'Hot off the heels', and other idiomatic shifts

Students of linguistics are familiar with the ‘Great Vowel Shift’, the name we give to the alteration of vowel sounds over long periods of time. It is the reason why a Scot will say ‘hoos’ and an Englishman ‘house’, for example. Such modifications in language are not confined to vowels, either. In the United States, pronouncing the ‘r’ in ‘car’ or ‘bird’ was considered socially inferior until after the Civil War, when the centres of political power shifted away from the (British-influenced) east coast. Gradually, the ‘rhotic’ forms of the word gained prestige, and now it is unusual to hear an American say ‘cah’ (unless they are putting on an English accent).

Such phonetic shifts can be explained in terms of social mobility and class aspiration, but these effects are well researched elsewhere. What concerns me in this short piece is something slightly different.

When a word’s sound changes, it can collide with a pre-existing word of the same sound, and force people or communities to alter that word too, in order to distinguish between meanings. In this way, a domino effect (or push-chain) is set up whereby multiple items in a language’s vocabulary take on new sounds.

For example, in mediaeval times the word mate was pronounced ‘maht’. But when, owing to various changes, it began to be pronounced ‘meht’, it clashed with the then sound of the word for the flesh of an animal. So that word (meat) took on the pronunciation ‘meet’, which it still has today.

Talking of meat brings me neatly to the real substance of my argument. To find out more, please consider subscribing, and read on…