Perceptions of the Midwest

[chingon]

I've heard Oklahomans refer to themselves as midwesterners.

That surprises me.

[Eon Blue]

spending 7 years in columbia, i detected what seemed like a pretty clear "mason dixon line" of sorts going to jefferson city and beyond. it wasn't just the relatively urbane nature of columbia vs. insular jefferson city, either. i can't really explain it. i'm not saying that the entire southern half of MO is "the south," but there is definitely a gradient that starts around the mid-line and seems to increase as one goes south. springfield feels like pure south to me, to say nothing of SEMO.

i would even say that STL feels more "southern" to me than KC for whatever reason.

I know what you're talking about with Columbia versus Jefferson City.

I grew up in SEMO. Having been away and back to visit now, I'd put the north-south line somewhere around Cape Girardeau, probably north of it. Ste. Genevieve still feels a little more northern. Perryville can go either way, but it probably leans south. The St. Louis sphere of influence still encompasses Cape, but it's definitely a transition zone, as Memphis takes over south of there.

Springfield is definitely southern-feeling, but I'd disagree on your assessment of St. Louis. It's definitely more north and eastward-looking in both feel and aspirations.

[bbqboy]

The original usage of the term middle west was the middle belt of everything west of Appalachia so west VA, Kentucky , Tennessee , Missouri , and Kansas (which then went all the way to Denver )..

If that is the case shouldn't the St. Louis Arch be in Denver then? The Arch is to be the Gateway to the West.

No the Arch should have been in KC, which really IS the gateway to the West.

[shinatoo]

The original usage of the term middle west was the middle belt of everything west of Appalachia so west VA, Kentucky , Tennessee , Missouri , and Kansas (which then went all the way to Denver )..

If that is the case shouldn't the St. Louis Arch be in Denver then? The Arch is to be the Gateway to the West.

No the Arch should have been in KC, which really IS the gateway to the West.

It's called the Jefferson Expansion Memorial, it's exactly where it should be.

[chaglang]

It's the Gateway to the East.

[aknowledgeableperson]

No the Arch should have been in KC

If what you say is true it should really be in Independence (or thereabouts) where the trails start not KC.

[Eon Blue]

The Arch should have been built somewhere that they didn't have to destroy 40 city blocks to build it

[aknowledgeableperson]

Don't know what was there before but it is safe to say, IMO, the Arch has been a better asset to downtown St. Louis than what existed.

[moderne]

Before they arch it was a district of 19th century cast iron buildings. Imagine what a nice "old towne" on the waterfront that would now be instead of vast swaths of lawn. The Gatewau Arch---first exit to the east.

[Joe Smith]

spending 7 years in columbia, i detected what seemed like a pretty clear "mason dixon line" of sorts going to jefferson city and beyond. it wasn't just the relatively urbane nature of columbia vs. insular jefferson city, either. i can't really explain it. i'm not saying that the entire southern half of MO is "the south," but there is definitely a gradient that starts around the mid-line and seems to increase as one goes south. springfield feels like pure south to me, to say nothing of SEMO.

i would even say that STL feels more "southern" to me than KC for whatever reason.

You've never been to Clay County have you?

[Joe Smith]

The original usage of the term middle west was the middle belt of everything west of Appalachia so west VA, Kentucky , Tennessee , Missouri , and Kansas (which then went all the way to Denver )..

If that is the case shouldn't the St. Louis Arch be in Denver then? The Arch is to be the Gateway to the West.

No the Arch should have been in KC, which really IS the gateway to the West.

Haha! K.C. wasn't much of anything in 1804.

[KCKev]

[/quote]Haha! K.C. wasn't much of anything in 1804.[/quote]


http://lewisandclarktrail.com/section1/ ... story3.htm

http://www.yelp.com/biz_photos/lewis-an ... ukI-VBEwAA


June 26, 1804 - Camped just above the mouth of the Kansas River, Wyandotte County, Kansas

"we set out early, the river falling a little, the wind form the SW. We killed a large rattle snake sunning himself in the bank, passed a bad sandbar where our tow rope broke twice, & with great exertions we rowed round it and Came to & We camped in the point above the Kansas River* I observed a great number of Parrot queets** this evening." Clark

Kansas River* - This camp just above the mouth of the Kansas, or Kaw River, would be in present Kansas City, Kansas. It was the first camp of the expedition in that state, assuming no major changes in the mouth of the river.

[warwickland]

In my fairly extensive travels of the state, I feel like there are only a couple things that i can say with any certainty. St. Louis and Kansas City are more or less islands of solid midwesternism, and the rest of the state has a noticible southern or appalachian influence that tends to waiver in weird ways. Places like Kirksville and Maryville in the far northern tier of the state are pretty hick-a-billy, while the heavily Germanic/Catholic Missouri river cities nearer St. Louis are more northern in feel. Also, far SEMO is absolutely southern. Springfield is starts to feel southern plains, almost.

