What is more common in language uniformity or variability?

The most common is variability, because languages aren’t dead and are attached to changes that the speakers may introduce while using the language.

What kinds of variability exist?

-Diachronic variability, that is, historical variations.

-Synchronic variability, that is, social variations.

-Languages can also vary geographically, that is, the dialects.

-Register, that is, contextually based variety.

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

We can decide it focusing on the different features that each group of speakers use when they use the language. We will decide if their language is the Standard of a dialect depending on the influence history, geography, economics and politics have on us.

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?

This isn’t reasonable because the language can’t be studied separately; it is a whole that can’t be understood by only looking at some parts of it. Therefore, it’s study should be done from a different point of view.

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, because a language will change according with the usage that the speakers make of it. As new things are developed, new words and expressions are needed, as well as other structures may me useless.

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?

Yes, for example the past participle of the verbs “-ado /-ido” in Spanish aren’t usually pronounced, like in “pensadoà pensao” or “comidoà comío”. Also, we could take as an example the wrong placement of the IO and DO pronouns like in the sentence “me se ha caido”.

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

Because he is making a use of the word where he doesn’t intend to mean exactly what that word means, and to give it a bit of an ironical reading.

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

Not in the slightest.

Which of these systems is more irregular? Why?

The most irregular one is the column of the left, because it doesn’t follow the logical pattern of creating these words, which would be the words on the right, though they’re not the Standard ones.

“… 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 econtexutalized 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?

No, it doesn’t involve them, because these norms may be agreed by some speakers but not by others, for example the famous “laismo” of Madrid, where they use the IO pronoun “la” in place of “le” the DO pronoun.

“He ate a pie already” is considered non-standard in British English, while it is well considered in American English.

What is the difference between descriptive and prescriptive grammars?

-         A descriptive grammar looks at the way a language is actually used by its speakers and then attempts to analyse it and formulate rules about the structure. Descriptive grammar does not deal with what is good or bad language use; forms and structures that might not be used by speakers of Standard English would be regarded as valid and included. It is a grammar based on the way a language actually is and not how some think it should be.

-         A prescriptive grammar lays out rules about the structure of a language. Unlike a descriptive grammar it deals with what the grammarian believes to be right and wrong, good or bad language use; not following the rules will generate incorrect language. Both types of grammar have their supporters and their detractors, which in all probability suggests that both have their strengths and weaknesses.

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?

This metaphor refers to the similarities of the changes in the trees that growth makes on them, as well as it is done in language by the changes it acquires when its structures or words change.

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

The internal history focuses on sound-changes and morphological changes, while external history focuses on the speakers’ changes.

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?