A Linguist Explains What Old-School British Accents Sounded Like -The Toast

Skip to the article, or search this site

Home: The Toast

url-2Gretchen McCulloch last explained exactly how the Benedict Cumberbatch name generator works and why dogespeak is so doge. This piece was brought to you by a reader.

You might think that Shakespeare spoke with a British accent. And technically, you wouldn’t be wrong, because since Shakespeare was a full-time Brit, he must, by definition, have had a British accent.

But a lot of people, including many Shakespeare aficionados, take that to mean that a modern-day British accent (usually Received Pronunciation aka RP) is the best accent to pronounce Shakespeare with. Is this actually true?

Partly as a demonstration, partly because I just want an excuse to make everyone watch this truly excellent sketch, here’s Catherine Tate performing Sonnet 130 (the snarky one) for Comic Relief, in a British accent that is definitely not RP. You can start at 4:37 if you only want to watch her perform the sonnet, although the whole sketch is well worth the watch.

Or what about the accent of Ichabod Crane in Sleepy Hollow? (For the uninitiated, this is a TV series involving Ichabod, a British soldier who has been magically asleep since 1781, newly awoken from his enchantment and adjusting to the modern world, while also trying to break an ancient curse and figure out whether he has better chemistry with his cop partner Abbie or his former wife Katrina.) Here’s the series trailer for reference: you can stop after about 30 seconds if you’re pressed for time.

There’s a lot of buddy-cop plus magic stuff in Sleepy Hollow which is actually quite entertaining, but what I want to focus on is the fact that Ichabod speaks with a fairly standard-issue British accent, RP or close to it. Ignoring the realism of Headless Horsemen, is Ichabod’s accent any more reasonable than the affected British accents of Shakespearean actors?

As a matter of fact, there are actually very good reasons to think that neither Shakespeare nor Ichabod should be speaking with what we currently think of as a “British” accent at all. What? Yes, really. Let me explain.

imagesFirst, we need to talk about how it came to be that British and American accents are different in the first place. Most people assume that the British have always basically talked like that, and at some point after Shakespeare had died and while Ichabod Crane was asleep, the American colonists started speaking differently. That’s certainly what Sleepy Hollow assumes.

But it’s actually the opposite: at the time shortly post-Shakespeare and pre-Ichabod when the majority of British settlers arrived in North America, they actually spoke much more like current Americans than current Brits. One example is in the pronunciation of R after a vowel: at this time, everyone on both sides of the Atlantic was saying things like “paRk youR caR in HaRvaRd YaRd” (well, if cars had existed at the time, which they didn’t. Harvard Yard actually did exist, which, just…whatever, Harvard Yard).

We can tell that the rhotic pronunciation was the original one for a couple of reasons. For one thing, there has to be some reason why we write an R in those words in the first place, and basically everything that seems illogical about English spelling is actually totally reasonable if you go far enough back into the etymology. Another way we can show that people pronounced things in a particular way before we had recording devices to prove it is spelling variation, especially from less-standardized text like private notes and letters or from respelling schemes in early dictionaries. For example, if someone is writing “should” as “shud”, we can be fairly sure that the /l/ is silent for that person; conversely, if people don’t start writing “park” as “pak” until 1775, we can suppose that they didn’t start pronouncing it that way until around the same time.

So anyway, some Brits sailed across the Atlantic, speaking rhotically, and then they rebelled against the mother country, speaking rhotically, and then they founded America, speaking rhotically, and then they decided to make a time-travel action/supernatural TV series featuring some excellent characters of colour, still speaking rhotically. I may have skipped some steps, but speaking rhotically is in every single one of them. (Well, unless you speak one of the American dialects that isn’t rhotic, like Boston English or Southern English, but let’s not complicate things here.)

Meanwhile, back in Ye Olde England, everyone had also been speaking rhotically for quite a long time, but people started getting tired of it in the period just after the American Revolution. (Although we’re not quite sure why: perhaps this was just the 18th century equivalent of memespeak.) The first evidence we have of non-rhotic pronunciation is from a dictionary by John Walker in 1775, and pretty soon thereafter everyone was “pahking theih cahs in Hahvahd Yahd”. Metaphorically speaking. (Well, except for the people who speak a British dialect that is rhotic, like Northern English or Scots, but again let’s not complicate things.)

