Speech pattern and typographical variations across Canada

[SignalHillHiker]

This part of that map confuses me (close-up on New York area):



Whichever way you say "on", won't you say "Don/Dawn" the same way?

And how is bone there? How could "on" and "bone" ever rhyme? Are there people up there ( just kidding) down there who would say, "My dog has a bawn."?

[lio45]

Originally Posted by SignalHillHiker

It's a good map - but, of course, at this scale it's a little off... you'd be hard pressed to confuse someone from Labrador with someone from New Brunswick, for example.

Yeah, I was pretty sure that having Anglo Canada as a whole monolithic block (except for the Avalon) wasn't really that accurate relative to the level of detail in the US in that map. The map is clearly American-centric, and I assume the author(s) aren't as familiar with Canada.

And what's with this fully Francophone (not even striped! so even more Francophone than Sherbrooke, according to the map) area northeast of Grande Prairie, Alberta?!?

[rousseau]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

For example, here the "mainland" is automatically presumed to mean "not Vancouver Island."

Yes, but the same confusion would result if someone from Victoria used the term "mainland" to mean "the rest of Canada not including Vancouver Island" in a context that isn't solely BC-specific.

Originally Posted by GlassCity

...because the Newfoundland definition of "mainland" actually makes a large degree of sense. Just because it's not 100% accurate doesn't mean it can't be a useful term, especially to them.

Only to them. Only to 1.5% of the population of Canada is the term "mainland" understood to mean "the part of Canada that is not Newfoundland."

Originally Posted by GlassCity

Also, we use "up" and "down" here often as well. Someone in Vancouver could say they're moving up to Whitehorse, up to Kelowna, or even up to North Vancouver.

There are exceptions, but in general Canada is a horizontal country. When referring to other population centres you're going to be saying "over there" or "out there" exponentially more than you'll be saying "up there" or "down there."

[lio45]

Originally Posted by SignalHillHiker

This part of that map confuses me (close-up on New York area):



Whichever way you say "on", won't you say "Don/Dawn" the same way?

The way I understand it, there's an area where Don and Dawn are distinguishable (i.e. -on sounds like Don) and one where they are not (i.e. -on sounds like Dawn).

[SignalHillHiker]

Lio, that town offers its website with a French translation.

http://www.town.falher.ab.ca/fr/

[rousseau]

Originally Posted by SignalHillHiker

This part of that map confuses me (close-up on New York area):



Whichever way you say "on", won't you say "Don/Dawn" the same way?

And how is bone there? How could "on" and "bone" ever rhyme? Are there people up there ( just kidding) down there who would say, "My dog has a bawn."?

It's a distinction between "cot" and "caught" that you get in the greater New York area and beyond. "Caught" sounds almost as if you are starting out to say "coat" but you end the vowel more like how the rest of us would say "caught." For them, "caught" has a diphthong, i.e. the vowel sounds almost like it's two syllables. "Cot" doesn't.

• Video Link

[lio45]

Originally Posted by rousseau

There are exceptions, but in general Canada is a horizontal country. When referring to other population centres you're going to be saying "over there" or "out there" exponentially more than you'll be saying "up there" or "down there."

Except when it's obvious that one location is either upriver, or else downriver, from the other location, which sets a crystal clear and unarguable up/down elevation reference relationship between the two.

[SignalHillHiker]

He's really good. I get it, thanks.

[SignalHillHiker]

I figured it out. I'm only half joking. And unintentionally drew a penis.



But this genuinely is what we call the East/West ends of the city. So maybe people actually though southwest was north back in the day, started saying up to Canada, and it stuck.

[Pinion]

Originally Posted by SignalHillHiker

Hmm... I never realized people didn't understand what it meant. I'm sure I've used it often around mainlanders and here while seemingly being understood. I imagine they use it, and with the same meaning, in Prince Edward Island, Vancouver Island, etc. as well. I don't get the impression that it's a term most people don't understand.

