Boundary Dialects

The analysis of regional dialect differences has traditionally relied on production data, but researcher Erica J. Benson feels other factors, such as attitudes about dialect varieties, could also contribute toward understanding dialect usage. Her study focuses upon Ohio, where various studies have yielded different results. One researcher identified a speech pattern labeled as the Northern Dialect was concentrated in the northeast corner of the state, although other dialect maps extend that dialect further west. The other dominant speech patterns in the state are identified as North Midland and South Midland on one map. Researcher Craig M. Carver has dismissed the existence of a Midland dialect, identifying the transition zone between Northern and Southern dialects as Lower North. This dialect, which reflects influences from both Northern and Southern cultures, runs through a band of Midwestern states that includes our southern Illinois region. The North and South Midland dialects identified in other linguist maps also appear in other Midwestern states such as Illinois, with the southern Illinois dialect identified as South Midland.
While the north-south dialect differences were consistent among maps, Benson questioned whether Ohio also had different dialects based on an east-west divide. To survey differences, respondents were asked to circle on a hand-drawn map areas where people spoke differently. The measurements used were that people spoke the same, a little differently, somewhat differently or differently.
Respondents identified differences in regions of Ohio, although the extent of differences and the identified regions varied according to the area from which the respondents hailed. All of the respondents noted similarities that traveled across state lines, with some northern Ohio dialects associated with Pennsylvania and Michigan and some respondents grouping the dialect used in regions of southern Ohio with Kentucky and West Virginia.
Benson attributed differences in dialect perception to several factors: exposure to speakers from other regions, the travel experience of respondents and sample size of the study. Benson also identified a factor termed “linguistic security.” People in the northern regions identified their dialects as “good plain English,” while respondents whose dialect was identified in southern terms exhibited less security about their linguistic abilities. In describing the dialects of others, the more Midwestern areas of northwestern and central Ohio were rated highly by all respondents. Respondents from northwestern and central Ohio tended to group southern Ohio speakers with those from West Virginia and Kentucky. Some even called this dialect “hillbilly slang.” This mirrored a study by Michigan respondents who had a negative opinion of southern speech.
Along with the stigma associated with southern Ohio dialects, Benson found respondents in southern Ohio tended to identify fewer dialect differences and were more prone to identify their speech pattern with northern Ohio speakers. Another study found similar responses by southern Indiana speakers, who tended to align their dialects with northern states. All of the Ohio respondents identified a dialect boundary at the Ohio River, which separates Ohio from the southern states. The major dialect boundary by respondents who did not view Ohio as a single dialect region was near the city of Columbus.
Benson said some conclusions that could be drawn by analyzing dialect perceptions are that Ohio has east-west dialect differences, there is a transition area between the northern and southern dialect regions, and a Midland dialect does exist. Benson concludes perceptual studies of dialect can help provide a more complete picture of speech communities and their relationship to other communities.
The Ohio examples provide some parallels with dialects in Illinois, as both states have large urban areas and regions which border southern states. Benson did hint at perceptions of eastern dialects in Ohio, but did not discuss those speech patterns in great detail. The Ohio respondents who called their dialect “good plain English” reflect a common perception that the Midwestern states contain speakers with accentless speech patterns. More study could have been done on the Ohio urban areas to ascertain whether there is a perception that Cleveland and Cincinnati residents have dialects that differ from rural areas. In Illinois, there is a noticeable difference between the Chicago dialect and speech patterns in rural areas. Is that a north-south difference or one involving an urban-rural divide?