It does add more definition to speech, it helps convey meaning beyond what just the words alone can do. It that so bad for society that we need to force girls to undergo intensive therapy and discipline to prevent it from becoming mainstream? It is bad that the spoken word can contain more meaning then the written?
Curiously, nobody complained about this twenty years ago when singers such as Kurt Cobain were doing this (even to excess, in songs such as Lounge Act and Moist Vagina), but now that Britney Spears is doing it, suddenly it’s a horrible epidemic?
I don’t complain about Britney Spears doing it mainly because I never listen to Britney Spears.
Sounds a little like the ‘Grudge’ sound…
No, not consciously. Although I think “authoritative” probably isn’t the best word–maybe “more weighty” or “more presumptive” are better ways to describe it. There are other ways that they do this (expressions such as whatever, as if, and so on).
Yes. A LOT of women reporters pitch their voice as low as they can, evidently because they think it makes them sound more serious. It’s annoying enough when they stay within their natural limits, and I can’t stand it when they go beyond them, and start growling. I’ve pretty much stopped listening to Amy Goodman for exactly that reason.
And it’s not just women. I’m looking at you, Henry Kissinger.
Is this Vocal Fry thing what Richard Burton was doing?
This is confusing to me, because she seems to be mixing the vocal fry with other annoying vocal affectations in her demonstration of it. The voice she does sounds a bit like the cartoon character Lumpy Space Princess, but LSP’s voice doesn’t have the vocal fry vibrations in it. Do people ever do the vocal fry on their normal voices without any other effects?
That just sounds to me like a deep voice that occasionally - a few words in the whole recording there - goes a bit gravelly. The Vocal Fry thing is people who naturally have a higher-pitched voice going much deeper and gravelly for effect.
I’d forgotten what a gorgeous voice Richard Burton had.
I’ve been noticing it in young women for several years, especially as noted at the trailing end of an utterance. It makes me curious: Why is it such a young-woman phenomenon? My daughters have picked it up (but just a little).
I saw a story about vocal fry in the New York Times the other day, and it quoted linguistic experts as saying that new vocal trends (unsurprisingly) tend to originate/spread faster among young people, and also that women tend to adapt the new trends earlier than men. This means one can generally expect young women to be the earliest adapters of a new vocal trend.
No, not what Richard Burton did. That was just his yummy voice. What I’m talking about is a current practice of women, especially young women. A fad. Like valleygirl-speak was for a while.
If we’re gonna make anything against the law, I’d love to make frivolous judgment of other folks’ linguistic and vocal patterns against the law. It invariably comes across as a status-fight to me, folks saying, “Me, I’m so secure in who I am that I don’t need to do those things that those insecure people do, see how secure I am? I mock them!” Blech.
Failing that, however, I’d like to register my opposition to the Great Vowel Shift.
Whan in Aprill, with his showrs soote the droghte of March has perced to the roote and bathed every vein in switch licour …
I started noticing (and being bugged by) this in the mid 90s. At first I mostly heard it from teenage girls. I always thought of it as The Gene Pitney Growl.
I had no idea that I did this, but listening to podcasts I recorded about three years ago? Oh yes. I totally do. Didn’t even know that I was. Attributing it to pop singers is kind of dumb, though–I’ve never really listened to them. But I’m a 28 year-old female, and I totally do it.
Huh - I’ve never heard of it as a “thing” before, but I do that.
And actually, I tend to do it more often when I don’t want attention, but for some reason find myself speaking when I have nothing to say. It’s a slightly more audible mutter.
It’s completely different than “Valley Girl” speak, which is high, at the top of the mouth (practically nasal, in fact), and frequently has a ton of upspeak. When I do this, it’s low and in the back and base of my throat. Just because “valley” is an annoying affectation, doesn’t make every annoying affectation “valley girl”
The way that vocal fry and valley girl speak are alike is that they’re both affectations. No one is saying they SOUND the same.
I’m more irritated by the opposite effect - women talking in a falsetto voice.
FWIW, part of my advice to beginning teachers might encourage vocal fry. Classroom management is really stressful, especially when you’re beginning your career, and when you get stressed, your muscles tense, and for a lot of people, this means your throat tenses, and that stretches your vocal cords, causing your vocal pitch to rise. At the same time, people often talk faster and faster when they get stressed.
A high voice going at top speed tends to express agitation. When you’re in charge of a classroom that’s already a bit out of control, the last thing you want to do is to add a loud, agitated voice to the mix: it just exacerbates the problem, makes everything spiral even farther out of control.
So I tell new teachers to watch for this. Instead of going loud, fast, and squeaky, you want to take a deep breath to relax those vocal cords, and then go quiet, slow, and deep. (And a bit menacing). Instead of communicating excitement, you communicate calm and control; folks have to listen carefully to hear you, and the menace gives them a reason to listen; the low voice, sometimes almost a growl, is very often almost hypnotic.
It’s totally counterintuitive, as are many parts of classroom management, but in my experience the low-slow-soft approach works much, much better than the intuitive high-fast-loud approach does. And if this leads to vocal fry, who on earth could be bothered to care?