Anyone else notice that once Bush secured re-election, his conformance to Standard American English suddenly improved? All of a sudden it seems it’s okay to refer to technology relating to the center of an atom by the term he no doubt grew up with: NUCLEAR.
There’s a word for people who mask what they really are and pander to others. Okay: politician. But more generally: HYPOCRITE and LIAR and FAKE.
Furthermore, since he altered his diction to exploit a perceived “down-home” image, he thought that a more northeast image would not go over with the American public as well as a more casually-educated Texan image.
I, personally, don’t care what the image of people is: while there certainly is a tiny difference between those projecting different images, the difference is so small that acting on it all the time would only cause problems.
Bush thinks the people DO make their decisions based on this image. Combine this with the preferred image is a non-university educated cowboy and I am forced to conclude that BUSH THINKS AMERICANS ARE STUPID.
You know, the harping on how Bush sayss “nuclear” is just about the stupidest goddamned thing I’ve ever heard in my life, pronouncements from the current administration included.
Geez, I don’t know; I don’t much care for the man, but couldn’t it be possible that he has realized that he has been frequently ridiculed in the press for pronouncing “nuclear” incorrectly and has made a concerted effort to alter his speech?
Sorry, but in true SDMB fashion I’ll have to call for a cite that he was pronouncing the word “nuclear” correctly before his first political campaign, if I am to accept that the “nucular” thing was just an affectation.
BTW, I bet he’s figured out that “Internet” is a singular now, too.
So did Jimmy Carter, IIRC, and he served as an engineer on a nuclear sub. “Wrong” or not, that particular pronounciation is very widespread, and the idea that it is some sort of accurate yardstick for intelligence or ability is absurd.
I think what Ludovic is saying is that GW was pandering to the non technos by using that pronunciation because he appantly recently switched to the more correct one after the election.
I, personally, haven’t seen it, but I’m guessing Lud thinks he has.
All we need is a soundbite to which we can link. While it’s possible that he did indeed conciously change his pronunciation, it’s not likely.
As Miller correctly said, it’s not about intelligence. There have been linguistic studies about this, and, while I read them, I can’t give you a cite just now. I’ll try to do it later.
Did I forget to mention that the actual pronunciation was a minor part of my rant? Did I not mention that I do not judge people very much* on their outer appearance and dialect?
No, the biggest part of what this shows, if true, is that Bush believed he had to come across as an aw-shucks cowboy to win, and now that he has won, it’s no longer necessary.
*sometimes it’s necessary to do so for one’s safety, but given a long term ability to see the bigger picture of someone’s intellect, dialect and appearance are meaningless.
As much as the pronunciation nyu-kyuh-luhrgrates on my nerves, it is acceptable in Webster’s. Well, almost. Webster’s uses the schwa instead of the uh. (The schwa gives it a u sound as in cut or abut.)
“Standard American English”? There is a standard broadcast English and there are standard rules for formal written English. Spoken English embraces many dialects and usages so that there is no one standard. The pronunciation that you and I probably prefer is not limited to those from New England. It is used by all of my friends and family here in Nashville. I don’t know what the usage pattern is for Nashville or the country in general.
I never liked Johnson too much, but I wasn’t around back then to notice changes in dialect. More importantly, neither of them were ever lame ducks, so in a sense we never got to test if that was their dialect of choice or if they too were putting out false airs.
What really chaps my hide is the implication of the argument that “a down-home dialect improves your chances of winning.” It implies that people are against those who use “overly-educated” dialects.
When listening to Bill Clinton, my view of his policy opinions did not differ based on how he chose to speak that particular day. My view of Bush’s policies are affected by his speech only inasmuch as I don’t trust his fakey demeanor.
Now, to all those who averred that dialect does not imply intelligence or abilities: if the American people did, indeed, make their choice based on dialect, they are, indeed, stupid. While I think this is true I don’t believe it to be true as much as Bush and his advisors apparently did. It’s fairly condescending.
Remember that reporter (or article) that said that Kerry wasn’t American enough b/c he was fluent in French? God knows we need a widely travelled, sophisticated Pres–too bad Joe America feels alienated by just those qualities.
Okay folks I’m from Boston (where the owls say ‘whom’). Maybe it is my stuck-up blueblood upbringing (actually it was middle class) but here we like to speak proper English. And I think it is the way ALL people should be speaking. No, I don’t think all Americans should say “BARTH” or “LARF”. And I don’t care if you have an accent be it Southern or Texan or foreign. However, my opinion of a person’s knowledge (and yes maybe intelligence) is lowered when I hear mispronunciations such as NOOK-YA-LAR.
Okay Dopers, what would you think of someone if they pronounced
Goethe as GO-THEE
Freud as FROOD
faux pas as FOX PASS ?
Would you hire someone who used pronunciations such as JOO-LA-REE, REE-LA-TEE, LI-BERRY ?
How would you feel about a neurosurgeon who says that he will be making an incisson into your cramiun ?
I for one am glad that surgeon is NOT an elected position !!!
Well go ahead, it’s time to play “pounce on this posting”.