Tuesday, December 28, 2021

Fossil Hunter: How Mary Anning Changed the Science of Prehistoric Life: A Review

I received a free ARC of this book from NetGalley in exchange for a fair review.

Title: Fossil Hunter: How Mary Anning Changed the Science of Prehistoric Life
Author: Cheryl Blackford
Illustrators: Cover by Stephanie Son, interior illustrations and paleoart by Ellen Duda
Rating: 4/5

Mary Anning is the single most important paleontologist you’ve never heard of. She discovered the first Plesiosaurus, the body of the first Ichthyosaur, and the first pterosaur outside of Germany. She first identified the “bezoar” stones in the stomachs of fossils to be coprolites (fossilized feces) and figured out that Belemnoids, an extinct cephalopod, had ink sacs like its modern relatives. Her specimens are among the most prized possessions of the Natural History Museum in London. And she barely received any credit in her time and today is barely known.

Cheryl Blackford, herself a geologist, sets out to address this in her middle grade biography of Anning. The book begins with a prehistoric interlude with the doomed ichthyosaur that would someday be discovered by the Anning siblings, Joseph and Mary, followed by a chapter introducing Anning and her excavations-- from there, the biography is chronological. The biographical style is somewhat inconsistent. The introduction with the ichthyosaur and the first chapter, "Crocodile or Sea Monster?" show signs of wanting to be a narrative biography: "Thirteen-year-old Mary Anning had been hunting for an elusive treasure for months.”[1] This stands out because the rest of the book is a typical facts-only biography with no other narrative sections. This may be because the copy I read is an uncorrected proof, so this may change between now and its forthcoming publication in January, 2022. Despite this uneven opening, the rest of the book is well-organized by general era of Mary's life, and it's not cluttered by sidebars or unrelated images. 

Duria Antiquior, a more ancient Dorset, by Henry De la Beche, based on specimens discovered by Mary Anning[2]


Part of the fun for me is the inclusion of historical images. While I love paleontology in general, I find the early years of the science especially interesting. I'm fascinated with how people viewed prehistory before our modern understanding-- for example, when the Annings found their first ichthyosaur (a process that took a year, between 1811 and 1812), the only point of reference people had for the strange discovery was the crocodile. Because there were only limited specimens and research into these creatures was in its infancy, artistic reconstructions look a little goofy today, but I find them charming. Even more useful for the young reader learning about Anning are the exquisite sketches she made of her finds. It really gives the reader an impression of Anning’s dedication to her job. One thing I didn’t know was that, since she couldn’t afford books or journal subscriptions (an issue independent scholars still face to this day), she would painstakingly copy out whole articles by hand on whatever material available. Something about this particularly struck me. The paleoart by Ellen Duda in this book is very nice and serves to contextualize the fossils as living creatures well, but I was disappointed there were no illustrations of Anning’s era like on the cover. This I think is a similar issue to the inconsistent writing—the book feels like it doesn’t know what it wants to be.

These style issues aside, Fossil Hunter is a good, accessible introduction to the life and work of Mary Anning, and will hopefully influence young readers to learn more about the early years of paleontology, as well as about the woman who so often has been forgotten in discussions of this history.


[1]Blackford, Cheryl. “Chapter 1: Crocodile or Sea Monster.” In Fossil Hunter: How Mary Anning Changed the Science of Prehistoric Life, 3. Boston, New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, forthcoming. 

[2] Henry De la Beche. Duria Antiquior, a More Ancient Dorset. 1830. Watercolor. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Duria_Antiquior.jpg.

Monday, September 20, 2021

Having Fun Isn't Hard When You've Got a Library Card! Or, What I Did This Summer

 Hello everyone, time for an update.

At the beginning of the year, I intended to write more articles. That obviously didn't happen, and so far I've only written two, both reviews. However, I have a (hopefully) good reason for neglecting this blog. 

