Template:Short description Template:Use Oxford spelling
U and non-U English usage, where "U" stands for upper class and "non-U" represents the aspiring middle and lower classes, was part of the terminology of popular discourse of social dialects (sociolects) in Britain in the 1950s.<ref>{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=web }}</ref> The different vocabularies often appeared counter-intuitive, with the middle classes prefering "fancy" or fashionable words, even neologisms and often euphemisms, in attempts to make themselves sound more refined ("posher than posh") and the upper classes using plain and traditional words that the working classes also used, as, confident in the security of their social position, they had no need to seek to display refinement.<ref name="ross1954">Ross, Alan S. C., "Linguistic class-indicators in present-day English", Neuphilologische Mitteilungen (Helsinki), vol. 55(1) (1954), 20–56. Template:JSTOR</ref> By the late 20th century the usefulness of the terms as signals of social class had decreased, and by the 2020s they had ceased to be reliable signals.<ref name=":0" /><ref name=":1" />
HistoryEdit
The discussion was set in motion in 1954 by the British linguist Alan S. C. Ross, professor of linguistics in the University of Birmingham. He coined the terms "U" and "non-U" in an article on the differences social class makes in English language usage, published in a Finnish professional linguistics journal.<ref name="ross1954"/> Though his article included differences in pronunciation and writing styles, it was his remark about differences of vocabulary that received the most attention.
The upper class English author Nancy Mitford was alerted and immediately took up the usage in an essay, "The English Aristocracy", which Stephen Spender published in his magazine Encounter in 1954. Mitford provided a glossary of terms used by the upper classes (some appear in the table), unleashing an anxious national debate about English class-consciousness and snobbery, which involved a good deal of soul-searching that itself provided fuel for the fires. The essay was reprinted, with contributions by Evelyn Waugh, John Betjeman, and others, as well as a "condensed and simplified version"<ref>Mitford, Nancy (ed.). 1956. Noblesse oblige. London, Hamish Hamilton, 'Note'.</ref> of Ross's original article, as Noblesse Oblige: an Enquiry into the Identifiable Characteristics of the English Aristocracy<ref>Mitford, Nancy (ed.). 1956. Noblesse oblige. London, Hamish Hamilton.</ref> in 1956. Betjeman's poem "How to Get On in Society" concluded the collection.
The issue of U and non-U could have been taken lightheartedly, but at the time many took it very seriously. This was a reflection of the anxieties of the middle class in Britain of the 1950s, recently emerged from post-war austerities. In particular the media used it as a launch pad for many stories, making much more out of it than was first intended. In the meantime, the idea that one might "improve oneself" by adopting the culture and manner of one's "betters", instinctively assented to before World War II, was now greeted with resentment.<ref>Buckle, Richard (ed.). 1978. U and Non-U Revisited. London: Debrett.</ref>
Some of the terms and the ideas behind them were largely obsolete by the late 20th century, when, in the United Kingdom, reverse snobbery led younger members of the British upper and middle classes to adopt elements of working class speech, such as Estuary English or Mockney.<ref name=":0">Fox, Watching the English: The Hidden Rules of English Behaviour, pp. 75–76: "Terminology Rules – U and Non-U Revisited".</ref> By the 2020s, many of the words studied by Mitford had ceased to reliably signal social class.<ref name=":1">{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=web }}</ref>
American usageEdit
A study in 1940 on the speaking differences between the American upper and middle classes revealed a strong similarity with the results of Ross's research. For instance, the American upper class said 'curtains', whilst the middle class used 'drapes'. Notably, the well-heeled would use 'toilet' whereas the less well-heeled would say 'lavatory', an inversion of the British usage.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref>
ExamplesEdit
| U | Non-U | |
|---|---|---|
| Bike Template:Em bicycle | citation | CitationClass=web
}}</ref> |
| Dinner jacket | Dress suit | |
| Knave | Jack (cards) | |
| Vegetables | Greens<ref name="Ross"/> | |
| Ice | Ice cream | |
| Scent | Perfume<ref name="Ross"/> | |
| They've a very nice house | They've a lovely home<ref name="Ross"/> | |
| I was sick on the boat | I was ill on the boat<ref name="Ross"/> | |
| Looking-glass | Mirror | |
| Chimneypiece | Mantelpiece | |
| Graveyard | Cemetery | |
| Spectacles | Glasses | |
| False teeth | Dentures | |
| Die | Pass on | |
| Mad | Mental<ref name="Ross"/> | |
| Jam | Preserve | |
| Napkin | Serviette<ref name="Ross"/> | |
| Sofa | Settee Template:Em couch | |
| Lavatory Template:Em loo | Toilet<ref name="Ross"/> | |
| Rich | Wealthy<ref name="Ross"/> | |
| Good health | Cheers | |
| Lunch | Dinner (for midday meal)<ref name="Ross"/> | |
| Pudding | Sweet | |
| Drawing room | Lounge | |
| Writing-paper | Note-paper | |
| What? | Pardon?<ref name="Ross"/> | |
| How d'you do? | Pleased to meet you<ref name="Ross"/> | |
| Wireless | Radio<ref name="Ross"/> | |
| (School)master, mistress | Teacher<ref name="Ross"/> |
See alsoEdit
ReferencesEdit
Further readingEdit
- Mitford, Nancy (ed.). Noblesse oblige. Hamish Hamilton, London, 1956. Reprinted Oxford : Oxford University Press, 2002, Template:ISBN.
- Fox, Kate. Watching the English: The Hidden Rules of English Behaviour. Hodder & Stoughton, London, 2004. Template:ISBN
- Cooper, Jilly. Class. Corgi Adult, 1999. Template:ISBN
- Alan S C Ross. How to pronounce it. Hamish Hamilton, London, 1970. SBN 241 01967 2
- Alan S C Ross. Don't say it. Hamish Hamilton 1973, Template:ISBN
- Charlotte Mosley (ed.) The Letters of Nancy Mitford and Evelyn Waugh. Hodder, London, 1996, at pp. 297–394. Template:ISBN