Talk:Appalachian English

American in origin

While the Scotch-Irish and Northern English settlers had a strong influence on the Appalachian dialect,[85] linguistic analyses suggest that most of the dialect is American in origin

Really? So it's a direct descendant of Old Euessaic, which itself is a descendant of the native Proto-American tongue that was spoken around 8000 BC by the ancient Proto-Cowboy people in what is today Northern California? Influence from the British Isles is marginal and amounts to a few loanwords? Jokes aside, I suppose I can guess approximately what this sentence was meant to express, but the wording is imprecise to the point of being confusing and it can seem a little Freudian, too.--91.148.159.4 (talk) 00:01, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

In other words, it evolved as a distinct dialect in what is now the United States. Elements of the dialect are found in Colonial American English that aren't present in the English of the British Isles. Bms4880 (talk) 01:34, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Proper picture?

I don't think that this has been discussed yet; though if it has, I do apologize. My general concern is that the picture currently appearing at the start of the article, which is a picture of the general "Appalachia" region of the United States, is probably not 100% appropriate and potentially misleading. While this article is about the Appalachian dialect of English, the article itself makes it clear that this dialect is not present throughout all or even a majority of the Appalachian region. Although the term "Appalachian English" is spoken in regions of Appalachia, it seems potentially misleading in the sense that the dialect is not spoken in the entire region shown. I would suggest either getting a new picture, which covers a more limited area, or simply removing the picture all together. 74.228.64.159 (talk) 18:04, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Double nouns: "stair step"?

Could someone with access to the original source figure out why this is being called a double noun, with the second word being redundant? Wikitionary says that "stair" can refer to either a single step or an entire set of stairs. Thanks! Allens (talk) 02:43, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

That's why it's a double noun. One could simply say "step" or "stair". To say "stair step" puts two nouns together redundantly. Eastcote (talk) 11:33, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

"Stair" can mean either a single step or an entire set of stairs (how can one necessarily tell which is meant? Context doesn't always indicate), and "step" can mean a lot of different things. "Stair" by itself is insufficiently specific; "a stair step" is a way of compactly saying "a step of a set of stairs". Allens (talk) 12:23, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

That's how all the double nouns work. "Standard" American usage would be to simply say "Item X is on the stairs", or "Item X is on the step". To double it up to say "Item X is on the stair step" is an Appalachian usage. Eastcote (talk) 23:30, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

In that particular case, I can see the argument that "stair step" is redundant. But in the phrases "That stair needs fixing" or "That step needs fixing", it is either unclear as to that it's only a single step that needs fixing, or a confusing usage of "step", whereas "That stair step needs fixing" is clear(er), and thus not redundant. Allens (talk) 12:41, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

The term "stair step" is widespread enough in general English usage that if you go to Amazon you can find "stair step baskets" for sale. It is not even a redundancy, as there are different kinds of steps--stairsteps and,say, doorsteps. Eleanor1944 (talk) 04:26, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

I think that's why the aticle says "seemingly" redundant. While they seem redundant to a speaker of Standard American English, to the Appalachian ear double nouns are not redundant. One makes the other clearer, e.g. that's not just a dog, it's a particular kind of dog, a "hound dog" or a "poodle dog". Eastcote (talk) 13:01, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Good point; thank you. (Although I'm from Appalachia, and would call "hound dog" or "poodle dog" redundant - it's "stair step" that isn't.) Allens (talk) 13:05, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Pronunciation of the word "Appalachian" revisited

Eleanor1944 recently made an editorial comment that "in fact, the term [Appalachian] was not well known in the area until recently and thus had no vernacular pronunciation, but some teachers in Appalachian Studies seem to have decided that this [Appa-latch-ian] is the correct pronunciation". (Never mind for a moment that Eleanor1944 should provide citations and should avoid edits that are personal opinion). I would agree with Eleanor1944 on this particular point. No one I know of, while in the region, ever had the need to use the word "Appalachian". My family never used the word till we left the region, and I always heard it pronounced "Appa-lay-shun". If giving a reference of where we were from, we always said "Sand Mountain". These days I say "Appalachia" but that's because of who I'm speaking to. When living in the mountains there was no reason to use the word. Eastcote (talk) 13:22, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

It's used fairly commonly in East Tennessee, with the "latch" pronunciation. Bms4880 (talk) 20:23, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