I spent most of this year searching for a more steady job, being a freelancer can be fun but so is having money and steady experience in my field. After some false starts, I finally landed a position at my local library. It's great to be back at my home library, where I not only volunteered for years, but had my first paying job ten years ago. I also get to have, for the first time ever, a free library card (since I live in an unserved area). 

Hopefully I'll be back on soon with another ridiculously wordy article about some random topic, but until then I just wanted to post an update.

Tuesday, August 24, 2021

Anne and Louis: Forever Bound Review

Before I begin this review, I need to apologize for its lateness. I fully intended to have this book finished and reviewed in May, but family health issues and my own employment situation took up so much of my time this summer that I'm yet again late with my writing schedule.

I received a free ARC from NetGalley in exchange for a fair review. I was also personally asked for a review by the author, Rozsa Gaston.

Title: Anne and Louis Forever Bound: The Final Years of Anne of Brittany's Marriage to Louis XII of France
Series: Anne of Brittany, book 4
Author: Rozsa Gaston
Rating: 3.5/5

Rozsa Gaston's series following the life of Anne of Brittany reaches its conclusion in Forever Bound, beginning in 1508 and ending in 1514 with Anne's untimely death at 36. I've reviewed its predecessor, Rulers and Lovers, in a post last year. 

The easiest way to begin is to look at what I liked. There are more narrative scenes and Anne has a much stronger personality than in the previous book and the ones before it. Claude has a whole chapter to herself, which will win me over any day. The eponymous Anne and Louis have a nuanced marriage -- loving and supportive, though often strained by their roles as politicians with contradicting goals. I loved the references to Louis's family, including his grandmother Valentina Visconti (appearing here as a painting Louis talks to for advice) and his father Charles d'Orleans, who I've written about my love for on this blog before. This ties in with the increased emphasis on family bonds, which is explored through Anne's fight for her daughters' inheritances, the loss of Louis's nephew Gaston of Foix, and Louise of Savoy's scheming for her own children.

Anne herself has some excellent moments-- especially with other characters. Her confrontation with Louis over his fight with the pope stands out, especially when she snaps and says she's not going to risk the souls of their subjects (France was facing the possibility of being placed under interdict, which would bar all subjects from taking part in the sacraments), and that Louis only cares about the Chruch when it's on his side. Her interrogation of a suspected spy in the household is also done well and has some great tension, and her finally meeting with her rival Louise of Savoy is also a delight. I also very much do enjoy the inclusion of historical images as illustrations and to give the reader a bit more context for the era and people.

This brings me to some issues I had with Anne and Louis.

My major issue with this book is one I have with most historical fiction, including my own attempts-- it is overwhelmingly exposition, with very little action. Most of the major events are related to us by the narrator, rather than through scenes of a story, and what events are deemed important enough to actually show is uneven. Hete we have scenes of the cook and kitchen maid discussing Anne's matchmaking, but the Battle of Saint-Mathieu and the loss of the Marie-la-Cordelière, one of the great tragedies of the era, as well as the reactions of Anne and Louis, are only briefly mentioned. I got the feeling I was reading a textbook rather than historical fiction and that the book wanted to be both. There is a bibliography at the back, but several books cited are completely unrelated, fiction, or both (like Anya Seton's Katherine). I noticed this with the previous books and I still do not understand why this is included. The dialog was decent but stilted-- Anne's habit of addressing Louis as "husband" was especially grating and made me glad when most of their conversations were over.

My second issue is with the portrayal of Louise of Savoy. Louise is Anne's main rival, now that Anne of Bejeau is no longer the major player she was in French politics. I don't object to portraying them as rivals, they obviously were, but I would liked to have seen a more nuanced take on Louise. She's the designated villain in this story, and I would accept that as just being from Anne's perspective except the book is from multiple third-person points of view. Louise was a rival to Anne, yes, and she was dedicated to her son (to the point of overprotective) but I think she had reason to be-- she was widowed at a young age with two small children, in a precarious political situation.