My assumption is that Columbia is a bit of an island of northish culture like the bigger Illinois cities are, but I have to say when I work in the area, away from MU and students from KC and StL, it feels pretty damned hick-a-billy, like in my face.

Illinois is weirdly similar to Missouri. There is an outstate twang that goes almost to I-80, but with the important exceptions of the Central Illinois industrial towns and cities (they even often have the northern vowel shift). The redneckism in Illinois is "under-rated" or I should underrepresented due to Chicago and the northernish company towns that dot it's center.

[warwickland]

i would even say that STL feels more "southern" to me than KC for whatever reason.

St. Louis is weird, it could be the "river city" feel. I mean the northern midwest doesn't have any real river cities - maybe St. Paul - to compare to. KC feels like it has threads of southern/or more accurately rural southernish plains to me, interestingly - when I talk to people on the phone in our KC office some of the people have a very light twang. On the other hand, around st. louis the nothern vowel shift mixes with a bit of a drawl in some places (say the more southern part of the metro) in a weird way too, and kind of a light "riverboat southern" thing in some places maybe (vs more "cowboy" for kc). I could be really reaching here, I don't know. But I do feel like St. Louis is an outlier of an (for lack of a better term) "urban great lakes" feel in places as well.

I do feel that people in KC more often have a non-regional dialect (other than sometimes a twang) - whereas around St. Louis people more often seem to have something going on with their accent - often some mutation of the northern vowel shift.

[earthling]

Some in KC (especially outskirts of KC) have what linguists call the 'midland drawl', not a twang. Some others in KC who may or may not have an accent often do the 'fast slur' and roll several words together as almost one. The midland drawl stretches from Denver to Indy but STL has a nasal sound in the city, and they do have more of the southern twang outside STL especially towards Cape Girardeau. SEMO has noticeable southern twang more similar to TN. I was just up in NW MO, IA through SD recently and noticed a mix of MN speak to 'midland drawl' but they speak each word much more distinctly, KC talk leans more lazy and slurred although many also speak distinctly.

Someone from our Atlanta office once said to me he really struggles with understanding some in the KC office with the drawl and also mentioned some runs words together as one. He has a heavy Georgia twang. Twang and drawl apparently don't translate well.

[warwickland]

Some in KC (especially outskirts of KC) have what linguists call the 'midland drawl', not a twang. Some others in KC who may or may not have an accent often do the 'fast slur' and roll several words together as almost one. The midland drawl stretches from Denver to Indy but STL has a nasal sound in the city, and they do have more of the southern twang outside STL especially towards Cape Girardeau. SEMO has noticeable southern twang more similar to TN. I was just up in NW MO, IA through SD recently and noticed a mix of MN speak to 'midland drawl' but they speak each word much more distinctly, KC talk leans more lazy and slurred although many also speak distinctly.

Someone from our Atlanta office once said to me he really struggles with understanding some in the KC office with the drawl and also mentioned some runs words together as one. He has a heavy Georgia twang. Twang and drawl apparently don't translate well.

I definitely had twang and drawl mixed up. That makes sense.

Nasal would definitely characterise St. Louis. You get a few people standing around drinking in the street on St. Pats or something and everyones "nasalness" feeds in on itself and gets worse and worse, it seems, and I feel like girls around here have "worse" nasal accents than guys, for some reason.

[chingon]

St. Louis and Kansas City are more or less islands of solid midwesternism

To me St Louis and KC are like the 2 ideals or exemplars of urban midwesternism.

[chingon]

But I do feel like St. Louis is an outlier of an (for lack of a better term) "urban great lakes" feel in places as well.

Which is odd, because I often feel like KC has more physically in common with the great lakes cities - Toledo, Detroit, Cleveland, Buffalo, etc. Nothing about St Louis feels "great lakes urban to me", except I think it is very, very culturally similar to Cleveland.

[chingon]

I feel like girls around here have "worse" nasal accents than guys, for some reason.

I had always heard, but never confirmed (during my "linguistics major" years) that females are generally more prone to "vacation accent syndrome" and that their speech was generally more malleable to prevailing social and cultural winds than male speech.

[warwickland]

But I do feel like St. Louis is an outlier of an (for lack of a better term) "urban great lakes" feel in places as well.

Which is odd, because I often feel like KC has more physically in common with the great lakes cities - Toledo, Detroit, Cleveland, Buffalo, etc. Nothing about St Louis feels "great lakes urban to me", except I think it is very, very culturally similar to Cleveland.

Yeah, physically. Although there are some commonalities with some areas of Chicago. Our ubiquitious flat roofed brick 1 and 2-flats and their brick 1-2-3 and 4 flats. St. Louis looks more like a lost Ohio River city, or something, but with some of Chicago's wider "prairie" feel (flatter city, wider streets, long straight views of streetlights, etc, that are less common along the Ohio).