Varieties of Spanish in The United States - (10. Nicaraguan Spanish in The United States)

10
Nicaraguan Spanish
in the United States
The Nicaraguan Diaspora
Nicaraguan Spanish is the third largest Central American
variety of Spanish represented in the United States (after
Salvadoran and Guatemalan), but in areas where Nicaraguans
are a majority, it is naturally the prevailing variety. The
largest single Nicaraguan community in the United States is
found in Miami, especially in the Sweetwater-Fountainbleu
area, at the extreme west end of the city. In this zone, entire
shopping centers, apartment complexes, and schools are
owned, inhabited, or frequented exclusively by Nicaraguans.
Another large Nicaraguan settlement is found in Los
Angeles. Considerable numbers of Nicaraguans are found in
Houston, Chicago, New Orleans, New York, and other large
urban areas, but without the coherence of ethnically
unique neighborhoods. Groups from Nicaragua’s Atlantic
Copyright © 2008. Georgetown University Press. All rights reserved.
(Caribbean) coast—traditionally speaking West Indian

Creole English and/or Miskito—generally live in other
areas. Some Miskito fishermen have taken up residence
around Port Arthur, Texas, while a considerable number of
black, English-speaking Atlantic coast residents live just to
the north of Miami, especially in Opa-Locka.
On July 17, 1979, Anastasio Somoza Debayle, the belea-
guered president of Nicaragua, gave up struggling against
rebels trying to topple a nearly forty-year-old dynastic dic-
tatorship and fled the country. Political power was immedi-
ately seized by the spearhead organization of the armed
resistance, the Frente Sandinista de Liberación Nacional
165
Lipski, John M.. Varieties of Spanish in the United States, Georgetown University Press, 2008. ProQuest Ebook
Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/utpb-ebooks/detail.action?docID=547807.
Created from utpb-ebooks on 2024-04-23 23:58:44.
166 CHAPTER TEN
(FSLN), a group that took its name from Augusto César Sandino, a Nicaraguan
nationalist hero who had fought against the U.S. military intervention in
Nicaragua in the 1930s and who—after having been tricked into a peace
accord—was murdered by order of Anastasio Somoza García, the first member of
the Somoza family dictatorship. For the next eleven years, the Sandinista move-
ment would totally dominate Nicaragua, taking over the economic, political,
social, military, cultural, and educational structures of the country. Among the
most interesting aspects of the Nicaraguan political transitions—from Somoza to
the Sandinistas to the post-Sandinista regime—are the changes in public language
usage, both gradual and abrupt (Lipski 1997). A few political terms that arose
during the Sandinista regime have made their way into Nicaraguan popular cul-
ture, and even Nicaraguan sports language has been influenced by the regime
(Ycaza Tigerino 1992). The presence of Cuban advisors in Nicaragua may also
have left more than passing memories. A more recent examination of Nicaraguan
popular Spanish usage (Peña Hernández 1992, 73) uncovered instances of non-
inverted questions such as ¿Qué tú dices? (What do you say?), a typically Cuban
construction previously unknown in Nicaragua, instead of the more usual universal
Spanish format ¿Qué dices tú? or the Central American ¿Qué decís [vos]?
Members of the FSLN had seized power with the departure of Somoza, and
although they enjoyed broad popular support at the beginning, they were in
effect only the armed vanguard of an ideologically more heterogeneous and con-
siderably less left-leaning Nicaraguan population. As the Sandinistas’ Marxist-
Leninist ideology became apparent, as ties with Cuba and the Soviet Union
broadened, as hostile relations with the United States became the order of the day,
and as increasingly totalitarian control of the population sank in, rejection of the
Sandinistas as heir to political power became widespread. In 1984 Nicaragua held
presidential elections under the supervision of United Nations observers. The
Sandinista candidate, Daniel Ortega, won a decisive victory. Although international