I am quite aware of the problem of sources. The problem is that the published materials are highly inaccurate. I noticed this when I was a teenager reading novels by people such as Jesse Stuart. One problem is that they often have lost touch with their original dialect (or learnt Standard English forms in the beginning). A greater problem for an outside linguist (or, for that matter, anyone who did not learn this as his/her first language and, thoughout life, listened for the way Standard English had eroded the regional dialect to different degrees for each generation) would not be able to judge whether what they heard was Mountain Dialect or usages that people had learnt to substitute for it. My academic work has been very far afield from this, but throughout my life I have listened for these things, and I often was distracted from my work if I saw a book on linguistics. I don't want to sound arrogant, but I regard myself as an original source on Mountain Dialect. I could easily publish articles in some journal and then cite that, but I am too much tied up with other things at the moment. I was born in 1940, and I occasionally came across the word "Appalachian Mountains" in school. I asked somebody, a former teacher, if that is the name of our mountains, and her response was that she thought these were the "Cumberland Mountains." Those who knew the word, I am sure, used the "ay" pronunciation. The first time I found out the supposedly "correct" pronunciation was when I was reunited with my old high school teacher in the 1980s (by that time, he was the head of an Appalachian Studies program in a small college), and he corrected my pronunciation. My basic point, though, is that there is no traditional vernacular pronunciation of the word "Apalachia." I suspect that the article cited was not really very authoritative. In my case, I actually thought about compiling a dictionary of Mountain Dialect when I was still a teenager. I went around using the international phonetic alphabet. One problem was that I could not find symbols for some of the sounds. Sorry to be verbose! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eleanor1944 (talk • contribs) 21:16, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

I suggest that instead of wholescale edit-warring (one person removing what the other has put in), a tag of Dubious (put inside doubled { and } symbols) on anything that Eleanor1944's experience contradicts is preferable. Allens (talk) 22:53, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

I don't agree. What Eleanor1944 suggests violates WP:OR. It's original research. The material in the article must be backed by a secondary source. Bms4880 (talk) 00:08, 6 November 2011 (UTC).

I'm sorry! I won't be able to get any corrections made unless I find somebody who has got it right in an encyclopaedia or whatever. But what I find written about this dialect is always defective, although it usually includes some correct stuff. You know nothing about me. How would I expect you to take my word. That is not even my name. Let's say it is the name of my favorite aunt or whomever and the date of her death or whatever.Eleanor1944 (talk) 01:23, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

I would have to agree with Bms4880. The Talk page is the place for personal commentary, not the article. If Eleanor1944 can provide sources, OK, but otherwise it's OR. Eastcote (talk) 02:29, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Sorry! I was just feeling my way with this thing and too much of a hurry to read the rules. Eleanor1944 (talk) 01:23, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

I see that what I said was unclear. What I was suggesting was that Eleanor1944 not put in new material without sources for it - but that she should label (via Template:Dubious) material that, so far as she knows, is incorrect, so that people can be encouraged to seek out new reliable sources on it. The material in the article should certainly be backed by sources - but it should also be correct, or at least warn the reader when it might not be; such a warning is the function of that template, as is encouraging seeking out new reliable sources. Allens (talk) 02:44, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

OK, I see. Yes, I agree with that. Eastcote (talk) 03:33, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

I don't see the point of a dubious tag. If Eleanor1944 thinks all the published material is flawed based on nothing more than personal experience, then there isn't much to discuss. Furthermore, I don't understand the complaint– that the "latch" pronunciation is not frequently used, that's not the correct pronunciation, that it's not the original way to pronounce it, what's the complaint? Bms4880 (talk) 03:55, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

I agree that the "latch" pronunciation is likely common now, but it has nothing to do with the region's traditional dialect. It is a book word (to make up a term for the lack of a better one), not something that we learnt from our grandpaps.Eleanor1944 (talk) 01:23, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Walt Wolfram, a noted linguist at North Carolina State University in Raleigh, North Carolina, was raised in Pennsylvania. When asked about the correct pronunciation of "Appalachian" his response was that it was with the "LATCH". Since his career has been dedicated to studying dialects, his voice carries authority on the matter. Those who use the "lay" pronunciation often come across as trying to sound more educated than they apparently are. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.99.90.39 (talk)

References

That's just your opinion. As to Wolfram, he's also entitled to his opinion, and he's probably right about where he is from, assuming he actually said/believes that, as you provided no sources for the claim. We're certainly not going to add it to the article without a direct citation. - BilCat (talk) 07:32, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Wash vs Warsh.

