains “mount ins.” I also despise the phraseology “ahead of” as in “ahead of the meeting” and “in hospital” instead of “in the hospital.”

[Chickensoup]

In tbe meantime I’d like to see leftists held accountable by fellow men.