Your posts are the only reason why I know Newfoundlanders think of themselves as culturally different than the rest of Canada and there's some resentment towards Halifax etc. On the west coast the maritime and Quebec issues are pretty much unknown. We know Quebec is very sensitive about language but it's never really discussed beyond that. It all just seems so far away and alien. Chinese culture has more impact on a day to day basis.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by SignalHillHiker

But this genuinely is what we call the East/West ends of the city. So maybe people actually though southwest was north back in the day, started saying up to Canada, and it stuck.

I don't know if you're kidding or not, but for the third time, back when ordinary people did not have the map of the continent/country burned in their brains (most people at the time probably hadn't ever come across a real map at the country/continent kind of scale anyway), when they navigated up to remote, inland Southern Ontario from their sea level starting point, they obviously went up, yes. And they were right.

Going "south" only equals going "down" on a map. And only on a map where convention has the north at the top, I might even add. Remove maps from daily life, and suddenly south isn't down anymore. Down (i.e. lower elevation) is down, and up (i.e. higher elevation) is up.

[rousseau]

Originally Posted by lio45

Except when it's obvious that one location is either upriver, or else downriver, from the other location, which sets a crystal clear and unarguable up/down elevation reference relationship between the two.

That is fascinating. To be completely honest, I never understood why the two pre-Confederation colonies were called "Upper Canada" and "Lower Canada" until someone explained to me that it was related to the direction of the river and the water flow in general. Around here we have the Great Lakes, and the St. Lawrence is a faraway abstraction. You don't really think much about the water flowing in a specific direction when you have these big, mostly placid bodies of water surrounding you in Lakes Huron, Erie and Ontario.

Yeah, I know, Niagara Falls should be a dead giveaway about the fundamental aspect of the directional flow, but it doesn't really resonate the way I assume the mighty St. Lawrence does in Quebec. River transport has never been of any great importance in southern Ontario the way inter-lake transport has. This is why it would sound really odd to an Ontarian if someone in Quebec said "up in Toronto" when speaking in English.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by lio45

Yeah, I was pretty sure that having Anglo Canada as a whole monolithic block (except for the Avalon) wasn't really that accurate relative to the level of detail in the US in that map. The map is clearly American-centric, and I assume the author(s) aren't as familiar with Canada.

That's not what the map indicates though. There are 3 subdialects listed for English in Canada. One is "Irish Newfoundland" and one is "Atlantic".

In any case it's very American-centric, as you say. I think they collect a lot more data from, say New York City than they do from small villages in Atlantic Canada.

[SignalHillHiker]

Originally Posted by lio45

I don't know if you're kidding or not, but for the third time, back when ordinary people did not have the map of the continent/country burned in their brains (most people at the time probably hadn't ever come across a real map at the country/continent kind of scale anyway), when they navigated up to remote, inland Southern Ontario from their sea level starting point, they obviously went up, yes. And they were right.

Going "south" only equals going "down" on a map. And only on a map where convention has the north at the top, I might even add. Remove maps from daily life, and suddenly south isn't down anymore. Down (i.e. lower elevation) is down, and up (i.e. higher elevation) is up.

Oh sorry. I just didn't address the point because I agreed. I imagine that makes sense in southern Quebec. In Winnipeg, the Red would make up/down be more north/south. No good rivers here, though.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by rousseau

Free of any context, if you suddenly used the term "mainland" people would be puzzled and think you might be talking about mainland China. I mean, obviously I knew that's not what you meant in your post, but still, it sounds really odd. There are many islands offshore, and none of them are more than sparsely populated. If Newfoundland had 10 million people, well, then maybe we'd be using or at least hearing the term more. The term "the continent" to mean "continental Europe" means something because of the UK. It wouldn't be a thing if all you had was Jersey off the coast of France.

Tangentially, I recently met a guy in his twenties who'd spent his formative years in St. John's. We got to talking, and he mentioned that he'd been "up here" for five years now, and at first I was confused. "Up here in Kitchener as opposed to, erm...Windsor? Or the US?" I actually asked him if he'd lived in the US, and then it was his turn to look at me funny. It only later dawned on me that he'd meant that he'd left Newfoundland and come "up to Toronto and then Kitchener."

