Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(1)
Variants that imply high proficiency are more likely to be adopted by proficient talkers of both genders, as was the case with [R], while variants with neutral-to-slightly positive connotation [cf. Ang 洪惟仁 (2003)] were more likely adopted by females across dialects, as was the case with [L].
Similar(59)
Except for Mix males, most proficient talkers are participating actively in eradicating the use of [Z].
As for [l], since it is regarded as a result of phonological simplification [cf. Ang 洪惟仁 (2012)], one suspects that more proficient talkers would be less likely to use this form due to conservativeness.
In other words, although proficient talkers are generally more cautious in adopting new variants, as one had originally predicted, their unwelcoming attitude could be attenuated by positive social connotation of the variant, and the effect is much stronger on females than on males.
In general, proficient talkers were indeed more conservative, and were more likely to use old forms than their mid-level counterparts.
Finally, for new forms that do not have clear positive connotation, proficient talkers tend to avoid using the variant due to their conservative nature, as was the case with [D].
They were not good talkers, either of them.
But presidents are the most cyclonic talkers of all.
The Navajo and Comanche code talkers of WW2 are the most famous.
McCann is a talker of the best kind.
A prime example of a talker of rot.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com