· What is more common in language uniformity or variability?

Variability is a lot more common on languages than uniformity. Milroy says: "at any given time a language is variable" (p.1).

· What kinds of variability exist?

The more common are historical, geographical and social factors.

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

We base this idea on historical, geographical, economical and of course political notions.

· 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?

I don’t think this is reasonable because of the fact that the languages are variable.

· 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?

Linguistic change is not abnormal, it is a way of understanding the evolution of a language. When reading the text, Milroy was talking about healthy and sick languages and he said “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’m not sure if what I’m going to say follows the non-professional attitudes or not; from my point of view an example of non-professional attitude to Spanish would be the relation between Spanish from Spain and Spanish from South America.

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

Milroy uses the scare quotes because the doesn’t agree with what he is saying.

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

I don’t think that non-standard dialects are incorrect, irregular, ungrammatical and deviant as far as it has a set of grammatical rules.

· Which of these systems is more irregular? Why?

Myself Yourself Himself Herself Ourselves Themselves

Myself Yourself Hisself Herself Ourselves Theirselves

If we focus on the way it is structurated, the second one is more regular, it is based on the structured of personal pronom + self/selves. So hisself and theirselves would be correct. Moreover, if we follow the grammar, the first one is grammatically regular and so, the second one irregular.

· “… 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?

I think this works on the spoken language in context. If we listen to people talking, we would noticed that people don’t follow grammatical rules and most of them have their own idiolect.

· 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?

According to Milroy “ ‘ for most speakers of (British) English’ He ate the pie already is ‘barely acceptable’, whereas He has eaten the pie already is ‘fine’ ”. According with him this would be correct for  the English and Wales, but more “dubiously” for  other speakers.

· What is the difference between descriptive and prescriptive grammars?

Descriptive Grammar:

According to this web page(www.usingenglish.com/glossary/descriptive-grammar.html) :

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?

The prestige motivation for change refers to the way in which we view our language and how others speak it also shows us how we often use language to express our superior social status.

the solidarity constraint could mean the way in which we use language to feel on par with our peers.

I could say that bouth are opposed to each other in the fact that the first one indicates a higher social status whereas the second one follows the idea of fitting in socially.

· Sound change: post-vocalic /r/ in New York. The change from long ā to ō in some dialects of English.

Most Americans use to have a rothic accent, so the post-vocalic /r/ accent in New York is based on the they think that having a rothic accent is vulgar so they tend to avoid the pronuntiation.

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

The place and degree of palatization varied in order to make differences on the meaning between the word doublets.

· What is the biological metaphor in language change?

The biological metaphor in language change can be related to the fact that languages are passed from one generation to the next.

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

Internally motivated change is the fact that a language can be assigned to a structural requirement; or if it does not, in that case we are speaking about externally motivated change.

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

The terms are often found in the same paragraph because the theory of lexical diffusion is opposed to the Neogrammarian hypothesis.

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

Back