Aye ! Arse and Bloody !

Chris A · Jan 13, 2015

Hi! I am writing a HF novel set on the X century and in the middle east.
This is middle age right before the crusades.

Some of my characters would say things as "Aye"; refer to the ass as arse and say "bloody" whenever something goes wrong (among other similar terms).

One of my beta readers was severely frustrated because the characters sounded (to her) "british" even when did not live in an english speaking country.

My reasoning to use these terms is to provide the reader some sense of being in the middle age; although my intended audience is american.

To illustrate below is an extract:

"Ma'am Mariam, you can do with the bloody kingdom what you please. You can wipe up your "arse" if that gives you any satisfaction, or worse hand it to this snake of L for him to fuck it..."

What are your thoughts of using these terms for characters that are not in an English speaking country?

Tx for your help!

mayqueen · Jan 13, 2015

I would avoid words and phrases that sound too modern or too much associated with a particular dialect of English. As a reader, that pulls me out of a story. Words like "bloody" and "arse" sound very British to me, as an American, so I would think your characters are British. Just like if your characters ran around saying "y'all" someone might think they're Texans. I'd recommend studying the dialogue of novels you really admire to see how those authors do it.

Chris A · Jan 13, 2015

Thank you. Valuable feedback¡

angeliz2k · Jan 14, 2015

Chris, are you familiar with The Queen's Latin over at TV Tropes?

Basically, there's a counter-logical trend of having Ancient Romans (or whomever) speak in British accents because somehow British accents are more "old-timey" (or something). In the tenth century, they weren't speaking anything like Modern English, so any words you put into your characters' mouths are going to be in translation. If you're an American writing for an American audience, why introduce artificial British-ness? If you're British yourself, then by all means use British English.

[Also, I wrote a blog on my own experience in figuring out what form of English to use in historical settings, particularly 18th-century France and Antebellum America (that one's easy).]

snafu1056 · Jan 14, 2015

You might want to read some documents written by Muslims around that time to get a feel for the kind of language that might be appropriate.

Here's one example from the 13th century It's full of lots of flowery expressions and language, but there's also lots or practical info to be gleaned.

https://archive.org/details/historyoftheworl011691mbp

morngnstar · Jan 14, 2015

You might want to check on the origin of "bloody". It does not simply mean having to do with blood. Any language would have a word for that, but wouldn't necessarily use it as an interjection. The origin of that usage, even in English, might postdate the tenth century.

EMaree · Jan 14, 2015

Brit here, it wouldn't bother me too much. I see a lot of historical TV shows and novels use Britspeak, it seems fairly normal now. If I remember correctly, Lies of Locke Lamora used a British-sounding dialect in its fantasy setting.

I do worry that you're overdoing it a bit, though, just judging by the snippet you gave us:

"Ma'am Mariam, you can do with the bloody kingdom what you please. You can wipe up your "arse" if that gives you any satisfaction, or worse hand it to this snake of Liparit for him to fuck it..."

A few things that stood out:

Why is arse in quotes?
"wipe up your arse" feels awkward as a phrase. Why not the traditional British "shove it up your arse"?
Using a respectful title like "Ma'am" seems to contradict the course, common dialogue. The character would have be *VERY* familiar with the character to speak so plainly to her, and if they're of a lower social class they might not necessarily have the right to do that.
Depending on your setting being so sexually vulgar might be frowned upon in society too, especially towards a lady.
I'm assuming this dude is super angry at this point in the story. If he talks like this casually it would get a bit overwhelming fast.

My reasoning to use these terms is to provide the reader some sense of being in the middle age; although my intended audience is american.

Since your intended audience is American, I'd maybe rethink the Britishisms... at least to this severity. It can work if done with more subtlety, though.

Also, if you're an American yourself, I'd steer away -- British speech patterns are a lot more complex than they appear at first, and they're difficult for a non-native to pull off without sounding like a strange stereotype. The regional variance alone is staggeringly complex: Celtic influences and languages affect certain regional slang, certain industries like mining and fishing affect others, and historical conquests can have a surprising impact on how everyone speaks.

angeliz2k · Jan 14, 2015

morngnstar said:
You might want to check on the origin of "bloody". It does not simply mean having to do with blood. Any language would have a word for that, but wouldn't necessarily use it as an interjection. The origin of that usage, even in English, might postdate the tenth century.

....which is basically the TV Trope "The Queen's Latin" that I linked to above.

And, yeah, it's almost 100% certain that bloody post-dates the 10th century. They were still speaking Old English (which is a completely different language from Modern English, which began around the 16th century). Okay, I looked it up: "It has been a British intensive swear word since at least 1676." [http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bloody?s=t]

Chris A · Jan 14, 2015

Thanks!

Wow! What a great discussion! Thank you so much!

I am at the office and cant reaf throught everything right now but really appreciate all your thoughts!

