James Milroy: Some new perspectives on sound change: sociolinguistics and the Neogrammarians.

146-160.

Answer the following questions using the book and other sources.

Why does Milroy say that sound change appears to have no “obvious function or rational motivation” (146)?

Because for example, in a change from [e:] to [i:], (as in such items as meet, need…), it is impossible to see any progress or benefit to the language or its speakers- the use of one vowel-sound rather than another is purely arbitrary: there is apparently no profit and no loss, that is, it appears to have “no obvious function or rational motivation”.

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

The basic axiom of the Neogrammarian movement is that sound change is “regular”: sound “laws” have no exceptions. The Neogrammarians were also interested in how “sound change”, in the narrower sense outlined above, is implemented. One important Neogrammarian claim is that regular sound change is phonetically gradual but lexically abrupt. Milroy is against these ideas “I do not think that this is a plausible scenario for sound change. The difference between the Neogrammarians and Milroy is that the first group focus on language as an object, and do not take into consideration the speakers of the said language. In contrast, Milroy focus on the importance of analysing speech and language in social contexts.

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

It is assumed that language change is embedded in a context of language maintenance. The degree to which the change is admitted will depend on the degree of internal cohesion in the community, and change from outside will be admitted to the extent that there are large numbers of “weak ties” with outsiders.

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

Because he says that speech “sounds” do not physically change: what happens is that in the course of time one sound is substituted for another; speakers of a given dialect gradually and variably begin to use sound X in environments where speakers formerly used sound Y.

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

Because Milroy says that sound change is a social phenomenon in that it comes about because speakers in conversation bring about, speakers often have very strong feelings about it, and it is manifested in speaker usage. Such a view is obviously a very long distance away from the Neogrammarian notion that sound change is “blind”.

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

It is a theory that says that sound changes originate in a single word or a small group of words and then spread to other words with a similar phonological make-up, but may not spread to all words in which they potentially could apply.

It is a socially gradual process and abrupt replacement pattern, by which a form changes and the resulting form is markedly different to the original one.

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

It is when a whole “dialect” can die out as another “dialect” replaces it, leaving only a few traces behind it. This is a result of changes in speaker-agreement on the norms of usage in speech communities. For example, Milroy refers to West Midland dialects of Middle English by weakly inflected East Midland dialects.

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

We can recognize different dialects of a language demonstrates that other norms exist apart from the standards ones, and that these norms are observed by speakers and maintained by communities often in opposition to standardizing norms. It is convenient to call these community norms or vernacular norms. These norms manifest themselves at different levels of generality. Some of them, for example, characterize the dialect as a whole and are recognize by outsiders as markers of that dialect. Others, however, are hardly accessible except by quantitative methods and may function within the community as markers of internal social differences, for example, gender-difference.

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

That a change can persist as a variable state for seven or eight centuries without ever going to “completion” in the traditional sense.

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

The distinction between innovation and change leads to an associated distinction – the distinction between speaker innovation, on the one hand, and linguistic change, on the other. The terms innovation and change should reflect a conceptual distinction: an innovation is an act of the speaker, whereas a change is manifested within the language system. It is speakers, and not languages, that innovate. It should also be noted that an innovation, when it occurs, must be unstructured and “irregular” and not describable by quantitative or statistical methods. It may be observable, but when observed, it is not known that it will lead to a change and is probably thought to be an error or defective usage of some kind. It is also quite clear that this distinction between innovation and change has not been sufficiently carefully or consistently observed in historical linguistics, and that many discussions about linguistic change have been in reality about linguistic innovation. It is, however, clear that for a speaker-innovation to become a change, it must be adopted by some community. It must pass from one speaker to others.

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 it is possible to argue that each single event of borrowing into a new speech community is just as much an innovation as the presumed original event in the “original speech community”.

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

It is assumed that the spread of the change is by “borrowing” and implied that the spread therefore does not involve sudden replacement- this is said to be “aside from its spread by borrowing”. In other words, it is possible to argue that each single event of “borrowing” into a new speech community is just as much an innovation as the presumed original event in the “original speech community”.

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

From a sociolinguistic perspective, standard languages are not “normal” languages. They are created by the imposition of political and military power, hence, the sound-patterns in them and the changes that come about in these sound patterns do not come about through blind necessity. Standard languages are carefully constructed in order to appear as if they are discrete linguistic entities- and the ideology of standardization causes people to believe that they are indeed discrete physical entities-whereas dialects and languages that have not been standardized have fuzzy boundaries and are indeterminate.

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

Clean data: which have already been largely normalized. The vernaculars that we actually encounter in the speech community are relatively intractable. The data we encounter is to a greater extent “dirty” data that presents itself as irregular and chaotic progress in understanding linguistic change will largely depend on our ability to cope with these “dirty” data expose the systematic behind them.