There's a lot you could do to compare her with Anne of Brittany, and nearing the end, Anne does realize that she also would do anything for her son had he lived, and she's already doing whatever she can for her daughters. A major issue that I found Anne and Louis XII dealing with was that they wanted what was best for their countries and those goals put them at odds, especially over their children, even though they want what's best for Claude and Renée. Louise is the same, we just don't get to sympathize with her.

Anne and Louis is a good read for nonspecialist readers interested in the era and the people, especially those who want a general overview given in a narrative format. Thanks again to NetGalley for the ARC and thanks to Rozsa for being interested in my feedback!

Sunday, August 22, 2021

Bliss and Blunder: A Review of The Green Knight (2021)

Arthurian literature is a tricky thing. While the general image of King Arthur, Merlin, and Camelot have been ingrained in the minds of most anglophone people, there is no real "canon" of authoritative versions of the legends in the way there is a Shakespearian canon. While the most familiar version of Arthur began with England's Geoffrey of Monmouth in the 12th century, Welsh and Breton sources date even further back. After Geoffrey, French and English-language authors wrote their own adaptations, including Chrétien de Troyes, who introduced the Grail Quest, and most pertinent to this discussion, the anonymous author of the Middle English poem Sir Gawain and the Green Knight. Each new version adds something to the legend, resulting in hundreds of different plots and variations on them, often contradictory characterizations, and no "correct" version of whatever story a modern bard will present. Even I, a certified The Book Was Better Than The Movie Snob, must admit that any adaptation of the Matter of Britain will be both its own thing and an addition to the ever-evolving state of Arthurian fiction.

Enter The Green Knight.

Monday, November 23, 2020

The Charles Translation Project Transcribed!

It's been a while since I've made an update. Work has kept me busy for the last few months, but I've had some time in between jobs to work on transcribing the text of BL Harley MS 682, the English poetry of Charles d'Orleans. It's been my goal for several years now to produce a modern English edition, and making my own transcription wasn't possible until the British Library got the manuscript digitized and up on their site. I've been working on the transcription in Transkribus (I talked a little about using Transkribus in this post last year) and thanks to some encouragement on Twitter, I've finally had the confidence to post it on my Charles website, Strangeness On the Ground. The site is a mess and some of the links pages are in need of a massive overhaul, but it's a start. I was paralyzed by it not being presentable and I didn't want to even start thinking about posting the transcription til it was complete and I had a nice site to put it on, but hey, the manuscript itself is messy and not ready for presentation 580 years later, so what am I worried about?

You can see the transcription in progress here: https://sites.google.com/site/charlesdukeoforleans/harley-682

Sunday, June 7, 2020

Anne and Louis: Rulers and Lovers - A Review


Anne and Louis: Rulers and Lovers (Anne of Brittany Series Book 3)

I received a free ARC of this book from NetGalley in exchange for a fair review.

Title: Anne and Louis: Rulers and Lovers
Series: Anne of Brittany, book 3
Author: Rozsa Gaston
Rating: 2/5

I intended to have this read and reviewed much earlier in the year. Unfortunately everything that's happened in the last few months, coupled with school and work has put me very behind in reading and reviewing.

This book, like its predecessors Anne and Charles and Anne and Louis: Passion and Politics in Early Renaissance France: The First Years of Anne of Brittany's Marriage to Louis XII, follows the life of Anne of Brittany, the last fully independent Duke of Brittany. Rulers and Lovers begins in 1501, with the proceedings for the engagement of Claude of France and Charles of Luxembourg and ends, leaving us in suspense, with Anne pregnant in January 1508. It focuses on Anne's marriage to Louis XII of France, their daughter Claude, and Anne's struggles to secure the independence of her people of Brittany.

