What is more common in language uniformity or variability?

It is easy to see that variability is a very common aspect of any language. Uniformity is not total in any language because depending on the place, situation, town... every language suffers different changes depending on the speaker.

 

What kinds of variability exist?

Languages are never uniform so we can find many different kinds of variations as for example: geographical variation, social variation, chronological variation, stylistic variation...

 

How do we decide if a particular group of speakers belong to a particular dialect or language?

If we find a group of people which shares the same characteristics in oral and written language we’ll be allowed to say that they belong to a particular dialect or language...

 

Saussure emphasized the importance of synchronic descriptions of languages rather than diachronic. He and is disciples (structuralists) focused on language at different periods as finite entities. Is this reasonable?

I don’t know...

 

The unattested states of language were seen as transitional stages in which the structure of a language was, as it were, disturbed. This made linguistic change look abnormal. Is it abnormal?

If linguistic change were an abnormal state of affairs, this would not be an unreasonable way to look at language: change could then be seen as something that strikes a language from time to time like a disease. We could talk of healthy languages and sick languages. But this is not how things are: no real language state is a perfectly balanced and stable structure, linguistic change is always in progress, and all dialects are transitional dialects.

 

Milroy (1992: 3) says “the equation of uniformity with structuredness or regularity is most evident in popular (non-professional) attitudes to language: one variety –usually a standard language – is considered to be correct and regular, and others –usually ‘non-standard’ dialects – are thought to be incorrect, irregular, ungrammatical and deviant. Furthermore, linguistic changes in progress are commonly perceived as ‘errors’. Thus although everyone knows that language is variable, many people believe that invariance is nonetheless to be desired, and professional scholars of language have not been immune to the consequences of these same beliefs.”

 

Can you think of any example of non-professional attitudes to your own language?

I speak Catalan and personally I can explain some non-professional attitudes to language, like for example: Moatros = Nosaltres, Aubert = Obert, Ordenaor = Ordinador...

 

Why does Milroy use “scare quotes” around non-standard and errors?

Because Milroy is trying to explain something but that explanation doesn’t correspond to his real opinion.

 

Are non-standard dialects “incorrect, irregular, ungrammatical and deviant.”?

Not because even being non-standard dialects they are standardized in its way... They can be structured and regular although they are not the “official” and accepted one.

 

Which of these systems is more irregular? Why?

I guess the second system is more irregular or at least I use to use the first one more... Those words “hisself” and “theirselves” are not very “popular.”

 

Myself

Yourself

Himself

Herself

Ourselves

Themselves

Myself

Yourself

Hisself

Herself

Ourselves

Theirselves

 

“… much of the change generally accepted body of knowledge on which theories of change are based depends on quite narrow interpretations of written data and contextualized citation forms (whether written or spoken), rather than on observation of spoken language in context (situated speech). (Milroy 1992: 5) Why do you think this is so?

 

Any description of a language involves norms? Think of the descriptions of your own language. Why is this so? For example: He ate the pie already is considered to be non-standard in which variety of English and perfectly acceptable in which other?

 

What is the difference between descriptive and prescriptive grammars?

 

Weinreich, Labov and Herzog’s (1968) empirical foundations of language change:

 

Constraints: what changes are possible and what are not

Embedding: how change spreads from a central point through a speech community

Evaluation: social responses to language change (prestige overt and covert attitudes to language, linguistic stereotyping and notions on correctness).

Transition: “the intervening stages which can be observed, or which must be posited, between any two forms of  a language defined for a language community at different times” Weinreich, Labov and Herzog 1968: 101)

Actuation: Why particular changes take place at a particular time.

 

 

What do you think the “prestige motivation for change” and the “solidarity constraint” mean? How are they opposed?

 

Sound change: post-vocalic /r/ in New York/ The change from long āto ōin some dialects of English.

 

Actuation: Why did /k/ palatalize before certain front vowels? PrsE: cheese, German käse English/Norse doublets shirt/skirt?

 

What is the biological metaphor in language change?

 

What is the difference between internal and external histories of a language?

 

 

Look up Neogrammarians and lexical diffusion. Why are they often found in the same paragraph or chapter?

 

Look up social norm-enforcement, childish errors and slips of the tongue. What have they to do with language change?