Why does Milroy say that sound change appears to have no “obvious function or

rational motivation” (146)?

Because sound change is purely arbitrary, it doesn’t seem to have any profit or benefit to the language or its speakers.

What is/are the main difference/s between Milroy’s approach and that of the Neogrammarians (147-148)?

From the Neogrammarians point of view, language is an autonomous organism, a kind of living entity divorced from people, they think that language is not a chaos, that is not arbitrary while Milroy's opinion is completely the opposite, he is a variationist and believes that language has no destiny, it is just a series of accidents in which people don't have any control. There is no internal mechanism for any change, language doesn't evolve autonomously, it is people who change the language. He assumes that speakers have to be included when we define sound change.

According to Milroy, what is language change dependent on? (149?)

Language change is dependent on the extent to which it is admitted by a certain community. There will be less change in those areas where cohesion in the language  is more significant, in an area where people feel more united through language, far example. More change will take place if there are a large number of “weak ties”with other language communities.

So the question is how much a language is maintained and not simply how it changes. Once a change has taken place it then needs to be maintained by social use which maybe resisted or accepted depending on the situation.

Why does Milroy say that sound change actually doesn’t exist (150)?

Sounds don't change, speakers change sounds. Traditionally, linguists did not consider the social factor of sound change within language to be so important.

Sounds are replaced by others sounds by speakers, not by some internal force of language itself, in which the Neogrammarians tend to believe.

Why does Milroy disagree with the Neogrammarians when they say that sound change is “blind” (150)?

Because for Milroy sound change cannot only be explained by looking at language, the final decision depends on society, in disagreement with the Neogrammarians he doesn't believe that sound change is explainable if it is not noticeable. Speakers have to be able to notice the difference to be able to accept or reject it.

What is meant by “lexical diffusion” (151)?

For Milroy sound changes spread gradually, all items of a set don’t change at the same time. We don’t talk of social gradualness, what is described is lexical diffusion.

Every sound in a particular word changes in a particular way. A sound is replaced by another sound, this is the way that it normally happens.

What does dialect displacement mean? Give an example. (152)

One dialect of a particular dialect is displaced by another that is socially dominant at some particular time.

A clear example of dialect displacement could be Valencian in favor of standardized Catalan in the Valencian Community.

What are “community” or “vernacular” norms? What term that we have used in class is similar (152)?

“the fact that we can recognize different dialects of a language demonstrates that other norms exist apart from the standard ones, and that these norms are observed by speakers and maintained by communities often in opposition to standardizing norms” ( Milroy, 1992a: 81-4).

What vernacular means is what is spoken in a natural way, it is a connotation of not been codified and it refers to the whole system and not just referring to vocabulary.

The word used in class to express that has been non-standard.

Community or vernacular norms are variable: they can change in contrast to standard ones, which are invariable.

What does Milroy mean when he says that h-dropping may not ever reach “completion” (153)?

h-dropping may not ever completely dominate spoken English due to the fact hat it has always been thought to show a certain vulgarity and  a  lack of education.

Explain what Milroy means by “speaker innovation” and change in the system. How are they connected (153)?

Milroy talks about speaker-innovation because for him if the replacement of a sound has not been adopted by a community it is not a change in the system: it has a phonetic event but not yet a change till a community takes it.

Why isn’t borrowing from one language to another and the replacement of one sound by another through speaker innovation with a language as radically different as the Neogrammarians posited (154-6)?

Because the replacement of one sound by another through speaker innovation could only be explained as gradual and internal whereas, borrowing could be easily explained for them through historical reasons, far example. So, change through speaker innovation is seen as internal, as fits in with  Neogrammarians general approach to sound change; while borrowing comes from outside and needs further explanation and is, therefore, seen as a different process.

What is necessary for a sound to spread (157)?

It needs to be taken by a community, by more than one speaker. It will be spread as soon as it is assumed by a speech community.

Why does believing in the ideology of standardization lead to believing in “blind necessity” (158)?

Believing in the ideology of standardization means that sound changes occur independently of socially-based human intervention. This would make the tendency towards standardized language seem a kind of “blind necessity” with no socio-political implications involved, whatsoever. Class, age/generation, fashion,  educational institutions, the media, etc. would have no affect on what is considered to be  correct, which Milroy considers to be “absurd”.

What does Milroy mean by “clean” and “dirty” data (158)?

In linguistic terms “clean data” provides the investigator with the normalized standard language whereas “dirty data” refers to it's vernacular form.