Is it surprising that the British were the ones who changed their way of speaking? Actually, not really. Language change generally happens faster in urban environments than in rural ones, so there’s a tendency for colonies (rural) to maintain the older forms of a language while colonizers (urban, at least in the capital where the most prestigious dialect is spoken) keep on innovating. So the same pattern happens in other languages: for example, Acadian and Quebec French preserve some older features that are now archaic in European French. (This is true at least until the colonies develop cities for themselves: other changes have happened in North America since then, such as the loss of the Transatlantic accent.)

Incidentally, the Great British De-Rhoticization (a term I just made up) also explains why Australian, New Zealand, and South African English are all non-rhotic, because these areas were settled after the British switched off their Rs, while Canada and the USA were first settled while everyone was still R-full. (More about British colonization if you want numbers.)

So let’s go back to Shakespeare: his dates are 1564 to 1616, which is far before the American Revolution in the 1700s and therefore long before anyone in Britain got it into their head to speak non-rhotically.

sleepyhollowtitle1And as for Ichabod Crane, he’s a British soldier-turned-revolutionary from 1781, but he emigrated from Britain some unspecified time before the American Revolution (1765-1783), so chances are that he should probably actually be speaking rhotically, although for him it’s quite a near thing. I mean, sure, I get why the creators didn’t do it: having a different way of speaking emphasizes Ichabod’s otherness, plus, everyone likes to listen to a dude with a British accent. And unlike me, probably not everyone would find historical linguistics the most riveting possible thing to include in a mythological Americana buddy cop show.

What about other differences?

It’s not just R-fullness or R-lessness. There have been lots of other changes since Shakespeare’s day. A big one is the pronunciation of various vowel sounds: as we can tell by certain sonnets, “love” used to rhyme with “prove” and “remove”, such as in Sonnet 116:

Love is not love

Which alters when it alteration finds

Or bends with the remover to remove

In general, Shakespeare-era vowels tend to have a rather Scottish tinge. For more examples of how the vowels have changed, I’d recommend this excellent demonstration video with David Crystal and his son Ben (the demonstration proper starts at 3:00, although the intro also has some lovely shots of the Globe Theatre.)

In Sleepy Hollow, a major source of anachronistic confusion for fans has been Ichabod’s pronunciation of “lieutenant” as “leftenant”: it’s such an issue that it’s even addressed on the FAQ of the fuckyeahsleepyhollow tumblr. However, this one is actually spot-on. The “left” pronunciation has existed for basically as long as the term itself in English. Not only is it the current pronunciation in the UK (and also Canada), but it’s also how the word was pronounced in the US up until around the 1820s, several decades after Ichabod zonked out. Rhotic or non-rhotic, Ichabod should definitely not be saying “lootenant”.

Where the language of Sleepy Hollow and Shakespeare collide is in Episode 5, where Ichabod and Abbie come across settlers from Roanoke. Founded in 1586, Roanoke was one of the earliest British settlements in North America, but that’s not quite early enough for the “Middle English” that its inhabitants are supposedly speaking, as even a lot of fans have pointed out.  Middle English (think Middle Ages) is approximately the speech of Chaucer and stopped being spoken around 1470, which is well before any sustained contact between England and the Americas, let alone settlements. (Recall the famous Columbus 1492 thing.) Roanoke settlers would actually have spoken Early Modern English, just like Shakespeare, who was actually 22 years old when Roanoke was founded. (Hey, I think I have an idea for a second time-travelling episode next season.)

Unfortunately, if for plot purposes you want to have the Roanoke settlers speaking a variety of English that’s unintelligible to modern ears, Early Modern English isn’t quite going to cut it. Even if we don’t quite get all the innuendos in Shakespeare without the help of the footnotes, this era of speech is far from incomprehensible to present-day listeners.

Reading_Jane_Austen_business_deskIchabod in particular shouldn’t have had to study anything at Oxford in order to talk to people from about 200 years before his time: this is basically the same gap as a modern person reading Jane Austen. On the bright side, as far as I can tell without being fluent in it, the actual Middle English that the TV-Roanoke settlers are speaking does sound like a reasonable approximation. (This behind-the-scenes video says that the producers hired a Middle English specialist and dialect coach to help with that episode, though alas not a historical linguist to determine whether they should have been teaching them Middle English in the first place.)