This book frustrated me a great deal. It has a great deal of potential, and there were several parts I enjoyed-- Anne's tour of her duchy was done well and I especially liked the conversation between her and Philippe de Montauban about the bond between father and daughter-- what she is frustrated with, Claude's adoration of her father, is the same thing she had for her own father Francis. I also liked the acknowledgement of the heartbreak of loss- Anne losing so many babies and Louis seeing his men die in combat. Louis seeing the similarities and differences of the two was moving-- it made me think how both have to suffer and see people they love be lost for them to do their duties. Little Claude was adorable and I accept her as my queen already. If I were a romance fan (kind of the target audience, people who like historical romance), I probably would have enjoyed Anne and Louis's relationship.
Despite these strengths, there was a great deal in it that disappointed me and prevents me from rating it higher-- which I really wanted to do. I had two main issues with this book.

First, the exposition. Exposition is admittedly difficult to avoid when writing historical fiction, and in fact impossible when writing historical fiction that covers long periods of time. The first few chapters were strong from a narrative standpoint and I hoped that would continue throughout the book, and it did intermittently, but so much of it was expository, especially Louis's campaigns in Italy. I got the feeling that I was reading an essay on the war, not a novel (or I was having quarantine-induced flashbacks to when I taught history, that may also be a possibility). My mind wandered frequently during these sections, and I would have enjoyed more of them had there been actual scenes of the wars-- battles, Louis planning, anything more than just telling me where the troops moved. However, these parts are, as far as I know, accurate. I confess I don't know a lot about Louis XII, I know far more about his father, but nothing seemed hugely amiss. This holds true for the whole book, and the ones before it. Gaston studied history and she does a great job of getting the facts down, which is far more than I can say for most historical novels I've read. As I'm a historian by trade, I read a lot of nonfictional treatments of things like these, and I would have enjoyed a break from that and had more story to go with the history.

The other issue, and probably the most serious, was Anne herself. I found myself several times asking myself "Why do I like Anne again?" which is a terrifying question. Gaston is kind to Anne, and one of the overarching themes of her writing is, as her biography says, is "women getting what they want out of life." Anne had a very rough life, and to her credit Gaston does not make it worse, and she seeks to find happy moments for the queen. However, while she's portrayed positively, I didn't enjoy Anne as a character. The narration tells us that she's feisty and smart, but most of that comes out just with her arguing with Louis. She rarely actually works with Louis, since the central issues are his campaigns in Italy (which she thinks are stupid) and the question of Claude's betrothal to Charles of Luxembourg or Francis the Dauphin, on which they disagree to say the least. I think this missed out on what makes them an interesting paring historically-- they worked well together, despite their disagreements about Claude's future, and I had looked forward to seeing that in story form. Anne also never seems to take any part in ruling, all she does is order works of art made, make matches for her cordelières, and try to make babies. Historically she served as regent for Louis twice when he was away at war or sick, but that never comes into the story. She also doesn't do any administrative work for Brittany, except fight against Claude being married into France. I forgot what it was that made Anne such a fascinating figure and was sorely disappointed with that part.

There were parts I enjoyed, as I say above, and Gaston has a strong footing in the history of the era, which as a historian I greatly appreciate. You can also tell she very much cares about Anne and wants to tell her story, which is also very important in historical fiction. This book is perhaps best suited to readers who just want an overview of the era without having to read a 700 page nonfiction book, and readers looking for a light romance with a historical setting. My impressions of Anne in this book will probably be completely different than those of the next person to read it. I hope Gaston continues to write about this era, each successive book in the series has improved on the last. This book as a whole just didn't work for me.

Thursday, April 30, 2020

Talk Like a Hoosier - The Hoosier Dialect(s)

“You guys want me to git you anything when I’m at the groshry store? I’m gonna run real quick into Meijer’s and git some pop and melk and mangoes.”
—      A stereotypical sentence in the Hoosier dialect 

Indiana occupies an unusual place in American linguistics. While geographically part of the North and the Midwest, much of the state is considered to speak a dialect similar to that of the Southern United States. The extreme Northwestern corner of the state, including Gary and Hammond, is part of the Northern Inland region, along with its neighbor Chicago. Northern and Southern Indiana have been noted for their differences in dialect, especially in pronunciation. The University of Wisconsin-Madison’s Dictionary of American Regional English (DARE) places Indiana in ten different dialect regions.[1]

