Is the English Language Changing?

[Elipsys]

I have observed many people, including news commentators, that are changing the way some words are pronounced. Important, becomes impor-aant; mountain, becomes mou-annn; Beautiful, becomes buu-ful; forgotten, becomes forga-annn, and even news-casters saying Trevon Mar-ann, etc. Is this regional, bi-coastal, ethnic, or pious self edification? I understand "Ebonics," but feel it lazy, and it isn't just ethnic people doing this. What is happening? Do I need to change? I am not racist....Ax me and I will tell you,...."No!"

[Zachery]

Language, just like EVERY SINGLE CONCEPT IN THE UNIVERSE, is ALWAYS changing.

[first l]

It is a dialectical variance...this is commonplace in all known human languages, and there has been written evidence of this for as long as there have been written languages. It is not until the last 300-400 years (since the introduction of movable type by Gutenberg) that there has been any sort of effort made (at least in the English language) to standardize spelling. This has had the effect, over the centuries, of slowing down significant pronunciation changes, but nothing can stop the process completely. Dialectical differences can be based on geographic regions, ethnic or racial differences, or on socioeconomic status, or often a combination of these influences. In the natural course of history, different regions, different classes, and different ethnicities will rise or fall in their importance, and their speech patterns will similarly become more desirable or less desirable in general society. The more desirable a speech pattern, the more likely it is to be emulated by those for whom it is not a native speech pattern. Just because a particular speech pattern might not be desirable for you, doesn't mean your preferences necessarily reflect those of popular society as a whole.

[tl;dr]

Everything you mention is a common feature of American English. American English has many dialects/sociolects, and that is the way those words are pronounced in them.

What you may have actually noticed is the proliferation of television stations with 24-hour news broadcasting, which means that they may:
(a) lower their standards for the pronunciation, enunciation, diction and delivery of their news casters, because they need many more people than before.

(b) present many more broadcasts/rebroadcasts of local news stations, most of which are not opposed to hiring newscasters with local dialects/pronunciation.

The truth is: many of us have a warped perception of what the "average" American English speaker sounds like, since editing of media often cleaned it up before we ever got to it. However, the modern trend toward "immediate broadcast" of all media means editing is being left by the wayside, and we are getting "unfiltered" language production.

There is also a growing trend for every individual (educated or not) to be placed in the media spotlight, or become a producer of media content (see barely literate twitter and facebook postings).

Welcome to your language, it's a much stranger and more varied place than you might have thought.

[Mark]

short answer: all languages change over time. Some more rapidly than others.

None of the English dialects around today existed in 17th century England. They have all changed with time.

This is linguistic evolution -- well documented and unavoidable, until that line of languages/dialects goes extinct.

2000 years ago, people were speaking Anglo-Saxon in England -- a language much closer to modern German. 3 genders for nouns, different kinds of you, different sounds, different vocabulary. Every generation since then could easily understand the generation before and after it. But now, 2000 years later, we can't understand Anglo-Saxon without studying it as a foreign language. (Note that the Anglo-Saxon word for its language was ENGLISC.)

It is likely, that many of today's dialects will continue to accumulate changes over the next several centuries, eventually resulting in at least a few new languages, unintelligible from each other or from any English dialect around today.

[zirp]

yes, but not in the way you are describing. New words are added to talk about things that didn't exist a few decadeds ago, and it's also changing because demagogues manipulate it. Look at seemingly clear american words like "liberal" and "libertarian" they had completely different meanings a century ago.
Back then, liberals tried to free people from the power(abuse) by government (often kings) and clergy. Libertaires were anti-capitalist leftwing anarchists.

Some people claim that every language always will and has to change, but they are wrong. Aymara hasn't needed to adopt new words for centuries. Latin hasn't done so either, but that's because of a vatican decree