I do get what you are saying on "overdoing". Got to think more on how my characters talk to each other.

Good point on reading documents from that time and era!

Chris A · Jan 14, 2015

snafu1056 said:
You might want to read some documents written by Muslims around that time to get a feel for the kind of language that might be appropriate.

Here's one example from the 13th century It's full of lots of flowery expressions and language, but there's also lots or practical info to be gleaned.

https://archive.org/details/historyoftheworl011691mbp

This is AWESOME! Thank you

Chris A · Jan 14, 2015

EMaree said:
Brit here, it wouldn't bother me too much. I see a lot of historical TV shows and novels use Britspeak, it seems fairly normal now. If I remember correctly, Lies of Locke Lamora used a British-sounding dialect in its fantasy setting.

I do worry that you're overdoing it a bit, though, just judging by the snippet you gave us:

A few things that stood out:

Why is arse in quotes?

"wipe up your arse" feels awkward as a phrase. Why not the traditional British "shove it up your arse"?

Using a respectful title like "Ma'am" seems to contradict the course, common dialogue. The character would have be *VERY* familiar with the character to speak so plainly to her, and if they're of a lower social class they might not necessarily have the right to do that.

Depending on your setting being so sexually vulgar might be frowned upon in society too, especially towards a lady.

I'm assuming this dude is super angry at this point in the story. If he talks like this casually it would get a bit overwhelming fast.

Since your intended audience is American, I'd maybe rethink the Britishisms... at least to this severity. It can work if done with more subtlety, though.

Also, if you're an American yourself, I'd steer away -- British speech patterns are a lot more complex than they appear at first, and they're difficult for a non-native to pull off without sounding like a strange stereotype. The regional variance alone is staggeringly complex: Celtic influences and languages affect certain regional slang, certain industries like mining and fishing affect others, and historical conquests can have a surprising impact on how everyone speaks.

Thank you for your comments!

So I think is plain I refrain from artificial words since the characters spoke another languages rather than English in their place and time. Noted.

Thank you on your comments about the terms. In regards to your question, yes, the character is in his peak of anger so none of the characters talk like that most of the times.

I would love to show what I have written but I know I have to reach 50 posts

morngnstar · Jan 14, 2015

angeliz2k said:
....which is basically the TV Trope "The Queen's Latin" that I linked to above.

And, yeah, it's almost 100% certain that bloody post-dates the 10th century. They were still speaking Old English (which is a completely different language from Modern English, which began around the 16th century). Okay, I looked it up: "It has been a British intensive swear word since at least 1676." [http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bloody?s=t]

Old English is not a completely different language, and in your link it gives the Old English translation of bloody: blodig - almost the same word. But that word probably was not also a contraction of "by our lady".

Chris A · Jan 14, 2015

angeliz2k said:
Chris, are you familiar with The Queen's Latin over at TV Tropes?

Basically, there's a counter-logical trend of having Ancient Romans (or whomever) speak in British accents because somehow British accents are more "old-timey" (or something). In the tenth century, they weren't speaking anything like Modern English, so any words you put into your characters' mouths are going to be in translation. If you're an American writing for an American audience, why introduce artificial British-ness? If you're British yourself, then by all means use British English.

[Also, I wrote a blog on my own experience in figuring out what form of English to use in historical settings, particularly 18th-century France and Antebellum America (that one's easy).]

Hi, I completely understand that Romans, Celtics, Byzantines and etc.. did not speak Brit English, but isn't fair to believe Brit accents are closer to whatever they spoke at that time than the modern american accent?

Would you find believable a slave that refers to his slaver as "Boss" ; a worker that refers to his employer as "My Manager"; or a knight that refers to his fellow warrior as "my Bro"?

Really just asking your opinion (and everyone elses),

morngnstar · Jan 14, 2015

Chris A said:
Hi, I completely understand that Romans, Celtics, Byzantines and etc.. did not speak Brit English, but isn't fair to believe Brit accents are closer to whatever they spoke at that time than the modern american accent?

Nope. Latin, Gaelic, and Greek are so unlike English that it would be impossible to say what dialect of English is more like them. That's like asking whether a squirrel or a chipmunk is more like a brontosaurus.

As far as whether British or American English is more like Old or Middle English, someone once told me that what they spoke in Shakespeare's time was more like an American accent. Remember, there's no reason why British English should be closer because Shakespeare lived in England. When the first colonists came to America, they had the same accent as the English. Over time, both accents changed. What I heard is that it changed more in England.

Orianna2000 · Jan 14, 2015

If it's in the Middle East, and your characters are not Englishmen, I would seriously question why they're apparently talking with British accents and using British slang. To me, at least, it wouldn't make sense. Talking with a British accent doesn't make someone sound historical, it just makes them sound British. If it was set in ancient England, then it would be fine, but you said it's in the Middle East, so no, it doesn't work for me.