Indiana was a frontier state that entered the union in 1816. White settlers in the 19th century largely came from other parts of the United States, bringing their dialects with them. The state can, for our purposes, be divided into Northern and Southern portions, with the dividing line roughly drawn at the capital, Indianapolis, in the center of the state. Settlers from the South arrived relatively early in the 1800s, with settlers from Northern states coming largely after the 1840s.[2] The Southern influence on the Hoosier dialect has continued into the present day and has possibly spread as far north as Indianapolis. This part of Indiana that appears to be linguistically part of the American South is often termed the Hoosier Apex.[3]

As a result, the “Hoosier dialect” is actually a combination of multiple dialects, roughly fitting into three major dialectical regions: the Inland North (Gary, Hammond, and the Indiana section of Chicagoland), the Northern Midlands (Northern Indiana including South Bend, Fort Wayne, and extending as far south as Indianapolis) and the Southern Midlands (the Indianapolis area and Southern Indiana, Including Bloomington, Terre Haute, and Evansville).
 
A very rough division of Indiana’s dialectical regions: 1. The Inland North, 2. The Northern Midlands, 3. The Southern Midlands. Map from Google Maps, notation by the author of this blog.

Phonology[4]

When asked if they have an accent, many Hoosiers, especially from the northern part of the state, say they don’t—they in fact consider themselves to sound like the people heard on national broadcasting. Northern Hoosiers often consider their Southern counterparts to have an accent.[5] While Hoosiers may not have an accent as iconic and recognizable as those found in New York or Chicago, they have a wide phonological range within their state.

Notable sound changes

A merger is when the difference between sounds disappears. Certain dialects of American English are currently undergoing a series of vowel mergers, including some forms of the Hoosier dialect. The Low-Back merger, which causes the vowel sounds in “cot” and “caught” to be the same, is ongoing throughout Indiana, though this change appears to have largely missed Fort Wayne and Gary in the north, Indianapolis in Central Indiana, and Evansville in the South.
 
 
A map (based on W. Labov, S. Ash, and C. Boberg, Atlas of North American English (Mouton de Gruyter, 2006)) showing the /ɔ/ and /ɑ/ merger’s prevalence in Indiana. Yellow dots represent places where the merger is ongoing, blue dots where the merger has not occurred, and green where the merger is complete.[6]

There's a chance that if you ask for something to write with in Southern Indiana, you might be given a "pin" rather than a "pen." This is the result of the pen/pin merger of the Southern vowel shift, the progress of which is visualized to the right. Beginning in the American South, it has crept north into Southern Indiana. The vowel in "set" /ɛ/ becomes the vowel in "sit" /ɪ/. This especially occurs before the nasal consonants /m/, /n/, /ŋ/.

Diagram of the Southern Shift. Chart from the University of Pennsylvania.[7]



Purple represents the pen/pin merger caused by the Southern Shift. Note that the merger extends as far north as Indianapolis but misses the southeastern Ohio River Valley and Northern Indiana. Map based on W. Labov, S. Ash & C. Boberg, The Atlas of North American English (Mouton de Gruyter, 2006).[8]

Indiana’s northern border is geographically part of the Great Lakes region, one of the locations currently experiencing the Northern Cities Vowel Shift. This shift has produced the distinct “Chic-aaago” accent, where the cot/caught vowel, usually /ɑ/ becomes /æ/ like in “cat.” This shifts the standard English /æ/ up to /ɛ/ or /ɪ/. This sound change is only heard in the small section of Northern Indiana considered part of the Northern Inland, which includes Gary. The whole change can be seen below. 
 