observers reported the elections to be generally fair and free, the United States
rejected the results and intensified political and military pressure on the Sandinista
government. In 1990 Nicaragua once more held elections, this time under
preconditions and at a level of scrutiny that even the United States government
found acceptable. Although it was widely believed that Daniel Ortega would easily
be reelected, the Nicaraguan people opted instead for Violeta Barrios de
Chamorro, widow of a charismatic newspaper publisher who had been assassi-
nated for his opposition to the Somoza regime. Chamorro was supported by a
broad coalition of opposition groups, ranging from ex–National Guard members
who had supported Somoza to more moderate business leaders and even former
Sandinista combatants.
NICARAGUAN SPANISH IN THE UNITED STATES 167
Violeta Chamorro was widely viewed as the candidate of the reactionary for-
mer Somoza supporters—given the high profile of the former Somoza National
Guard and family business structure among the opposition groups—despite the
fact that her husband had presumably been killed under Somoza’s orders.
Observers on all points of the political spectrum assumed that the clock would
quickly be turned back on the social, economic, and political changes introduced
by the Sandinistas—in particular, a rapid abandonment of Marxist-Leninist
ideology and of a state-controlled economy as well as a return to unabated
capitalism were the assumed outcomes. It therefore came as something of a sur-
prise when Chamorro retained Sandinista military leader Humberto Ortega
(brother of the former president) as head of the Nicaraguan armed forces, and
when she did not undertake the expected purge of Sandinista officials in the new
government of “national reconciliation.” In many ways, Chamorro’s policies
pleased no one. Pro-Sandinista groups resented Chamorro’s redistribution of con-
fiscated land that had been handed over to peasants during the Sandinista regime,
while ultraconservative groups longed for a more decisive return to the privileges
of the past. Armed rebellion—by former anti-Sandinista guerrillas and disgrun-
tled Sandinista supporters—broke out on both sides, and during the early 1990s
it seemed that Nicaragua would sink back into the same self-destructive civil war
that had marked the second half of the 1980s. A succession of post-Sandinista
governments has done little to improve the lot of Nicaraguans, and as of this writ-
ing (shortly after Daniel Ortega had once again been elected to the presidency, on
a post-Sandinista but still leftist platform), the political situation can be best char-
acterized as an uneasy truce amid continued economic stagnation, sniping from
both political extremes, and little foreign investment.
Sandinista ideology quickly penetrated the area of public education, in particu-
lar with a reevaluation of rural culture, the beginnings of a literacy campaign, and
the formation of revolutionary organizations such as the block-by-block defense

committees, as well as Sandinista organizations of women, peasants, city workers,
and youth. In retrospect, the Sandinistas overestimated the average Nicaraguan’s
appetite for revolutionary rhetoric as opposed to a simple return to an untroubled
life and a freedom from political persecution. From the outset, conservative radio
stations (including those associated with the Catholic Church and those represent-
ing large business owners) took a dim view of the Sandinista clamor, and they
began calling for moderation in both language and content. Comparative studies
of the language used in Sandinista and private (almost by definition more conser-
vative) stations during the early Sandinista period show an increasing polarization
of language, not only in terms of revolutionary vocabulary and slogans but even in
the style of delivery, not to mention the overall program content. In 1980 the
168 CHAPTER TEN
Sandinistas undertook a five-month nationwide literacy campaign with the aim of

reducing the illiteracy rate, which was among the highest in Latin America. In an
attempt to help the young Nicaraguan literacy brigade workers, volunteer teachers
from Cuba, the United States, Canada, and European countries joined in the crash
program, which after six months resulted in a claimed illiteracy rate of only 12%
nationwide, down from 55%. These figures must be taken cautiously; although the
pre-Sandinista figures are believable, the growth in literacy that can result from a
stopgap campaign such as the one carried out by the 1980 brigades is quite lim-
ited. Most of the new alfabetizados could barely read revolutionary slogans and bill-
boards (in effect, the immediate goal of the Sandinista literacy campaign was to
ensure the ability to read revolutionary broadsides and pronouncements). Despite
the short-term success of the literacy campaign, anti-Sandinista sentiments rapidly
grew among large sectors of the Nicaraguan population, nowhere more so than on
the Atlantic coast, where the Somoza government had left the black creole and
indigenous populations alone. Coastal residents were resentful of Sandinista forced
military service, of obligatory vigilance, and—because they had not participated
actively in the struggle against Somoza and harbored no historical anti-Yankee
sentiments—of an ideology that seemed distant and artificial.
Nicaraguan Spanish in the United States

Nicaraguans have always been present in the United States in small numbers, but
no large groups of Nicaraguans were to be found until the Sandinista insurrection
against the Somoza regime began. Four decades of dictatorial Somoza rule—
including the father (Anastasio), two sons (Luis and Anastasio Jr.), a grandson in
training (Anastasio III), and interim puppet presidents—had created the inevitable
exile population, but most relocated in Mexico or neighboring Central American
countries. When the Sandinista armed insurrection began to gather force in 1978,
the increasing death toll, the political repression, the guerrilla warfare in both
urban and rural areas, the shortages and blackouts, and the general climate of inse-
curity prompted many Nicaraguans with the means at their disposal to temporar-
ily leave the country or, at least, send their children abroad. The United States was
a favored safe haven for those who could afford it because other Central American
countries had problems of their own. Honduras openly supported the Somoza gov-
ernment, but Costa Rica increasingly favored the Sandinistas, and El Salvador and
Guatemala were rapidly sliding down the path to civil war.
With the abdication of Somoza and the triumph of the Sandinista Revolution in
July 1979, political violence temporarily stopped. However, the rapid social changes
that accompanied the Sandinistas’ rise to power provoked an almost immediate
exodus of the wealthiest elements of Nicaraguan society—some of whom had

actively contributed to the prosperity of the Somoza regimes—and of those who were
regarded with suspicion and hostility by revolutionary supporters simply because of
their elevated socioeconomic status in this poor nation. Almost immediately after the
Sandinista takeover, a counterrevolutionary movement was formed, spearheaded by
former members of the Somoza National Guard and supported financially by
Nicaraguans whose fortunes had diminished by the transition from Somocismo to
Sandinismo. The United States government also provided crucial economic and
logistical support to the contras, through both public and clandestine channels.
The contras began an active military campaign against the Sandinista regime,
which in practice affected virtually all residents of the country. The largest contra
group, and the one most closely associated with the Somoza National Guard, was
based in Honduras and operated the principal rebel radio station—Radio 15 de
Septiembre—whose transmitter was always located in or around Tegucigalpa. A south-
ern front was also formed under the leadership of a disaffected former Sandinista,
Edén Pastora. Pastora, who had fought the Somoza forces, at first distanced himself
from the northern contras, but both he and the Costa Rican government hosting him
ultimately accepted aid from the U.S. government and from pro-Somoza groups. For
a time, Pastora’s group operated La Voz de Sandino, a clandestine shortwave broad-
cast station based in Costa Rica. Finally, Miskito and other Atlantic coast residents—
who felt that active Sandinista intervention was more harmful than the neglect and
marginality bestowed by the Somoza governments—formed the Misurata (from
MIskito, SUmo, RAma) front. The principal leader of the Misurata was Steadman
Fagoth, the half-Miskito son of a German immigrant, who received considerable sup-
port from the U.S. intelligence community. This group operated Radio Miskut from
the Miskito coast of Honduras. This station transmitted in Miskito, Sumu, and Spanish.
Radio Monimbó, another rebel station, delivered much smoother and less inflamma-
tory programming. This station, whose location was never disclosed (it may have
been operating from South Florida), was apparently funded by more moderate ele-
ments of the Nicaraguan opposition (Lipski 1991a).
As a result of the intensified contra activity and of increasing Sandinista inter-
ference in all aspects of Nicaraguans’ lives, the Nicaraguan exodus grew from a
trickle to a torrent. Large numbers moved to the United States, especially Miami
and Los Angeles, where they established small businesses or found other employ-
ment. Although those who left assumed at first that their return to Nicaragua
would be imminent, the reality of exile soon became apparent, as matters in
Nicaragua went from bad to worse. Stable Nicaraguan communities with an inter-
nal structure that duplicated patterns found in the home country took shape in the
United States. Particularly in Miami, the climate was favorable for educated
170 CHAPTER TEN
middle-class refugees fleeing a leftist revolutionary government, one that further-

more was openly embracing communist Cuban support. This is not to suggest that
all exiled Cubans in Miami welcomed Nicaraguans with open arms, as both
groups were often placed in competition for scarce resources. But the fact that
these two groups had a common enemy served to smooth over many differences.
The Nicaraguan community in exile was jubilant over Chamorro’s election,
but—perhaps predictably—this event did not spur a large-scale permanent return
of expatriates. Many Nicaraguans had now lived in the United States for many
years, had established successful businesses, were living in comfortable and safe
neighborhoods, had children in American schools, and were little inclined to
return to a chaotic post–civil war environment in which economic fragility and
political uncertainty were the order of the day. Reverse migration was slow, and
to this day Nicaragua has failed to attract back the torrent of returning exiles one
would expect given the number of displaced persons during the Sandinista period
(Ortega 1991). Within the country, the return of displaced persons to their orig-
inal homes has been extensive, as has the repatriation of Nicaraguans from the
neighboring countries of Honduras and Costa Rica. By 1984, approximately
25,000 Nicaraguans were known to have taken refuge in neighboring Honduras
(including at least 14,000 Miskitos), and at least 4,000 in Costa Rica (Montes
1986, 57; Farías Caro and Garita Salas 1985, 43–59). Some estimates place the
total number of Nicaraguans in the two neighboring countries at more than
40,000 during the first years of the 1980s (Torres Rivas 1986, 11). By 1986
more than 30,000 Nicaraguans were living across the border in Costa Rica.
Immigration of Nicaraguans to the United States during the Sandinista period
is better documented than emigration of refugees from other Central American
countries in the same time period, as a result of the preferential treatment
afforded the former group by the U.S. government. During the insurrection
against Somoza, some 100,000–200,000 Nicaraguans left the country as

refugees; another 800,000 were internally displaced (the total population of the
country at the time was perhaps 2.5 million). In the first year of the Sandinista
triumph (1979), many Nicaraguans took refuge in the United States, most of
whom had been directly implicated in the Somoza government or the
Nicaraguan military. It was estimated that by 1984 some 30,000 lived in the
Miami area alone, with smaller numbers in Los Angeles, New York City, and
New Orleans (Universidad para la Paz 1987, 178). By 1985 some 50,000
Nicaraguans were estimated to live in the United States, undoubtedly a figure
much lower than the true population (Ferris 1987, 35). The 1990 census found
some 203,000 Nicaraguans in the United States, of which 38,000 were native.
In the 2000 census some 178,000 Nicaraguans were counted, indicating that
some of the previous residents had returned to Central America. Nearly two-
thirds of all Nicaraguans live in Florida or California. The states with the largest
Nicaraguan population are as follows:
Florida 79,600
California 51,300
New York 8,000
Texas 7,500
New Jersey 4,400
Maryland 3,400
Virginia 3,200
Louisiana 2,800
Nevada 1,600
North Carolina 1,450
Linguistic Features of Nicaraguan Spanish

Few comprehensive linguistic studies of Nicaraguan Spanish have been published,
and even fewer are based on systematic fieldwork.1 Nicaragua is currently the
Central American nation with the smallest research bibliography with regard to
linguistic behavior.
Phonetics and Phonology

Few published studies describe the pronunciation of Nicaraguan Spanish (Lacayo
1954, 1962; Lipski 1989b; Ycaza Tigerino 1980). There is little sociolinguistic
variation in pronunciation, and even regional phonetic variation is very slight.
General phonetic traits are as follows:
• Intervocalic /d/ readily disappears in a variety of contexts, especially in the ubiqui-

tous ending -ado (e.g., hablao for hablado [spoken]).
• As in the rest of Central America, the posterior fricative /x/ or jota is normally pro-
nounced as a weak aspiration [h], and this sound frequently disappears intervocalically,
particularly between nonfront vowels: trabajo > [traBao] (work).
• In common with other Central American dialects, intervocalic /j/ is pronounced
with little or no friction and is often dropped when one of the vowels is /i/ or /e/,
providing that the first vowel is not /o/ or /u/ (Lipski 1990a): gallina > gaína (hen),
sello > seo (seal), calle > cae (street). Nicaraguans routinely insert a hypercorrect [j] in
hiatus combinations beginning with /i/, thus converting María to Mariya and Darío
to Dariyo. Rural speakers also insert [j] in hiatus groups beginning with /e/ as in vea
> veya (see, [imp.]) (Lacayo 1962, 10).
172 CHAPTER TEN
• Earlier accounts of Nicaraguan Spanish (Lacayo 1954, 1962, 10; Canfield 1981,
65–66) claim an occlusive pronunciation of /b/, /d/, and /g/ after nonnasal con-
sonants, as in algo (something), alba (dawn) and arde (it burns). This pronunciation is
quite infrequent in contemporary Nicaraguan Spanish.
• Word-final /n/ is uniformly velarized as -ng in English sing, both phrase-finally
(muy bien [very well]) and when followed by a word-initial vowel (bien hecho [well
done]). A common alternative in phrase-final position is nasalization of the pre-
ceding vowel, combined with elision of the nasal consonant.2 There is little social
stigma associated with velarization of /n/; however, data from radio broadcast-
ing suggest some reluctance to display velarization to a wide audience (Lipski
1983a).
• Aspiration to [h] or elimination of syllable- and word-final /s/ occurs to a greater
extent in Nicaraguan Spanish than in any other Central American variety, with
frequencies comparable to Caribbean dialects. This elimination of final /s/ has
given rise to the nickname muco, a term originally referring to a cow missing one
or both horns and applied to Nicaraguans by neighbors in Honduras. In
Nicaraguan Spanish, retention of phrase-final [h] is more frequent than in
Caribbean Spanish, and preconsonantal /s/ rarely disappears, giving Nicaraguan
speech a breathier quality—in words such as pues > pueh (well) and entonces >
entonceh (then)—not found in other Caribbean dialects in which loss of precon-
sonantal and phrase-final /s/ is the rule. Syllable-final /s/ is pronounced as [s]
only in carefully monitored speech.3
The phonetic features just described are valid not only for most of the Nicaraguan
territory but also for the Nicoya/Guanacaste region of Costa Rica. The only area
where the preceding description does not hold in its entirety is the Caribbean coast
of Nicaragua, among residents for whom Spanish is not a first language. One of the
most common phonetic discrepancies often noted in the Spanish of Nicaragua’s
Caribbean coast is the pronunciation of the trill /r/ as a single flap [P], or the
pronunciation of both /P/ and /r/ as a retroflex glide (that is, similar to the English r ).
Occlusive pronunciation of intervocalic /d/ is also common, and in rapid speech the
resulting sound approaches [P], as in toro for todo (all).
Morphological Characteristics
Nicaraguan Spanish uses only vos as the familiar pronoun, with the corresponding
voseo verb paradigms (Thiemer 1989). Among Central Americans, Nicaraguans are
noted for the great ease with which they use this familiar form of address, even
with complete strangers. This usage stands in sharp contrast with neighboring
Costa Rica, where use of formal usted may even extend to interaction between sib-
lings or spouses (Rey 1994; Gaínza 1976; Vargas 1974; Villegas 1965). Neigh-
boring Hondurans are also considerably more reluctant to use the familiar vos with
strangers or outsiders (Castro-Mitchell 1991; Rey 1994). Nicaraguans had tradi-
tionally enjoyed the dubious reputation of being confianzudos (overly familiar), but
Sandinista policies pushed this propensity for familiar address to extremes not
previously found in Nicaragua. Official documents—including correspondence
between government ministries—used vos instead of the universally mandatory
usted. Billboards exhorting public support for the government, which in pre-San-
dinista days would have used usted (or occasionally the artificial, non–Central
American tú) bristled with voseos (e.g., Nicaragüense, cumplí con tu deber [Nicaraguan,
do your duty]). This writer has a passport stamped with a Nicaraguan visa that
reads Nicaragua espera por vos (Nicaragua awaits you), a remarkable deviation from
the usual diplomatic protocol.
Syntactic Characteristics
• Nicaraguan Spanish shares with the rest of Central America the use of hasta
to indicate the beginning of an event: el jefe viene hasta las nueve (the boss is
coming at 9:00).
• Some rural speakers use a pleonastic clitic lo, both in sentences indicating the
existence of something (lo hay una mata de lirios [there is a lily plant]) and in
contexts where no direct object is called for (lo temo que se muera (I’m afraid
that he will die), por cierto que lo sois rico (you’re rich for sure) (Ycaza Tigerino
1980, 6). This usage is archaic and seldom heard in contemporary
Nicaraguan Spanish or in the Spanish of Nicaraguan emigrants.
Lexical Characteristics
Most of the Nicaraguan Spanish lexicon is composed of commonly used Span-
ish elements, or words derived from Nahuatl used throughout Mexico and Cen-
tral America. Only a handful of items may truly be called Nicaraguan. Of the
regional words, most are derived from Native American languages once spoken in
Nicaragua. These words usually refer to local flora, fauna, and domestic activities,
and they are known only to older rural dwellers. Many words used in Nicaragua
are used elsewhere in Latin America, but with partially or totally different mean-
ings. A brief selection of words that Nicaraguans themselves most often regard as
distinctively nica includes the following:4
bajo/baho (a meat dish)

chachaguas (twins)
chavalo (child)
chele (blond, fair-skinned—used also in Honduras and El Salvador)
174 CHAPTER TEN
chigüín (small child)

chiltoma (bell pepper)
chimar (to bruise, scrape)
chocho (expression of surprise)
chunche (unnamed object, thing of no value—used also in neighboring countries)
cipote (small child—used also in Honduras and El Salvador)
cuaches (twins)
cumiche (youngest child of the family)
gallo pinto (dish of red beans and rice—used also in Costa Rica)
idiay (greeting, expression of surprise)
jodido (friendly greeting, expression of surprise—this is an obscene word in most
other Spanish dialects)
maje (guy, individual)
pinol (drink made of toasted corn)
pinolillo (drink made of toasted corn and cacao)
pipante (native canoe)
reales (money)
vigorón (dish made of yucca and pork rinds [chicharrón])
Accommodation to Other U.S. Varieties of Spanish

Nicaraguans in exile, like their Cuban neighbors, have resolutely refused to carry
over the revolutionary forms of address, avoiding the use of compa even among
friends who might have used this term in pre-Sandinista days.5 On the other hand,
the usual Nicaraguan voseo has not been diminished. Perhaps one of the most tan-
gible linguistic effects of the Sandinista revolution was to bring vernacular speech
elements—including vocabulary items, use of vos, and a relaxed, consonant-weak
pronunciation—into all spheres of public life. High government officials publicly
addressed one another as vos on radio and television, as did government radio
announcers and publications. Thus vos—a form of address that had traditionally
been regarded as substandard, overly colloquial, and simply incorrect (although
used routinely by all Nicaraguans)—gained official recognition as a legitimate
aspect of Nicaraguan national culture.
In Miami, Nicaraguan Spanish comes into contact with Cuban Spanish on a
daily basis. Cuban Spanish—representing a variety of registers, generations, and
degrees of bilingualism with English—is the norm in Miami when it comes to
Spanish-language broadcasting and journalism, and it is the de facto lingua franca
in most parts of the city. It is nearly impossible for a Spanish speaker in Miami, par-
ticularly one who relies on Spanish more heavily than on English, to avoid contact
with Cuban Spanish, regardless of individual attitudes toward Cubans and their
language. Less frequently, depending on personal circumstances, Nicaraguans in

South Florida encounter other Spanish dialects, with Salvadoran, Colombian (of
several regions), and Puerto Rican being perhaps the most common.
Virtually all Nicaraguans living in the greater Miami area have definite opin-
ions and attitudes regarding Cuban Spanish, Nicaraguan Spanish, and the inter-
face between the two. Those Cubans who are familiar with Nicaraguans and their
speech have equally well-defined opinions. In a survey conducted by the present
writer in the 1990s among middle-class Nicaraguans in Miami, a majority of
those over the age of about 20 expressed at least some negative sentiments
towards Cuban Spanish. Frequently, these feelings were vague and not associated
with particular linguistic characteristics; rather, they reflected cultural differences
and perhaps concealed some resentment at the obviously dominant position
enjoyed by Cubans in South Florida. One such nonspecific negative sentiment (by
no means characteristic of the entire Nicaraguan community) is reflected in the
remark that Cubans speak “too loud,” “too fast,” “too nasty,” and so forth. These
are precisely the same unsubstantiated criticisms that neighboring Central
American countries level against Nicaraguans, and they are typical of xenophobic
attitudes worldwide. As with all stereotypes, the comments made by Nicaraguans
about Cuban Spanish have a kernel of truth: compared with the baseline Central
American varieties of Spanish, Cuban Spanish in the more emotionally charged
registers is objectively marked by greater intonational swings, often perceived as
absolute differences in volume. In animated conversations, Cubans (particularly
Cuban men) tend to prefer simultaneous participation—with each intervention
taking place at a successively higher volume level—to a greater emphasis on turn-
taking, which prevails throughout Central America. To the ear unaccustomed to
such energetic exchanges, a Cuban conversation can seem impossibly rapid, deaf-
eningly loud, and incredibly rude.6
On a more specific basis, many Nicaraguans residing in the United States crit-
icize Cubans living there for an excessive use of Anglicisms, particularly loan
translations and slightly adapted borrowings. The most commonly cited loan
translation is the use of pa(ra) atrás as a literal translation of the English verbal par-
ticle back, as in te llamo patrás (I’ll call you back), me pagó patrás (he/she paid me
back). This combination is indeed common among younger generations of
increasingly English-dominant Cuban bilingual speakers. The use of noninverted
questions—such as ¿Qué tú quieres? and ¿Dónde usted vive?—is also regarded as
unacceptable by Nicaraguans in the United States, many of whom suspect English
interference in such questions. At the time of the survey, the members of the
Nicaraguan community in Miami had not resided in a bilingual environment long
enough for this type of subtle syntactic Anglicism to penetrate their vernacular
176 CHAPTER TEN
speech. Nicaraguan adolescents picked up these combinations naturally, both

through contact with Cuban friends and by simply living in the Hispanophone
environment in Miami. Older Nicaraguans are predictably dismayed when their
children begin using constructions from other groups, particularly when, in the
parents’ eyes, the combinations are socially unacceptable.
Nicaraguans less frequently commented on Cubans’ pronunciation of Spanish,
except to note neutralization of preconsonantal /l/ and /r/, giving rise to forms
such as pocque < porque (because) and calta < carta (letter). Objectively, though,
Cuban Spanish does not often change /r/ > [l]; in fact, such change is much
more frequent in Puerto Rican and even Dominican dialects. In Cuba this neu-
tralization is characteristic of the lower classes in the central and eastern
provinces, and it was not widely found in the Cuban exile community until after
the Mariel boatlift of 1980, in which large numbers of less educated working-
class or rural Cubans arrived in the United States. Neutralization of liquids was
always stigmatized among educated Cubans, but it is becoming increasingly
common—and, correspondingly, less objectionable—as the demographic profile
of the South Florida Cuban community evolves, and as young Cuban Americans
receive less sociolinguistic feedback regarding their pronunciation in Spanish.
Glottalization of syllable-final liquids, combined with gemination of consecutive
consonants, is found throughout Cuba, including Havana, and it is also charac-
teristic of the speech of members of the lower social classes. Certain words—
such as pocque < porque (because),—routinely undergo gemination even when
they are produced by educated Cubans, but variants such as puetta < puerta (door)
and aggo < algo (something) have become common in Florida Cuban Spanish
only in the last decade. Such deviations from standard Spanish phonology strike
Nicaraguans as unacceptable.
Relatively few Cubans in Miami have close enough contact with Nicaraguans
to have formed clear opinions regarding Nicaraguan Spanish. Among those

Cubans who do mention specific features, the use of vos stands out as the most
striking difference. The adjectives used by Cubans to describe this distinctly
non–Caribbean phenomenon range from “strange” to “incorrect.” A few Cubans
comment on Nicaraguans’ weak pronunciation of intervocalic /j/, especially in
contact with /i/ and /e/, which can make gallina (hen) sound like gaína and sello
(stamp) emerge as seo. Cubans also comment on the frequency with which
Nicaraguans punctuate their speech with pues [pueh] (well then), a trait of which
Nicaraguans themselves are also aware. Among the most shocking differences
between Cuban and Nicaraguan Spanish is the use of jodido as a casual greeting
among Nicaraguans of both sexes. To Cubans, use of this word as anything other
than an insult is unthinkable.
In the context of Latin American Spanish, it is unfortunately not uncommon

for Central Americans to have a low opinion of Central American dialects,
regarding them as excessively laden with archaic and vulgar elements. Historical
comments by prestigious grammarians—such as Andrés Bello and Rufino José
Cuervo—as well as by well-known Central American writers have done little to
improve the situation. The relative poverty and instability of the region is
another contributing factor, as is the fact that national literatures invariably both
reflect the speech patterns of an intellectual elite (usually educated abroad) and
attribute Central American linguistic traits only to marginalized characters such
as peons and the urban proletariat. In recent decades, a more positive attitude has
been emerging, as populist authors and university communities insist on legit-
imizing homegrown varieties of Spanish and on diminishing the mindless admi-
ration of foreign patterns. Nicaraguans are not exempt from feelings of linguistic
insecurity, but the Nicaraguan community in the United States is less afflicted by
such sentiments than are other Central American groups. A high level of educa-
tion and a more comfortable socioeconomic status are probably the main con-
tributing factors, aided by a certain smugness from being the bearers of a form
of Spanish as yet unaffected by the overwhelming influence of English. Few
Nicaraguans consciously alter their language when speaking to Cubans, and even
fewer willingly adopt Cubanisms into their own speech. With regard to the char-
acteristically Central American use of vos, a majority of Nicaraguans stated that
they use such forms to address Cubans with whom they had attained a level of
confianza that warrants such usage. A few confessed to employing tú so as to not
shock or offend Cubans.
Scholarship on Nicaraguan Spanish in the United States

To date there has been very little published scholarship on Nicaraguan Spanish in
the United States. Lipski (1997) peripherally mentions the U.S. Nicaraguan com-
munity, as does Peñalosa (1984). Lipski (2000b) covers the U.S. Nicaraguan com-
munity in somewhat greater detail.
Notes
1. Arellano (1980, 1992) contains a partial bibliography as well as several shorter
essays by various authors. Mántica (1989) is the only major monograph, whereas
Ycaza Tigerino (1980) is a shorter compilation. Valle (1976) contains many useful
observations.
2. Lipski (1986d). Some personally collected quantitative data representing a cross-
section of Nicaraguan speakers are as follows (Lipski 1986f, 1988b):
178 CHAPTER TEN
Context n## {Phrase-final} n#V {Prevocalic}

Allophone [n] [N] [Ø] [n] [N] [Ø]
% used 7 55 38 10 81 9
3. Some basic quantitative data representing a cross-section of Nicaraguan Spanish are

as follows (Lipski 1989b):
/s/C /s/#C /s/## /s/#V /s/#v

[s] [h] [Ø] [s] [h] [Ø] [s] [h] [Ø] [s] [h] [Ø] [s] [h] [Ø]
13 84 4 2 86 12 35 59 6 28 70 2 7 90 3
C = consonant; V = tonic vowel; v = atonic vowel; # = word boundary; ## = phrase boundary
4. The Nicaraguan lexicon has been studied by Barreto (1893), Berendt (1874),
Buitrago Morales (1940), Castellón (1939), Castrillo Gámez (1966), Mántica (1989),
Matus Lazo (1982), Rabella and Palais (1994), Ramírez Fajardo (1993), and Valle
(1972, 1976).
5. During the initial insurrection against Somoza, Sandinista combatants were known as
compas, a colloquial Nicaraguan term of address (derived from compadre or perhaps
compañero [comrade]), whose meaning was narrowed to include only rebel fighters. After
the Sandinista takeover, use of compa among all Nicaraguans became de rigueur as a
sign of revolutionary solidarity; the use of traditional señor, señora, don/doña, and so
forth was taken as an anachronistic and even unpatriotic acknowledgement of former
class hierarchies. The situation is completely parallel to that of revolutionary Cuba,
where use of compañero/compañera has almost completely supplanted señor/señora, at least
in public conversations. The extent of direct Cuban influence on revolutionary
Nicaraguan terms of address is debatable. Given the similar circumstances—in both
countries rebel groups gained power through armed struggle—the carryover of military
camaraderie to the civilian sector is not unexpected.
6. Claims of vulgar talk normally involve certain key lexical items that are inoffensive
and common in one dialect, while carrying a heavy negative connotation in the other.
Cuban Spanish is noted for the very frequent use of coño, an obscene epithet still
very common in Spain but rarely heard in Latin America outside of the Caribbean.
Nicaraguans are aware that coño is a “bad” word, although the word is not normally
used in Nicaragua, and they are sometimes surprised at the ease with which well-bred
Cubans, including women and children, employ this term. Even more shocking to
the Nicaraguan ear is the uninhibited use of comemierda, which Cubans employ as
meaning simply fool or gullible person. Cubans in turn find the free and easy Nicaraguan
use of jodido as a friendly greeting (including by many women) astoundingly vulgar, as
this term in Cuba could only be an insult.

Varieties of Spanish in The United States - (10. Nicaraguan Spanish in The United States)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Varieties of Spanish in The United States - (10. Nicaraguan Spanish in The United States)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

10

(Caribbean) coast—traditionally speaking West Indian

Sandinista candidate, Daniel Ortega, won a decisive victory. Although international

the formation of revolutionary organizations such as the block-by-block defense

Sandinistas undertook a ﬁve-month nationwide literacy campaign with the aim of

Nicaraguan Spanish in the United States

exodus of the wealthiest elements of Nicaraguan society—some of whom had

middle-class refugees ﬂeeing a leftist revolutionary government, one that further-

against Somoza, some 100,000–200,000 Nicaraguans left the country as

Linguistic Features of Nicaraguan Spanish

Phonetics and Phonology

• Intervocalic /d/ readily disappears in a variety of contexts, especially in the ubiqui-

bajo/baho (a meat dish)

chigüín (small child)

Accommodation to Other U.S. Varieties of Spanish

language. Less frequently, depending on personal circumstances, Nicaraguans in

speech. Nicaraguan adolescents picked up these combinations naturally, both

to have formed clear opinions regarding Nicaraguan Spanish. Among those

In the context of Latin American Spanish, it is unfortunately not uncommon

Scholarship on Nicaraguan Spanish in the United States

Context n## {Phrase-ﬁnal} n#V {Prevocalic}

3. Some basic quantitative data representing a cross-section of Nicaraguan Spanish are

/s/C /s/#C /s/## /s/#V /s/#v

You might also like