This article contains a sourced statement that somehow "warsh" or "worsh" is an Appalachian pronunciation of "wash". Maybe some speakers of "Appalachian English" use it, but none in my family (from the area where Georgia, Tennessee and Alabama meet). I now live in Michigan, and it is often heard here, spoken by native Michiganians. I always thought it was a Michigan thing and it always sounded strange to my ear. Even if some speakers of Appalachian English pronounce "wash" this way, it is by no means an exclusively Appalachian pronunciation, so shouldn't be used as an example of Appalachian English. Eastcote (talk) 17:13, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

This is r-intrusion, explained under phonemic incidence. It's extremely common in some parts of the region, and occurs in other words ("ought to" as "orta", e.g.). Bms4880 (talk) 20:21, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

It is fairly common, although that was not the way I (growing up in an ultrarural area of Southeast KY) first learnt to pronunce the word. Some people used the "r" sound. I reckon that the "r" sound must have been in the dialect, though, in say the late 19th century and was one of the features being gradually peeled off (I have always thought of the effects of standard language on dialects as being like the layers of an onion, with the outer part coming off first.) I was quite impressed when I went to the closest big city (Knoxville, TN) and heard the "r" sound in the word there. I suspect that the "r" sound was present in the word generally throughout Appalachia at one time but gradually was omitted by more and more people under the influence of "correct" English. I can't say for sure, though. I have heard it from people from various areas of Appalachia, and possibly outside the region too. Eleanor1944 (talk) 20:52, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes, but is it something that is peculiar to Appalachian English? Or is it found in other regions as well? As I said, I hear it in Michigan, from people with varied backgrounds: Polish, German, Irish, etc. So I'm not sure this is something that is peculiarly "Appalachian". Eastcote (talk) 20:58, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

No, it's not peculiar to Appalachian English. Bms4880 (talk) 21:03, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Very little in AE is peculiar to Appalachia. Yes, "Ought"--pronounced "ourt" (with a long "o" in pure AE)is another example. Far from being used only by very old people, you will hear it from many college graduates, I daresay, in SE KY. I remember a school principal at the U. of KY in Summer 1959 using it. Sorry I said that "worsh" is the only example of the intrusive "r." I think there may be one or two other examples, but not many. [One more example of "r" intrusion: in "ruin" (pronounced "rurn" to rhyme with "churn." I can't say right off how much this pronounciation is being "corrected," but it was pretty general three or four decades ago. Eleanor1944 (talk) 02:40, 14 November 2011 (UTC)] By the way, although AE is indeed rhotic, unlike some other Southern American dialects, there are a few exceptions. One is in the phrases "head fo'must" (for "head foremost) and "foot fo'must" (for "foot foremost"), as in "he fell off of the bluff head fo'must and got kilt." I was thinking of these pronunciations some months ago and asked my wife, who is from near Roanoke,VA, whether she was familiar with it. Her reply was that her grandmother did. That is another indication of how most aspects of the dialect are the same even in areas three hundred or so miles apart. In AE, there are also at least two examples of "r" being dropped before a vowel. "Through" is pronounced as "thu," and "through" is pronounced as "tho"--as in "He tho'd the rock thu the winder and broke the glass." I've rambled from one topic to another too much. I'll get bback to the pronunciation of "glass," "class," etc. on another occasion.Eleanor1944 (talk) 00:06, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Again, not something I can point to as research, but I likewise grew up in Southeast KY (Middlesboro, to be precise), with the nearest city being Knoxville, TN, and do not remember hearing that much r-intrusion there - I think I did when I went further south, though. Allens (talk) 21:18, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

I am from the next county, a rural area in which Middlesboro is considered quite a city. Although not everybody pronounced the word with an "r," a lot of people did. I am not quite sure whether all of the less educated people born in about 1875 did so. The two pronouncations may have co-existed in the same area all along. That is one point I am not quite sure of. I even asked one of my grandparents in the 1950s about how their grandparents pronounced certain words, but unfortunately that was not one of them. As for whether it is peculiarly Appalachian, I suspect not. I doubt whether there is anything that is peculiarly Appalachian, although some of these forms are more highly concentrated there than in other places. As for the pronounciation "worsh," I believe this is the only such word with "r" intrusion. Eleanor1944 (talk) 21:24, 7 November 2011 (UTC) See above for another example, though.Eleanor1944 (talk) 00:06, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