Also, your use of bloody and arse feels like it's bordering on stereotypical, which is never a good thing.

Chris A · Jan 14, 2015

I am sympathetic to a certain point; because my train of thought is that languages evolve; rather than simply change.

If you were to pick a place where language has "evolved less" would be the place with fewer external influences that would prevent them from incorporting words and changing the ennunciation.

Whenever I think about this issue I look it from another language stand point; for example Portuguese. If I were to write in Portuguese about Egypt in the biblical times would I choose the fashion of Portugal or the "more evolved" dialect of Brazil?

Thats what has me spinning cause I do think there is a reason beyond "sounding cool" that make TV and Movie producers pick Brits for Middle Age and Fantasy adaptations...

Chris A · Jan 14, 2015

Orianna2000 said:
If it's in the Middle East, and your characters are not Englishmen, I would seriously question why they're apparently talking with British accents and using British slang. To me, at least, it wouldn't make sense. Talking with a British accent doesn't make someone sound historical, it just makes them sound British. If it was set in ancient England, then it would be fine, but you said it's in the Middle East, so no, it doesn't work for me.

Also, your use of bloody and arse feels like it's bordering on stereotypical, which is never a good thing.

Thank you! I think is plain and the veredict is to change the tone

Will do that !

angeliz2k · Jan 14, 2015

Chris A said:
Hi, I completely understand that Romans, Celtics, Byzantines and etc.. did not speak Brit English, but isn't fair to believe Brit accents are closer to whatever they spoke at that time than the modern american accent?

As morngnstar said, no. Not at all. British accents have changed just as much as American accents since they began the process of separating in the 17th century. Just because England has been an entity longer than the United States doesn't mean that their version of English is more connected to, say, Latin or any Middle Eastern languages. In the 10th century, the two dialects (obviously) hadn't diverged, so there's no reason to prefer one dialect over the other; American and British English are both equally distant from that time period and from the Middle East.

Would you find believable a slave that refers to his slaver as "Boss" ; a worker that refers to his employer as "My Manager"; or a knight that refers to his fellow warrior as "my Bro"?

Really just asking your opinion (and everyone elses),

There's a major difference between American English and American slang. What I would suggest is a more-or-less "neutral" English. You don't want to use words that scream "British!" or "American!" or "21st century!" because that would jolt your reader out of the story. Using British spellings and words, to go back to the original question, would scream British to your American audience and might jolt them a bit.

morngnstar said:
Old English is not a completely different language, and in your link it gives the Old English translation of bloody: blodig - almost the same word. But that word probably was not also a contraction of "by our lady".

Yes, but that's in the sense of "covered in blood"; I copied and pasted the part about its use as a swear word. I don't know how accurate this is, but it's what I found!

mayqueen · Jan 14, 2015

This is about accents, but: A Linguist Explains British Accents of Yore (using Sleep Hollow as an example).

I'm with Angeliz here. I strive for words and ways of indicating accents for any of my characters that do not jolt the reader out of the story. Anything that is too modern or too characteristic of a particular way of speaking now is going to pull your reader out of the story.

For example, I read a novel set in 7th century England where the characters talk about a woman's "cherry" for her virginity. That threw me. On the other hand, Sharon Kay Penman has her characters saying "swive" for fucking, which would have been authentic to the time period. That feels authentic and you figure out what it means in context.

I also second snafu. There are plenty of written sources out there for pre-Crusades Middle East. Figure out how people spoke in those, aware of the fact that written and spoken languages are different, and that will help.

Supposedly the Appalachian accent sounds most like Shakespearean English, so that's interesting.

When it comes to swearing, I either 1) use a documented swear for the time period or 2) write, "He swore."

Chris A · Jan 14, 2015

You guys are all right and I appreciate it !

Sonsofthepharaohs · Jan 14, 2015

snafu1056 said:
You might want to read some documents written by Muslims around that time to get a feel for the kind of language that might be appropriate.

Here's one example from the 13th century It's full of lots of flowery expressions and language, but there's also lots or practical info to be gleaned.

https://archive.org/details/historyoftheworl011691mbp

But.... this text is translated, right? So it's not giving an idea of the style, diction, syntax etc of the original language at all, but rather the style, diction and syntax of a British professor in 1958. Every word choice involves interpretation, and entails the rejection of one possible meaning for another. It takes the original incomprehensible language and turns it into something the reader can understand, both linguistically and conceptually.

That is also your job as an HF author. To make the historical world and characters comprehensible to your modern readers.

(Sorry, got my classical philologist hat on. I hate it when people read translations of Homer and think they totally understand Homeric style and diction. Especially when they've only read the Richmond Lattimore translation :rant:

)

EMaree said:
I do worry that you're overdoing it a bit, though, just judging by the snippet you gave us:

A few things that stood out:

Why is arse in quotes?

