Yet Again: The Midland Dialect

Cross-dialectal comprehension as evidence for boundary mapping: Perceptions of the speech of southeastern Ohio

“…However, his proposed merger to 0A0 was attested principally in the western half of Hocking County and not in the eastern half, which lies within the hilly plateau extending southeastward into Athens County and northeastward through the counties bordering West Virginia and western Pennsylvania. Such a dialect division would accord with the view of some that vertical or diagonal boundaries may be as important as horizontal ones, particularly in the trans-Appalachian region (Dakin, 1966;Johnson, 1994). 9.…”

“…Such a redrawing of the lines may be seen by some as an acknowledgment of the South Midland as merely a "transition zone," as Carver (1987) and Davis and Houck (1992) suggested, but we submit that it is better described as a transition zone with an Appalachian "core" (Johnson, 1994), from which and into which forms are diffusing along the margins of the mountain plateau. Kurath and Mc-David suggested as much 40 years ago when they described the South Midland, "comprising the far-flung Appalachians and the Blue Ridge from the Pennsylvania line to northern Georgia," as a "linguistically graded area" with no features "unique in themselves; all of them occur either in the North Midland or the South."…”

“…The demarcation proposed here also agrees with earlier hypotheses of such a regional isogloss based on grammar usage (Flanigan, 1996) and is in general agreement with other studies of the South Midland based on phonological or lexical usage (Allen, 1997;Blaney, 1998;Cassidy, 1985-;Clark, 1972;Dakin, 1966Dakin, , 1971Frazer, 1993Frazer, , 1997Hankey, 1972;Hartman, 1966;Humphries, 1999;Kelley, 1997;McDonald, 1965;Thomas, 1996;Wetmore, 1971;Williams, 1999). The conclusion of all these studies, direct or implied, is that Carver's (1987) lowering of the southern boundary of the North Midland dialect region (which he called the Lower North) to the Ohio River on the basis of lexicon is not supportable on the basis of phonology and grammar, nor is the blanket erasure of the North Midland0South Midland isogloss justified (Davis & Houck, 1992; see responses by Frazer, 1994, andJohnson, 1994). Rather, the traditional line between North Midland and South Midland should be extended northeastward, enclosing much of eastern (Appalachian) Ohio, northern West Virginia (formerly considered North Midland, even while prototypically and perceptually "Appalachian"; cf.…”

Misrepresenting the American South

“…In recent years the traditional demarcation of the eastern United States dialect areas into North, North Midland, South Midland, and South has been the object of renewed analysis. Studies by Hartman (1966), Dakin (1971), Clark (1972), Hankey (1972), and Thomas (1996) of the upper Ohio River Valley; the papers in "Heartland" English (Frazer 1993); and a debate over boundaries conducted in American Speech (Davis andHouck 1992, 1995;Frazer 1994;Johnson 1994) are only some examples of the renewed attention paid to the North Central, or "Midwestern," part of the country. Most controversial, perhaps, has been Carver's (1987) redrawing of the four basic regions into two, North and South, essentially divided by the Ohio River; the former North Midland was renamed the Lower North, and the South Midland became the Upper South.…”

“…Moreover, it shares some of the features of the subregional variety called Appalachian English, a fact which led Dakin (1971) to speak of a "trans-Appalachian" region running diagonally down the mountain range and into the upland plateaus on both sides. Similarly, Johnson (1994) has described the South Midland as a transition zone with an Appalachian "core," from which and into which forms are diffusing along the margins of the mountain plateau.…”