Fortunately, I think there’s a perfect solution to all of these problems. We clearly need an elite squadron of linguists to vet all programming for linguistic accuracy before it appears in the public eye. And I know lots of highly qualified linguistics grad students who will probably be looking for work in the next few years. Dear Hollywood: call me. I’ll hook you up.

Add a comment

Comments (157)

Loading... Logging you in...
  • Logged in as
I'm so happy that Leftenant is correct.
5 replies · active 461 weeks ago
The David and Ben Crystal video is one of my favorites and I always try to show it to as many people as possible. So good! Thanks for this post! I'm always excited to see ling stuff on the Toast, especially historical linguistics, which I don't know very much about. Can I join the squadron vetting programming for linguistic accuracy? All I have is a linguistics BA, so I am not as qualified but probably cheaper, Hollywood.
2 replies · active 575 weeks ago
Here's a follow-up post with some more links about these topics! (Including the entire text of A Midsummer Night's Dream in original pronunciation, because you know you want it.)
http://allthingslinguistic.com/post/80067476348/a...
2 replies · active 575 weeks ago
Thank you for this excellent, excellent article with many fascinating points! And also putting to rest that tired old canard of "Shakespearean people spoke like Appalachian settlers" which I still don't fully understand.
6 replies · active 564 weeks ago
Ahh, the shirtless Sleepy Hollow pictures. Gretchen gets us.
5 replies · active 575 weeks ago
"Shakespeare-era vowels tend to have a rather Scottish tinge." YES - I find that whenever I try to read Shakespeare (or Chaucer) aloud, I accidentally come out with a painful Scottishish accent. Sorry, Scots, for butchering your lovely way of speaking.
7 replies · active 445 weeks ago
I love this! Please teach more more about linguistic accuracy!

And that link to the lieutenant explanation is blowing my mind! Noah Webster strikes again!
1 reply · active 575 weeks ago
Love that Catherine Tate sketch. Maybe I even "loohve" it.
They were rhotic, but did they have the flat tone we consider "American"? I was under the impression that the old British accent was more like a current Scottish or northern English accent than the genteel Queen-speak we think of as British today, but not like a midwestern news anchor. And wouldn't American accents be the result of a multitude of influences over the past 400 years, from indigenous Americans to a variety of immigrant populations from all over the world?
14 replies · active 460 weeks ago
This is so fascinating, Gretchen, and your writing style is so engaging - I'm always happy to see one of your articles because I know I'm going to be entertained and also learn a lot (which is true of a lot of Toast pieces, but still).
2 replies · active 575 weeks ago
farrisonhord's avatar

farrisonhord · 575 weeks ago

My father-in-law is a linguist from Texas living in Wisconsin. I'm a native Wisconsinite with an ear for my homeland's most amusing pronunciations. We have many good times discussing language and regional language differences. This article may just add a whole new historical dimension to our conversation.
3 replies · active 491 weeks ago
My father-in-law is a linguist from Texas living in Wisconsin. I'm a native Wisconsinite with an ear for my homeland's most amusing pronunciations. We have many good times discussing language and regional language differences. This article may just add a whole new historical dimension to our conversation.
16 replies · active 454 weeks ago
Also, a question - do we think that the Boston accent is non-rhotic because we were trying to keep up with the Joneses, accent-wise, after the revolution? Although it's definitely now a class thing - patrician = non-rhotic (JFK), middle-class MA accent = generally rhotic, but not as hard as other parts of the US (me), blue-collar MA accent = non-rhotic (Mark Wahlberg in basically any movie), but in a different way than the patrician version. This fascinates me.
13 replies · active 454 weeks ago
And unlike me, probably not everyone would find historical linguistics the most riveting possible thing to include in a mythological Americana buddy cop show.

LIES. that is absolutely the most riveting possible thing to include in a buddy cop show.

Love this, love your blog, love seeing your writing on The Toast, etc. Every single one of your articles makes me think of my own piddling linguistics minor with fond nostalgia. :)
4 replies · active 575 weeks ago
UNF THIS IS SO GOOD.
smiff island's avatar

smiff island · 575 weeks ago

What about the accents that have been preserved on places like Smith Island in Chesapeake Bay? I remember hearing that isolated enclaves like that tend to retain older accents. Y/n?
1 reply · active 454 weeks ago
This is fascinating. Your articles are fast becoming my new favorite thing on The Toast!
Linguists represent!