Which is peculiar, as we are a lot farther south than St. John's. It only seems reasonable to say "over here" or "over there" when you talk about anything cross-continental, because anything "up" or "down" outside of the context of Calgary and Edmonton or Regina and Saskatoon is Arctic.

Well, he came "up" to Upper Canada, so he's being logical. Although I think I'd more likely say "out" in the case of St John's, the sound of me saying "I moved from Kitchener down to Halifax" doesn't seem wrong to me.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by rousseau

That is fascinating. To be completely honest, I never understood why the two pre-Confederation colonies were called "Upper Canada" and "Lower Canada" until someone explained to me that it was related to the direction of the river and the water flow in general. Around here we have the Great Lakes, and the St. Lawrence is a faraway abstraction. You don't really think much about the water flowing in a specific direction when you have these big, mostly placid bodies of water surrounding you in Lakes Huron, Erie and Ontario.

Yeah, I guess I can see the Toronto/Hamilton POV of the "still" lake, but in the original Canada (), the St. Lawrence was THE travel artery, and it had two directions, upbound, and downbound. The cities and villages (Quebec, Trois-Rivières, Sorel, Montreal, etc.) were all along this single axis, so you'd go up to some and down to others, depending on the direction you're going. Again, ordinary people didn't have maps handy all around them, so the most tangible way to speak of travel direction was up and down.

This is still in the daily speech patterns here. For example, for Xmas my gf and I are going "down to the Gaspé" (which is north of here). I don't know anyone who'd say it differently.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

Well, he came "up" to Upper Canada, so he's being logical.

Yes, he's being logical -- but only to anyone who knows that "Upper" Canada is up compared to points down East

[rousseau]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

Although I think I'd more likely say "out" in the case of St John's, the sound of me saying "I moved from Kitchener down to Halifax" doesn't seem wrong to me.

You know, Canada needs more people who are curious about these things doing TV shows on obscure points of interest the way the Brits and the Americans do.

Because I'd love it if someone could do a poll of a thousand people on these kinds of issues, and then go around the country asking people on camera about them too, both regular types on the street and those with some professional knowledge.

I don't fully trust my own intuition on this. I understand the reasoning that "going down to Halifax" makes sense, but it still really does sound wrong to my ears. Saying "up" or "down" for anything in a Canadian context outside of Calgary-Edmonton or Regina-Saskatoon sounds wrong to me unless you're going to the Arctic Circle or Ohio or Florida. Or Windsor up to Toronto. or "up to Muskoka." I'd venture to say that water transport resonates very little to your average person in these parts, and in the Prairies as well.

My neighbour down the street did a lovely book of the history of the Grand River, complete with drawings, that took him and his sister three years to complete, but I'm afraid it's a niche book that will sell very few copies or elicit much interest in the general public.

http://www.therecord.com/living-stor...iver-revealed/

"Water at work" just doesn't loom large in our consciousness. Nothing like with the mythical rivers of the world: the Thames, the Seine, the Danube, the Yellow River, the Mississippi, the Amazon. Except that in French I'm assuming that the St. Lawrence does indeed occupy that kind of space in Quebec?

[lio45]

Originally Posted by rousseau

Or Windsor up to Toronto.

You mean from Windsor down to Toronto.

Gravity will take you to TO from downtown Windsor, not the other way around. All you have to do is step into a barrel or any other craft in the Detroit River. Falls-proof, ideally, but if not, your body will still end up washing ashore in the GTA. (Unless it continues down to Montreal and beyond.)

[lio45]

Originally Posted by rousseau

"Water at work" just doesn't loom large in our consciousness. Nothing like with the mythical rivers of the world: the Thames, the Seine, the Danube...

What's funny is that those are basically brooks compared to the mighty St. Lawrence River. They are incredibly tiny, ultra-narrow, slow-flowing, you name it...