In a message dated 09/27/1999 1:51:04 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:

> So Levittown and it clones as well as the 1960 "colonial" developments
>  are vernacular?
I would say they are, but I also think the definition becomes a little gray,
because we begin to talk about a group of buildings constructed by a single
builder, as compared to groups of buildings built by different builders.

I usually use the word vernacular when 1) a building doesn't have any
particularly character-defining stylistic features besides age, floorplan,
massing, and basic materials and 2) these elements are used similarly among
other buildings in a region. I use the term most often as a description,
rather than a 'category' , especially when a building exhibits no specific
'style' (i.e. Georgian, Adam, Greek Revival, etc.) but still typifies certain
building characteristics of its period.

>  Sounds like something produced by the great Art History
>  academic machine.
I was intrigued, since I use the word all the time, and feel that I "know"
vernacular when I see it; however, unless I can define it so that other
people can understand the usage, it doesn't really seem all that helpful a
description (hmmm... sounds a lot like the idea of 'earth tones')

Sign me,
Beating a dead horse 'til it's nice and tender