I know this is a very old post, but I wanted to add in something. My family is Appalachian and most say it the "warsh" or "warsh." All my older family members say it, except my parents, one of which is from Kentucky and the other is educated and gave up the dialect. I don't remember hearing young people say it (I mean, we don't really wash stuff together much, so why would I hear them use the word?). I am curious if it is shifting because I know the dialect is often attacked by virtually everyone else in the country. I don't really know why it would matter if it is peculiarly Appalachian or not. It is very uncommon in the US and, at least in my experience, is the norm in Appalachian English. The dialect will have similarities with others but it should still be mentioned. 184.58.100.105 (talk) 00:17, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Proposal to automatically archive the page

This page is getting quite large. It's a good practice to archive older comments, moving them to indexed pages that are linked to this talk page. This can be a tedious chore. But there is a bot, MiszaBot I, that will do the work for us if we choose. The bot userpage makes the following suggestion:

So do we have a consensus? — ℜob C. alias ÀLAROB 05:43, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

That's fine with me. Bms4880 (talk) 14:17, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

No objection. I'll look for the archives. Eleanor1944 (talk) 00:56, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Invitation

Some of the contributors who are active on this page might want to get involved in other parts of Wikiproject Appalachia. If so, please join us at Wikipedia:WikiProject Appalachia. --Orlady (talk) 22:19, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Up spake and he commenced to

I see no mention of the link between French and the Bible in Appalachian speking here which is odd. For example, "Then up spake this man...." OR to start an action in a rapid fashion with no reason, as in "He commenced to singing". Coal town guy (talk) 17:41, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

None of the sources I checked mention French or the Bible as an influence on this dialect, specifically (French, of course, influenced English in general). Bms4880 (talk) 18:17, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

"Jasper" is not synonymous with "acquaintance"

The term "jasper" is a generalized usage of the male given name "Jasper" and is used similarly to "joe" as a token for an unnamed male individual. It is slightly derisive, carrying the flavor of stranger or outsider. The closest general American equivalent I can think of would be "guy." Hogwaump (talk) 12:09, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Expand phonology section and always give IPA

The current phonology section is incomplete and needs to be revised. In addition to many examples only being given in the author's personal pseudo-phonetic rendering (which in many cases is ambiguous even if it referred to a single standard dialect, and regardless is ambiguous as to which dialect is used as the reference point), many important differences between Appalachian English and other dialects are ignored. All examples should be given in IPA and probably En-PR, with a note at the beginning about phonetic transcription. Also, is there a good description of the exact realization of AE's vowels? I know certain vowels are quite different from other dialects, /u/ being realized as /y/ for example, and there must be proper linguists studying AE phonology. Telmac (talk) 04:41, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Word List too long and inappropriate for article

The sample word list given is excessively long and inappropriate for an article of this scope. We're not providing a dictionary here, I'm aware of short lists of dialect specific words appearing on their wikipedia articles but it's excessive here. Also, as mentioned above, no mention is made with regards to inter-appalachian variation and some or many of these words might not be present in all regions in appalachia. Someone with more knowledge of AE should tighten the list to a handful of common examples. Telmac (talk) 04:47, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

I disagree with a "handful." I think the list is a decent length, but I don't think it would be bad to shrink it some. It think it should have at least 25 words. I'm not sure what words you would want to leave in though. Dope and poke are some deep Appalachian words that are common examples, but aren't in some regions such as mine. These are some really unique words that I believe belong in the article. There is no reason to limit the list to words that are everywhere in the region. 184.58.100.105 (talk) 00:24, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

"It is mostly oral but can also be written and appears in some known literary works."

What works? It says this but I do not see any links nor references to these known works. 184.58.100.105 (talk) 00:28, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

"The southern drawl is of an unknown American origin, although some suspect it originated in African-American English."