"wipe up your arse" feels awkward as a phrase. Why not the traditional British "shove it up your arse"?

Using a respectful title like "Ma'am" seems to contradict the course, common dialogue. The character would have be *VERY* familiar with the character to speak so plainly to her, and if they're of a lower social class they might not necessarily have the right to do that.

Depending on your setting being so sexually vulgar might be frowned upon in society too, especially towards a lady.

I'm assuming this dude is super angry at this point in the story. If he talks like this casually it would get a bit overwhelming fast.

I concur with all the above.

EMaree said:
Also, if you're an American yourself, I'd steer away -- British speech patterns are a lot more complex than they appear at first, and they're difficult for a non-native to pull off without sounding like a strange stereotype.

THIS, very very emphatically. I'm sorry, but your use of 'British' dialect (in quotes because there's actually no such thing, but that's another discussion) only highlights that you yourself are not British. It wouldn't ring true even if British English was appropriate to your setting (which I don't think it is)

Just write in your own natural voice, and not only will your readers stop scratching their heads wondering why your Mediaeval Muslims speak like mockney Dick Van Dyke, but the dialogue will start to feel more natural and authentic, instead of forced like it does now.

Chris A · Jan 14, 2015

Kallithrix said:
But.... this text is translated, right? So it's not giving an idea of the style, diction, syntax etc of the original language at all, but rather the style, diction and syntax of a British professor in 1958. Every word choice involves interpretation, and entails the rejection of one possible meaning for another. It takes the original incomprehensible language and turns it into something the reader can understand, both linguistically and conceptually.

That is also your job as an HF author. To make the historical world and characters comprehensible to your modern readers.

(Sorry, got my classical philologist hat on. I hate it when people read translations of Homer and think they totally understand Homeric style and diction. Especially when they've only read the Richmond Lattimore translation )

I concur with all the above.

THIS, very very emphatically. I'm sorry, but your use of 'British' dialect (in quotes because there's actually no such thing, but that's another discussion) only highlights that you yourself are not British. It wouldn't ring true even if British English was appropriate to your setting (which I don't think it is)

Just write in your own natural voice, and not only will your readers stop scratching their heads wondering why your Mediaeval Muslims speak like mockney Dick Van Dyke, but the dialogue will start to feel more natural and authentic, instead of forced like it does now.

Thank you! I appreciate your feedback and now I concur.

CWatts · Jan 14, 2015

mayqueen said:
This is about accents, but: A Linguist Explains British Accents of Yore
(using Sleep Hollow as an example).

Thanks for the link!

mayqueen said:
Supposedly the Appalachian accent sounds most like Shakespearean English, so that's interesting.

This makes me picture Brad Pitt doing Shakespeare in Aldo Raine's Tennessee hillbilly accent (and it would have to be one of them I-talian plays). Two Basterds of Verona, anyone?

gothicangel · Jan 15, 2015

Kallithrix said:
Just write in your own natural voice, and not only will your readers stop scratching their heads wondering why your Mediaeval Muslims speak like mockney Dick Van Dyke, but the dialogue will start to feel more natural and authentic, instead of forced like it does now.

A bit late in the discussion, but you do see this in Roman HF (especially Simon Scarrow), and I hate it. Not so much that its British, but that it sounds too modern. I prefer to research Roman swears and get a little creative (I have a book on Classical Latin profanities). Perhaps it is worth going back and looking at the language your characters should use. My WIP at the moment has a cast of mainly Jewish characters, and sometimes I have to stop myself from them blurting out, 'Jesus Christ' or 'Lord/God' in a swear which would be blasphemous to them.

onesecondglance · Jan 15, 2015

Kallithrix said:
(Sorry, got my classical philologist hat on. I hate it when people read translations of Homer and think they totally understand Homeric style and diction. Especially when they've only read the Richmond Lattimore translation )

Off topic, I once read a translation of the Iliad and the Odyssey that was modern, brisk, and unflinching - I particularly remember the passage where Polyphemus is blinded for it's brutality. But I can't remember the translator! Possibly Robert Fagles?

Aye ! Arse and Bloody !

Chris A

mayqueen

practical experience, FTW

Chris A

angeliz2k

never mind the shorty

snafu1056

morngnstar

EMaree

a demon for tea

angeliz2k

never mind the shorty

Chris A

Chris A

Chris A

morngnstar

Chris A

morngnstar

Orianna2000

Freelance Writer

Chris A

Chris A

angeliz2k

never mind the shorty

mayqueen

practical experience, FTW

Chris A

Sonsofthepharaohs

Still writing the ancient Egyptian tetralogy

Chris A

CWatts

down the rabbit hole of research...

gothicangel

Toughen up.

onesecondglance

pretending to be awake