The Northern Cities Shift. Chart from the University of Pennsylvania. [9]


Other Hoosier phonetic phenomenon


Coalescence
Coalescence is the phonetic process by which consonants fuse together. This is common in all parts of Indiana. Common Hoosier coalescences include:
  • “Going” [goɪŋ] becomes “gonna” [gʌnʌ]
  • “Caramel” is pronounced [karmʌl]
  • “Ordinary” is pronounced [ornari], with an almost, if not totally nonexistent /d/
  • The state bird, the cardinal, is pronounced [kardnʌl]
  • Hoosier children color with crayons, pronounced [krænz]

The [ɛ] and [ɪ] vowel switch
One common phonological change is a switch between [ɛ] and [ɪ], best illustrated by the Hoosier pronunciations, heard throughout the state, of “get” and “milk.”
  • [gɛt] becomes [gɪt], rendering “get” as “git.”
  • [mɪlk] becomes [mɛlk], meaning Hoosiers go to the store to buy “melk” rather than “milk.”

For a historical example, this switch appears in James Witcomb Riley’s poem “Little Orphant Annie,” where the final lines of each stanza are “An' the Gobble-uns 'at git you / Ef you / Don't / Watch / Out!”[10]
  • [gɛt] > [gɪt]
  • [ɪf] > [ɛf]

The /ɪ/ > /ɛ/ merger that comes from this change is often observed in front of the nasal consonants (/m/, /n/, and /ŋ/). This is especially prevalent in Southern Indiana.
  • Bring [brɪŋ] > “breng” [brɛŋ]
  • Rinse [rɪns] > “rense” [rɛns]
  • Hinder [hɪndər] > “hender” [hɛndər][11]

The epenthetic (or intrusive) /r/
An epenthetic sound is inserted into a word where the sound technically does not exist. A pronunciation that was once common in the Midlands, Indiana included, was the epenthetic /r/ after /ɑ/ in some words, meaning you “warsh” ([wɑrʃ]) your hands and the first president of the United States was George Warshington ([wɑrʃɪŋtən]). This pronunciation become less common in Indiana and today appears to be largely limited to the older population.

The /s/ > /ʃ/ merger
Some Hoosiers have been observed to merge certain instances of /s/ with /ʃ/:
  • “Grocery” [grosəri] > “groshry” [groʃri] (note the coalescence)
  • “Anniversary” [ænɪvɜrsəri] > “annivershery” [ænɪvɜrʃəri]
  • “Nursery” [nɜrsəri] > “nurshary” [nɜrʃəri]

Hoosier Lexicon 

Most non-academic descriptions of the Hoosier dialect focus on the words and phrases common to Indiana. These are used in other parts of the country but are especially prevalent in Indiana.
  • Pop – Like most of the Midwest, Northern Indiana calls carbonated beverages “pop.” The exception is Southern Indiana and the Indianapolis area, which more frequently uses “coke” regardless of brand. 
  • Mango – Green pepper
  • Sweeper – Vacuum sweeper
  • Davenport – A genericized trademark for sofa (like “Kleenex” as a generic name for “tissue”), this was especially prevalent in the 20th century.

Indiana is well-known for having unusual town names. Some of them are merely odd (like Santa Claus) and others are interesting from a linguistic perspective. The earliest European inhabitants were the French. The main French influence on the language of Indiana is in place names, which Hoosiers pronounce differently from the original French.
  • Terre Haute – Pronounced [ˌtɛrəˈhoʊt] in Hoosier, [tɛʁ ot] in French
  • Versailles – Pronounced [vərˈseɪlz] in Hoosier, [vɛərˈsaɪ] or [vɜːrˈsaɪ] in French
  • Vincennes - Pronounced [vɪnˈsɛnz] in Hoosier, ​[vɛ̃sɛn] in French

Morphology and syntax

Many Hoosier speech patterns are often unfortunately considered uneducated, though this is usually the influence of classism.[12] Hoosiers, like speakers of any other dialect, simply have their own way of talking, regardless of education level. Much like the vocabulary mentioned above, these formations occur in other dialects of American English, but are especially prevalent in Indiana:
  • “Where are you at?” meaning “Where are you?”
  • “Anymore” to mean “nowadays,” as in “Mangoes are expensive anymore.”
  • “Real quick” to mean “quickly,” as in the sentence “I need to run into Meijer’s real quick.
  • The formation “X thing actions Y action” in place of “X actions to be Y action.” for example “The floor needs sweeping” rather than “The floor needs to be swept” or “The cat wants out” rather than “The cat wants to go out."
  • “You guys” is the most common form of the second person plural, regardless of the gender being addressed. This construction often results in the possessive “you guys’s,” pronounced [ju gɑɪzˈəz]. Despite the influence of the American Southern dialect, “y’all” is rarely if ever heard in Indiana.

 
Everyone's favorite Midwestern groshry store

The Unnecessary Possessive Attached to a Business
An unusual morphological phenomenon, often seen in Indiana and Michigan, is the addition of the possessive “-‘s” to names of businesses, especially stores. The grocery stores Meijer and Kroger, both major businesses in Indiana, are often called “Meijer’s” and “Kroger’s,” despite there being no apostrophe in their proper names.

“How To Speak Hoosier”

The video series on YouTube entitled “How to Speak Hoosier” is a humorous yet accurate depiction of the Hoosier dialect. [13]



[1] “Dictionary of American Regional English | DARE,” Dictionary of American Regional English, accessed April 28, 2020, https://www.daredictionary.com/regions?rcode=region.IN.
[2] James M. Bergquist, “Tracing the Origins of a Midwestern Culture: The Case of Central Indiana,” Indiana Magazine of History 77, no. 1 (1981), 2.
[3] Dennis Richard Preston, “Presidential Address: Where Are the Dialects of American English At Anyhow?,” American Speech 78, no. 3 (September 17, 2003), 240.
[4] All IPA transcription has been made by the author, a native speaker of the Northern Hoosier dialect and as such reflect NHD perceived pronunciation.
[5] Devon Haynie, “Hoosiers Weigh in: Do We Have an Accent?,” The Journal Gazette, March 15, 2009, sec. D.
[6] User:Angr, English: Map Showing the Distribution of the Cot–Caught Merger in North American English. Green Dots: // = /ɔ/ in Perception and Production. Dark Blue Dots: // ≠ /ɔ/ in Perception and Production. Pale Blue Dots: // ≠ /ɔ/ in Perception or Production. Yellow Dots: Merger in Transition., June 4, 2006, June 4, 2006, Made by User:Angr. Based on W. Labov, S. Ash, and C. Boberg, Atlas of North American English (Mouton de Gruyter, 2006: p. 122). Base map is Image:BlankMap-USA-states-Canada-provinces.png by User:Astrokey44, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Cot-caught_merger.png.
[7] William Labov, “The Organization of Dialect Diversity in North America,” accessed April 29, 2020, https://www.ling.upenn.edu/phono_atlas/ICSLP4.html.
[8] Angr, Areas of the U.S. Where “Pin” and “Pen” Are Pronounced the Same., September 11, 2006, September 11, 2006, Own work; base map is modified from Image:Map of USA with state names.svg; data from W. Labov, S. Ash & C. Boberg, The Atlas of North American English (Mouton de Gruyter, 2006), p. 68., https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Pin-pen.svg.
[9] William Labov, “The Organization of Dialect Diversity in North America.”
[10] James Whitcomb Riley, “Little Orphant Annie,” Poetry Archive, 1885, http://www.poetry-archive.com/r/little_orphant_annie.html.
[11] Marvin D. Carmony, “Hoosier Dialect Studies and the Teacher of English,” Teachers’ College Journal; Terre Haute, Ind. 38, no. 5 (March 1, 1967), 210.
[12] Carmony, “Hoosier Dialect Studies and the Teacher of English.” This article focuses on the speech of Terre Haute, in Southwest Indiana, and addresses some of the classist assumptions related to dialect.
[13] Brad Bryan, How to Speak Hoosier, Episode 1 - “There’s Lots of Uses of 'S,” accessed April 30, 2020, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swqaM4TiX2I.
Indiana