I do not think that this line really should be on the page. First, it is sometimes said that African-American English developed from the Southern drawl, not the other way around. Secondly, the Southern accent at times is not viewed very friendly. Therefore, the line could be perceived as blaming African Americans for the Southern drawl. (Note: the Southern drawl is sometimes used in general to refer to the Southern accent.) Therefore, I feel the line should be removed. Thank you.LakeKayak (talk) 01:09, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

As it seems nobody has an opinion, (I have learned from experience. When users have opinion, they speak.) I am going to remove only the latter part of the sentence. I see nothing wrong with the former part: "The southern drawl is of an unknown American origin." Over and out.LakeKayak (talk) 01:14, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Merger: Ozark English → Appalachian English

Studies suggest that "Ozark English" and "Appalachian English" are the same dialect (one an "extension" or separated "island" subset of the other); features of both traditional Ozark and Appalchian English may be declining, as evidenced by a lack of much Ozark-focused dialect research since the middle of the 1900s, as well as the recent classification of both the Ozark and (especially) Appalachian regions under the Southern dialect region by the 2006 Atlas of North American English. Any sources that don't directly equate the two do consistently highlight their similarities, yet never their differences.

The merging of the two articles has never happened, though I proposed it in the past on the Southern American English talk page. In that discussion, one user opposed without further discussion (even when asked to elucidate), one user brought up a single argument I feel I countered, and one user supported without further discussion. No full discussion was ever had over the course of at least 9 months, though I found and included later evidence to bolster my points. Below is my evidence in full supporting the merger:

Evidence

The 1948 article "Southern Mountain Dialect", for example, refers to an Appalachian-Ozark variety as a single dialect with as much slight internal variation as any dialect: "Though fairly consistent in the isolated districts (with which we are mainly concerned), the dialect may vary slightly with the locality, and even from family to family." It lists "four main divisions" geographically, which include "the Blue Ridge of Virginia and West Virginia, the Great Smokies of Tennessee and North Carolina, the Cumberlands of Kentucky and Tennessee [all three constituting the Appalachian region], and the Ozarks of Arkansas and southern Missouri" [p. 46]). This passage unifies Appalachian and Ozark English. Here is what the more recent research that I could find has to say on Ozark English: John C. Wells' (1982) Accents of English lists "Ozarks" in the index with a "see also 'southern mountain'". Wells clearly centers "southern mountain" speech on Appalachian and "upland states", which "form a transition zone between the south and midland dialect areas; their southern mountain speech is classified as south midland by Kurath, but popularly regarded as a variety of southern accent" (527). This passage unifies Appalachian and Ozark English. "Variation and Change in Geographically Isolated Communities: Appalachian English and Ozark English" (1984), a 200-page comparative study, does initially speak of Appalachian and Ozark English as two different dialects or "varieties", yes, but the entire goal of the study is to unearth more about the relationships between the two. The conclusion states that the study considered "the descriptive detail of the [grammatical] structures we have examined, [and] the frequency with which the various structures are used" (p. 235). The findings of the study: "that there are no descriptive differences in the representative structures we have examined here" (p. 235) and then: "the frequency relationships between the varieties also shows fairly close parallels, with some non-significant differences" (p. 235). This passage unifies Appalachian and Ozark English. World Englishes (2013) plainly says "The Ozark Mountains can be seen as an extension of the Appalachian English dialect" (48). This passage unifies Appalachian and Ozark English. Wolfdog (talk) 14:37, 4 February 2017 (UTC) ANAE (2006) mentions the term "Ozark(s)" only twice: Referring to the card-cord merger, "while the general merger has disappeared in most of the Appalachian–Ozarkian region, the function words or and for often remain lower and fronter (closer to /ahr/) than the rest of the /ohr/ class, which has merged with /ohr/" (277). This passage unifies Appalachian and Ozark English. "The area of the South in which the Southern Shift is most developed is defined as the Inland South... an Appalachian region extending across eastern Tennessee, western North Carolina and Northern Alabama.... This region was populated by a settlement stream... most often identified by cultural geographers as the Upland South.... Secondary concentrations of Upland South settlement are the product of further migration to the Ozarks and to east Texas. Map 18.9 indicated that the strongest development of Southern States phonology is found somewhat to the west of this area" (261-2). This passage unifies Appalachian and Ozark English. Although the ANAE never again mentions the Ozarks, its maps show the Ozark region to be located on the borderline between the Southern and Midland dialects, with the biggest city in the area, Springfield, Missouri, firmly documented as Southern. Knoxville, Asheville, and Chattanooga in Appalachia are all firmly documented as Southern. This again unifies Appalachian and Ozark English. There is no reason given in the ANAE that Ozark English should be considered exceptional.

