LINGUISTIC VARIATION AND CHANGE

• What is more common in language uniformity or variability?

Variability

• What kinds of variability exist?

Geographical, chronological, social and variability depending on the register. In the matter of chronological variability, we can make a distinction between:

-   Synchronic variationà change in a particular period of time.

-   Diachronic variationà looks at the changes from one period to another.

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

If we observe that there are many similarities (such as accent, vocabulary, grammar aspects…) and that they are not accidental, therefore we can conclude saying that they belong to a particular dialect or language.

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

No, we cannot treat the course of a language by drawing lines and marking out limits. When one historical period ends (or so we like to say in order to study history in an easier way), a language cannot change completely because it is uninterrupted and continuous. Yes, some changes in language may depend on what has happened in that period of time (invasions of other countries, a change in the social organisation, standardisation of a language…), but all this will always be linked to a past and to a future. Therefore, is not reasonable to focus on language synchronically.

• 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?

• 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.  1. The attitude with the ideal of a correct form of language, this is, a standard language that never changes and which ignores dialects.

2. The attitude which look at dialects as something totally independent, even considering them as a language.

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

Because for him there’s not such thing as non-standard dialects and he doesn’t perceive linguistic changes as errors.

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

The concept of standard language itself is contradictory and non realistic and so it is saying “non-standard dialects”. Change (i.e a dialect) happens, that’s all, and we cannot say a dialect is correct or incorrect, grammatical or ungrammatical…  The need and desire for standardisation is more related to political power and geographical separation or independence rather than to the language.

Which of these systems is more irregular? Why?

Myself Yourself Himself Herself Ourselves Themselves

Myself Yourself Hisself Herself Ourselves Theirselves

The first column, because when adding the suffix –self or –selves to the possessive adjectives, in the case of the pronouns his and their it changes to an object pronoun.

• “… 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?

• 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?