LENGUAGE CHANGE AND VARIATION

1. What is more common in language uniformity or variability?

Variability, because every single person has its own way of speaking.

2. What kinds of variability exist?

I think as many as speakers are in the world! Although we tend to classified the variability in social groups or regions, each person has a difference in the way of speaking. For example, I was working in Cumbria during almost three years, in the Lake Disctrict, which is a very touristic region in the north of England, near the border with Scotland. When i arrived there I couldn't understand a word because of their strong "Cumbrian accent". It took me a few weeks to speak fluently with natives.

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

Sometimes that is very difficult to know because of the variability of language as I said in the previous question, and much more if you don't even know the language well but you have to listen carefully to the speakers and you might know what type of language are listening to.

4. 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?

Saussure who claimed that providing only historical description of languages (as it was done at his time) should not be the only approach to this complex entity. He maintained that crucial information about language can be obtained from its common users, who in most cases do not posses practically any theoretical knowledge about their native tongue and yet are competent speakers. Moreover, as Saussure assumed language use reflects the contemporary structure which should enable synchronic language analysis (language used at a given point in time) in addition to diachronic analysis concerned with the past linguistic forms.

5. 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?

No, is not abnormal at all because language is constantly changing.

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

 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.”

I think that the typical dequeismo or, using the participle, some people finish it with -dao instead of  -dado (enfadao-enfadado), also some people use an s at the end of the third person of the simple past, vistes in stead of viste.

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

Milroy uses scare quotes referring to a terms that he thinks are not appropriate to use.

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

Even though it doesn’t have the institutional support that a standardized dialect has, it has its own vocabulary and an internally consistent grammar and syntax; and it may be spoken using different accents, this doesn’t mean that it is incorrect or inferior.

9. Which of these systems is more irregular? Why?

Because the words are all composed from the possessive forms of the pronouns

10. “… 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 decontexutalized 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?

This was because nearly all the information about the history of English is written. This influenced the way the theories on the history of the language. The tape recorder is a recent invention and so only recently has it been possible to study the spoken language. Now that we have been able to study actual spoken language we have had to question some of the fundamental ideas in diachronic linguistics.

11. 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?

He ate the pie already is the norm in American English. In British English we say He has already eaten the pie. Neither is intrinsically better than the other. There are norms in Spanish and Catalan too, of course. However, this does not mean that non-normative varieties of the language are “worse”.

12. What is the difference between descriptive and prescriptive grammars?

Descriptive grammar: refers to the structure of a language as it is actually used by speakers and writers.

Prescriptive grammar: refers to the structure of a language as certain people think it should be used. Both kinds of grammar are concerned with rules--but in different ways. Specialists in descriptive grammar (called linguists) study the rules or patterns that underlie our use of words, phrases, clauses, and sentences. On the other hand, prescriptive grammarians (such as most editors and teachers) lay out rules about what they believe to be the “correct” or “incorrect” use of language.

http://grammar.about.com/od/basicsentencegrammar/a/grammarintro.htm

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

See "word definitions"

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

Some varieties of language are more prestigious than others. These prestigious varieties can influence less prestigious varieties which usually incorporate some features in order to become more prestigious. For example: the use of postvocalic /r/ in New York. Solidarity constraint requires the speaker to conform to local community norms rather than to norms that are viewed as external. It means that for example in the case of Belfast vernacular, the pronunciation of /ei/ was not motivated by the prestige. Prestige refers to the external norms, while solidarity constraint refers to internal norms (of the community). With the advent of radio and television, many people thought that everyone would adopt a standard accent and grammar. However, in cities like Liverpool and Newcastle there has been no weakening in the use of the local accents. Many people are proud of their accent –it is part of their identity. So prestige factors and solidarity factors are pulling in opposite directions.

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

The post-vocalic /r/ is the norm in American English. New York English, is like RP in that there is no post-vocalic /r/. However, whereas post-vocalic /r/ is prestigious in the USA, no post-vocalic /r/ is the prestigious form in England. Many New Yorkers are adopting post-vocalic /r/ so that their speech will be more prestigious. Long ā changed to ō in southern dialects of British English.

So stān became stōn in the South but not in Scotland, for example.

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

According to Milroy one condition could be that the proximity of the velar consonant to a front vowel may be necessary for the palatalization, but it is not a sufficient condition. He says that social conditions must be favorable, which means we must take into account the activities of speakers in social contexts in addition to the internal structural properties of language.

 17. What is the biological metaphor in language change?

Language is seen as a living organism. This contrasts with those, like Milroy, who stress that it is people, not languages, which bring about change. A language is not a living thing.

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

Internal histories of the language put the emphasis on change within the language whereas external histories of the language put the emphasis on bottowing from foreign languages. I like to keep a balance between the two. There is, for example, a lot of internal influence of Cockney on RP.

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

Because the opponents of the Neogrammarians say that sounds change through lexical diffusion and do not happen throughout the whole language system.

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

Childish errors and slips of the tongue might be causes of innovation and eventually of change. Social norm-enforcement normally makes it less difficult for innovations to take hold.