Wolfdog (talk) 14:42, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Discussion

OK, since the opposition to the original move has apparently passed and/or there is no opposition to the new move specifically to Appalachian English, I'll prepare to move the page in the coming days. On the topic of this dead or dying dialect, we will likely only lose sources over the years, not gain more. This will make it difficult to ever meaningfully expand the Ozark English stub. Wolfdog (talk) 16:29, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Adding a section about the controversies?

While I am not personally a speaker of any of the varieties of English found in Appalachia, this is a topic that I find fascinating. Reading through this talk page as well as looking into some of the existing linguistic research, I have realized that there is a fair amount of controversy over how the boundaries for this variety should be drawn. There are even some linguists who believe that the whole variation of Appalachian English might not exist at all given the huge variety of dialects spoken in this area of the country. There are many sources about this topic, but I will link a couple down below that I found interesting.

Is There an "Appalachian English"?- http://www.jstor.org/stable/40932575?seq=2#page_scan_tab_contents

Yet Again: The Midland Dialect - http://www.jstor.org/stable/455860 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mbooneroberts (talk • contribs) 18:26, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Mbooneroberts. I am your fellow ANTH 383 classmate and chose your article to peer review. I have a few suggestions for the article and thought it would be nice to have them on the article's talk page.

Overall, the article was very strong. It had comprehensive coverage of different aspects of this language variety (grammar, lexicon, phonology, etc.), and seemed to give fairly balanced and neutral coverage. Here are my suggestions/comments going through the article:

• The first sentence was a good definition sentence to start out the lead section.
• The second sentence of the lead section was a run-on and hard to follow--you might consider breaking this up or not including so much material.
• In all, the lead section was a bit too detailed for an opening. The types of Appalachian English and its relatives could have its own section in the body, but the lead section might be better used to go over the main points of the rest of the article. This, I think, will help the reader better follow what's going on.
• In that regard, the second paragraph of the lead section would be great for the beginning of the "Origins" section.
• The third paragraph of the lead section seems to belong in its own section, perhaps on the social role and realities of Appalachian English (now we're getting into sociolinguistics territory).

Now on to the "Phonology" section ...

• This section has some great details, but the "Phonetics" subsection would benefit from an introductory sentence that clues the reader in to what follows.
• Both subsections have material that is not cited. Most of the time, the uncited content is not imperative to the article, and can be easily deleted.
• The 4th bullet of the "Phonetics" subsection is referring to the PIN/PEN merger--it would be good to make this explicit.
• As a reader I am not immediately certain about how the content of the "Phonetics" and "Phonemic Incidence" subsections is different--maybe you could clarify this with introductory sentences or merge the two subsections?

Now on to "Grammar" ...

• This section might also benefit from a very brief introductory sentence.
• Maybe you could add an example sentence for the "To Be" subsection?
• The "Other Verb Forms" subsection has a lot of missing citations.
• The "Liketa" subsection might fit slightly better in the "Lexicon" section--however, this might not be ideal since there is much more detail about this particular word than the other words included. Maybe you could reprise the word in the "Lexicon" section?
• The "Pronouns and Demonstratives" subsection doesn't have any citations.
• Finally, the "Origins" and "Ozarks" sections are well-done, but I feel like they would fit better at the beginning.

In all, this article presents a good summary of Appalachian English and is fairly Encyclopedia-like. The biggest themes for change are adding introductory sentences where necessary and making sure things are properly cited. I hope this helped, and I look forward to seeing the final product! Sparks9714 (talk) 00:35, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

...Why... thank you? Wolfdog (talk) 02:01, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Grammatical Structure ‘need’ + past participle

The Appalachian (and Scottish Standard) dialects use the past participle following some verbs (need, e.g.).

https://ygdp.yale.edu/phenomena/needs-washed GrammarBroad (talk) 03:09, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

"And"/"an'" for "if"?

Is "and"/"an'" as a conjunction introducing a conditional, equivalent to "if", a feature preserved in Appalachian English? I know that it is extinct in almost all dialects, but I have a vague memory of learning that it could still be found in Appalachian English. On the other hand, I might be misremembering, and it is difficult to search for sources on this topic. Anyway, if it is preserved, the article should mention that, and I would be willing to help with the addition; if not, please disregard this comment. 166.181.83.59 (talk) 19:12, 3 November 2024 (UTC)