Also, round our way (in the UK) people frequently say that original Shakespeare would sound like someone from Birmingham (the Midlands place, not Alabama ;) ), which is supposed to be funny because Brummie (as it's known) is meant to be one of the least pleasant British accents to listen to (compare any number of regional US accents that are meant to be ugly).

Also, small correction - Northern English accents aren't rhotic (I should know because I've got one). You're probably thinking of West Country accents (basically, pirate speak - the guy playing Long John Silver in Disney's Treasure Island film was from there and used his natural accent). Sean Astin as Sam Gamgee seems to be attempting one as well (presumably to show the class distinction between most of the hobbits and the elf-taught, RP-speaking Bagginses).

But I'm always glad to see people subverting the All English Accents Are RP thing, especially Stateside :)
6 replies · active 461 weeks ago
All these posts just make me go like this:



Also I love that Catherine Tate sketch. More Catherine Tate forever, please!
1 reply · active 575 weeks ago
This was great! I love details. Also makes me feel less bad about getting hung up on the fact that the disappearance of the Roanoke colony was not a mystery.
3 replies · active 575 weeks ago
LOVED THIS. I speak with RP but enjoy explaining to non-Brits that my accent is *just one* of a huge variety and there is no such thing as a "British accent".
I love the OP video from the Globe, but to my native Bristolian ear the Shakespearean era English sounds an awful lot like the modern Somerset/general West Country accent (the country version, not proper Bristolian which is a lot tighter). I'd dispute that northern English is all that rhotic, but definitely Scots and not forgetting Irish SPEAKING OF WHICH: why is the Irish accent still so rhotic when it was so intertwined with non-rhotic England for so long? Perhaps since they weren't allowed to speak Irish, they decided to rebel in whatever linguistic way they could?
3 replies · active 509 weeks ago
Oh MAN this is just so, so cool! Gretchen, you are awesome and I <3 you and thanks to your pieces here I feel like I'm starting to actually "get" linguistics!
Standard Tuber's avatar

Standard Tuber · 575 weeks ago

Or! Try saying this as if "remove" as we say it today rhymes with "love," that's fun :)

Love is not love

Which alters when it alteration finds

Or bends with the remover to remove
2 replies · active 575 weeks ago
Ahhhh this was so great and you write so well! Thanks so much for this.
These are so many of my favorite things. Really enjoying your posts!
Thanks for this, it's always something that I've wondered about!
And double kudos for including the Catherine Tate/David Tennant sketch.
This was SO interesting!! I honestly had no idea about the love/remove thing - I just thought Shakespeare was being a bit lazy!
YESSSS. Sleepy Hollow is, for me, a constant exercise in one kind of historical hilarity or another, because I'm from Lexington, MA and so I (unwillingly) osmosed a greater than usual familiarity with the Revolution than I gather is average. I think they had a scene set in Buckman Tavern and I burst out laughing, because that single room was probably bigger than the entire building (which still stands in my hometown!). If it's not that, it's English colonists speaking Middle English, and then of course there's the entire "George Washington, demon hunter" premise. Wacky laugh a wacky minute, that show.

But in other news! This article was super fun, and this subject always interests me. More linguistics all the time!
3 replies · active 575 weeks ago
It's crazy what you can learn about pronunciation just by figuring out what's supposed to rhyme with what. This reminds me, Gretchen, that I read your blog post about Canadian Raising and then had an epiphany that "shout" and "loud" rhyme in US English which makes that one KISS song make SO MUCH MORE SENSE.
Gretchen, I love your articles!! I always love how relevant linguistics can be to the average person with a bit of curiosity about our crazy language (or any language, for that matter!). I am a Canadian SLP, and this means that I spend a lot of my time cursing rhoticism in general (damn sounds are so hard to acquire for so many kiddoes). Thank you for these posts, and please keep them coming! :)
DAVID CRYSTAL :-)
This is my favorite thing that has ever graced the internet.
SharkinaFunnyHat's avatar

SharkinaFunnyHat · 575 weeks ago

My last name is McCulloch too! Do you pronounce it with a 'uck' at the end or an 'ough'? Mine is with an 'uck' but people read it with an 'ough' 99% of the time.
3 replies · active 447 weeks ago
Skydancing's avatar

Skydancing · 575 weeks ago

This is fascinating! And enlightening, because I never once considered how changes in pronunciation might have affected meaning in Shakespeare's writings. Going to go lose myself in your blog now, Gretchen.
Toasties interested in a very detailed etymological history of the English language (like, starting with hypothetical reconstructed Indo-European tribal languages) should check out the History of English podcast. Tons of enjoyable content that others might find dry, but that is riveting for (clearly, based on these comments) people like us.

