Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

N.Z. DIALECT.

EDUCATIONALIST’S HI.COALY V JEW. WELLINGTON, -May 17. At the Secondary Schools Conference Mr Kenner. Wellington College, said here was danger ot New Zealanders’ pronouncement ol some words becoming unity .almost to Cockney. He said j that, “praise” was pronounced as “prize,” “my” as “moy,” “now” as | “neow,” “go” as “gow,” etc.' After a I lengthy speech be moved: “That the attention of all examining bodies, the University and ail examining bodies, the University and all educational authoriies be called to the widespread prevalence of wrong methods of speech and pronouncement, and this association request such bodies to take action by means of suitable training methods, viva voice tests and all means in their power, to foster l a standard system of pronount iation and thus cheek the growth of any New Zealand dialect.” The motion was seconded by Air 10. 1). J. Horens (AYellington), who pointed out that the late bead master of Wellington College, Mr Firth, had conducted tests with his most promising classes and bad found tlie standard ot diction unsatisfactory. The president, Mr 11. AT. Luing, ALA. said bo preferred tlie pronouneiatiou generally beard in the North of England to that of the middle and higher classes in England. Air James Drummond. Chief Inspector of secondary schools, said that though he did not take the same gloomy view ns Mr Kenner be bad notie ed signs of Cockney accent, but bo bad never come across anything really bad in snv particular school. Some vowels wei’w obviously mispronounced. par more attention to correct pronounciatioii seemed to be paid in girls’ schools than in boys’ schools. The fault seemj ed to be principally in lip laziness. The [best test of proiiouncintion was not I rending but oral composition. T lie question as to whether dialect was really a bad thing was open to debate. While 11" thought that Air Renner bad overstated the ease in bis opening remarks be agreed that there was some need for improvement of diction in schools. The motion was carried unanimously.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/HOG19220523.2.38

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Hokitika Guardian, 23 May 1922, Page 4

Word count
Tapeke kupu
339

N.Z. DIALECT. Hokitika Guardian, 23 May 1922, Page 4

N.Z. DIALECT. Hokitika Guardian, 23 May 1922, Page 4

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert