However, from a linguistic perspective, scat singing is far from random. It is a highly sophisticated form of non-referential communication. It possesses a phonology, a syntax, and a distinct prosody. Scat singing is the art of stripping language of its semantic meaning (definitions) while retaining its structural beauty to imitate the timbre and articulation of musical instruments.
When a jazz vocalist scats, they aren’t just making noise; they are engaging in a complex act of instrumental mimicry using the raw materials of human speech. Let’s dive into the grammar of the groove and examine the linguistics of scat.
In linguistics, a phoneme is the smallest unit of sound in speech, like the /b/ in “bat” or the /k/ in “cat.” We combine these to form words that carry meaning. In scat, singers curate specific phonemes not for their dictionary definitions, but for their percussive and tonal qualities.
Consider the anatomy of a trumpet. It produces sound through the buzzing of lips and the attack of noteg. When Louis Armstrong—the father of the improvised solo—scatted, he was essentially translating the mechanics of his trumpet playing into his vocal tract.
By consciously selecting these phonemes, the singer creates a “sonic vocabulary.” When Dizzy Gillespie sang, distinct from Armstrong, he often used sharper, angular phonemes (like “Ool-ya-koo”) that mirrored the complex, rapid-fire nature of the Bebop sub-genre.
If phonemes are the words of scat, rhythm is the syntax. In spoken language, syntax governs the arrangement of words to create coherent sentences. In jazz, musical phrasing governs the arrangement of sounds to create coherent melodies.
Linguists often study prosody—the rhythm, stress, and intonation of speech. Scat singing is essentially prosody in its purest form, unburdened by vocabulary. A scat singer must adhere to the “grammar” of the underlying musical structure, typically the standard jazz chord progressions (like the II-V-I).
Just as languages have stress-timed or syllable-timed rhythms (comparing English to French, for example), jazz has a specific rhythmic dialect known as “swing.”
In standard English, we might place equal stress on syllables in a robotic fashion. But in the dialect of scat, the singer utilizes the schwa sound (the neutral ‘uh’ sound, represented as /ə/) to “ghost” certain notes, making them barely audible, while accenting others. A phrase written as “Doo-ba-doo-ba” is rarely sung with four equal stresses. It is usually syncopated: “Doo-BA-doo-BA.”
This mimics the tongue articulations used by horn players. Jazz educators actually use “scat syllables” to teach instrumentalists how to articulate. They might tell a saxophone player, “Don’t play that as ta-ta-ta; play it as doo-dat-da.” Here, the linguistics of the mouth instructs the mechanics of the instrument.
In linguistics, an idiolect is the unique way an individual uses language—their personal vocabulary, grammar habits, and pronunciation. In jazz, every master scatter has a distinct musical idiolect determined by the instrument they are emulating.
Armstrong’s scat was granular and guttural. He often utilized a “New Orleans” dialect of scat, heavily reliant on the “Ah” and “Oh” vowels, punctuated by hard “D” sounds. This mirrored the broad, brassy, declarative nature of early jazz trumpet.
Ella Fitzgerald is perhaps the most linguistically advanced scatter in history. Her idiolect was vast. She mimicked not just one instrument, but the entire band. She would use rapid-fire syllables to imitate a saxophone solo, then switch to quoting actual lyrics from other songs, then dissolve back into nonsense syllables.
Ella frequently used the syllable “Dwe” or “Dl” (as in “Dwe-ya-dwe-ya”), a complex cluster that allowed her to navigate rapid chord changes with the agility of a virtuoso saxophonist like Charlie Parker.
Vaughan had an operatic range and often treated her voice like a bowed string instrument. Her scat syntax was less about the rhythmic “attack” (the plosives) and more about the vowel shapes—morphing “Ooo” into “Ah” into “Ee”—mimicking the vibrato and tonal shifts of a cello.
Is scat singing unique to American Jazz? Not entirely. From a linguistic anthropology standpoint, using nonsense syllables to transmit musical information is a global human phenomenon.
This suggests that there is a universal link between the human articulators (tongue, teeth, lips) and musical rhythm. We are hardwired to translate rhythm into speech sounds. Scat is simply the African-American vernacular iteration of this universal trait, evolved through the complex harmonic structures of Western music.
Finally, we must ask: If scat has no words, does it have meaning? In semantics, we look for definitions. But in pragmatics (the study of how context contributes to meaning), scat is incredibly rich.
When Louis Armstrong dropped his lyric sheet while recording “Heebie Jeebies” in 1926 and allegedly began scatting to save the take, he conveyed the joy, spontaneity, and humor of the moment perfectly without a single dictionary word. Scat communicates affect—pure emotion and kinetic energy.
The next time you hear a jazz singer launch into a “Ski-ba-bop-ba-dop-bop”, don’t listen for words. Listen to the phonetics. Hear the plosive mimicry of the drums, the fricative hiss of the cymbals, and the syntax of the swing. They are speaking a language fluently; it just happens to be a language where the definitions have been replaced by the groove.
Far from being a sign of poor education, Appalachian English is a complex, rule-governed dialect…
Discover the linguistics behind Thaana, the unique writing system of the Maldives, where the alphabet…
In the early 20th century, Ludwig Sütterlin designed a unique handwriting script that became the…
While stuttering is widely recognized, Cluttering is the "orphan" of speech disorders, characterized by rapid…
Is the word "cat" purely random, or does the sound itself carry the essence of…
Think of verbs like atoms in a chemistry lab: just as atoms bond with a…
This website uses cookies.