Thank you, Gretchen! Always enjoy your work.
skiesaboveskies's avatar

skiesaboveskies · 575 weeks ago

Lovelovelovelove this piece! I've always wondered what went down when the American and Brit accents diverged. Language RULES! More linguist stuff rah rah!
I am so psyched about the new Outlander TV show but I worry it is going to have all these problems. D:
Ohemgee you guys, Ben Crystal, the younger of the two British folk speaking Shakespeare above, has a book called Shakespeare on Toast, and a website. ( http://www.shakespeareontoast.com/about-toast/ ) So much toast, you guys. So much toast.
The old Shakespeare is gorgeous. I now want to see an entire play produced that way. The sound! i love the sound.
I'M NOT BRITISH! I'M ENGLISH! THE BRITISH ARE THAT FOREIGN LOT WHOM MY ANCESTORS BOOTED OVER INTO WALES AND BRITTANY IN THE FIFTH CENTURY. THEY DON'T SPEAK ENGLISH. THE BRITISH SPEAK WELSH!
he is FINE tho
Are you even aware that Shakespeare was not British, since during his lifetime the British nation did not exist? He was English. He was most certainly NOT 'British'.

Not everyone in Britain is English. The 'estuary accent' is not even spoke all over England much less all over Britain.
1 reply · active 427 weeks ago
Ichabod's mad language skillz (nerd peeps, represent!) are half the reason I watch the show, Mills sister badassery being the other half.
David Young's avatar

David Young · 564 weeks ago

Absolutely fascinating. Thanks!
Fascinating stuff, this!

It was my understanding that those coastal U.S. cities (particularly those in New England and New York) with really close trade ties with England were constantly exposed to that region's changing dialect, including the non-rhotic accent. The major southern cities (Charleston, Savannah, etc.) were not as closely linked in trade. However, lacking the colleges and universities of the northeast, the wealthiest southern families routinely sent their kids to universities in England, exposing their children to the changing accent. Therefore dozens of cities up and down the coast of the United States were far more influenced by the changing English accent.
Speaking as Brit - there is no such thing as a 'British' accent. Im astonished a linguist who writes about Elizabethan rhotic pronunciation doesn't know that very basic and crucial fact. There are 3 countries within Britain (count them) and many many vastly differing regional accents across those countries (Im leaving out Northern Ireland for the moment because its part of the UK not Britain) A Glasgow accent is just as much "a British accent' as the RP you're used to hearing in the movies, but those two accents are massively different, in fact the way people speak across Britain varies more wildly than the way Americans speak across the USA. I would not expect that basic mistake from a linguist.
2 replies · active 525 weeks ago
I learned that RP developed from the accent spoken in the so called 'Home counties' or the Southern Counties, around Kent, Sussex, Surrey etc. Yet,as others have said, there is so much varitation, even just within England, let alone in the whole of Britain, that there is really no so thing as a 'British accent'.

The accent spoken in parts of Northern England, and the non-Gaelic accent of Soutth-Eastern Scotland is said to be the closely related to Old English, or Anglo-Saxon- probably with a fair degree of Norse thrown in.
MIddle English is a fascinating langauge to read, as I have found, because it is exactly phonetic, people seemed to spell words according to the way they were pronounced in thier accent. Hence, you sometimes end up speaking in the accent of the writer when reading it aloud.....
John John m's avatar

John John m · 501 weeks ago

No. Sorry but no.
England has more dialectical variation than America and these dialects and accents are ancient.

A 16th century Yorkshireman would sound more like a modern Yorkshireman than a modern American. Especially one from the Dales speaking broad.

It might be correct to say RP is a recent innovation.
I just came across this article on googling whether American accents were more similar to 1776 English and didn't even notice that it was thetoast until I finished it. it's always nice to miss publication or byline to confirm to yourself that outlets and authors you like you genuinely do like, and not just out of being habituated to liking them.

Post a new comment

Comments by

Skip to the top of the page, search this site, or read the article again