MILROY 1
1) What is more common in language uniformity or variability?
-According to Milroy, the history of language is a continuous process, so that, a language or a dialect is variable and in a state of change.Only in dead languages like Latin we can find uniformity.
2) What kinds of variability exist?
-There are different kinds of variability: social, geographic, linguistic, dialect, accent,register.etc.
3) How do we decide if a particular group of speakers belong to a particular dialect or language?
-It depends on the common linguistic features they have. We can decide it according to the pronunciation, word choice(vocabulary), syntactic structure used by the speaker, etc. They often belong to the same social group.
4) 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 so, because is more reasonable to study a language in a diachronic way because you could observe the changes over the periods.We can’t measure language as a finite entity. Language is always “changing”, both language and the human being evolution are considered a single element.
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, it is not.Linguistic change is necessary to all the languages.
6) 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?
-Attitudes in a non-professional way could be which you use when you speak with your close friends, or your class mates or everything related to the family environment.Some of non- professional attitudes in the Spanish language could be: Haya/halla ; a/ha ; the wrong usage of the past participle –ado /–ido (cantao, comío);habían instead of había; me dijo de que,etc.
7) Why does Milroy use “scare quotes” around non-standard and errors?
-We use quotations when we want to refer to other people’s words or just in order to emphasize something which it is said in a non-traditional way (for example metaphorically). In this case, Milroy wants to emphasize the usage of the term “non-standard” as “errors” in order to criticise the theory of the structuralists. It is not his real opinion, he is using the irony to express his disagreement.(i´m witing this but it isn´t my opinion)
8) Are non-standard dialects “incorrect, irregular, ungrammatical and deviant.”?
-No,they are not. Non-standard dialects have their own grammar, vocabulary, syntax ,etc, and they are as important as standard ones. Milroy says that 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”.
9) Which of these systems is more irregular? Why?
Myself Yourself Himself Herself Ourselves Themselves
Myself Yourself Hisself Herself Ourselves Theirselves
-The first one is more irregular than the second one because use “himself” and “themselves”. To be more regular it would should be “hisself” and “theirselves” like in the second one. We must emphasize that the irregular system is standard while the regular system is non-standard.
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 decontextualized 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?
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?
-Language must involve norms. Any description of a language needs a full description of writing properly. He ate the pie already is acceptable in American English He has eaten the pie already is correct in England. The first sentence would be acceptable in colloquial speech but not in formal one in other varieties of English like in British English.
12) 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 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.
13) 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?
-Prestige motivation for change differs between groups separated by certain social variables, e.g., ethnicity, status, gender, level of education, age, etc., and how creation and adherence to these rules is used to categorize individuals in social class or socio-economic classes. As the usage of a language varies from place to place ,language usage varies among social classes. Solidarity constrait might mean that society has an effect on the way language changes, including cultural norms, expectations, and context and occurs when speakers decide to maintain their local community norms rather than to incorporate forms that are viewed as “external”.
14) Sound change: post-vocalic /r/ in New York/ The change from long āto ōin some dialects of English.
-British speakers today whose speech is closest to standard British English (called ‘Received Pronunciation’) do not pronounce r after vowel. Postvocalic r was still regularly pronounced in English speech back in Elizabethan times, and it was around that time (l6th century) that the ‘r-less’ pronunciation started spreading across much of England. It did not spread as far as in Ireland and Scotland, which is why we hear the ‘r’ pronunciation from the Irish and the Scots today. Many of the original immigrants to the colonies were from Scotland and Ireland, although at the time of settlement most English speakers were still pronouncing r after vowel too.
American speakers who most commonly drop the r (in what follows we’ll occasionally call this the ‘r-less’ pronunciation) are those from Eastern New England and parts of the South, particularly the coastal area where the old ‘plantation’ culture once existed. It is also part of Black English Vernacular speech. Until recently, dropping the r was part of New York speech as well, though more and more New Yorkers seem to be perceiving it as ‘vulgar’ and avoiding this pronunciation. (The case of New York is especially interesting because of a classic study in sociolinguistics by William Labov showing that the non-rhotic accent is associated with older and middle- to lower-class speakers, and is being replaced by the rhotic accent.)
15) Actuation: Why did /k/ palatalize before certain front vowels? PrsE: cheese, German käse English/Norse doublets shirt/skirt?
-They suggest that the proximity of the velar consonant to a fronts vowel could be, a condition for palatalization, but not always happens, on the other hand, they regarded that in the cases where the change was adopted the social conditions must be favourable, and where it was not adopted also the social conditions prevented the change.Palatalization is not distinctive in the obstruents /k, g,x/, which are systematically soft before front vowels but hard before back ones , in this like “kase” in german and PrsE “cheese”.
16) What is the biological metaphor in language change?
-Biological metaphor is a theory supported by Trench, in what the language has a life, as a man or tree, defended the theory on the independent life of language. Language change develops itself as a human being. Although a language cannot disappear (as we do) it has a life which is enriched with new vocabulary, grammar, etc. In fact, this change, of course, implies a loosing of words as well, words which are useless anymore, or just old-fashioned. So this biological metaphor stands for the development of language as a organism.
17) What is the difference between internal and external histories of a language?
-The history of a language must include, therefore, not only the evolution of the structure of the language but also an account of the external forces (political, economic, social, cultural, spiritual, etc) which have influenced this evolution in the course of time. The internal history of English includes all aspects of the development of the language structure: i.e the evolution of the grammar, phonology (and writing), vocabulary and semantics. The external history of English deals with all non-structural factors which have exerted certain influence on the development of the language. These factors can be of a different nature: Political: invasions, wars, the formation of the states Social: changes in social structure and in social prestige Economic: uprisings, industrialization and all motivated social movements Scientific: new inventions, for example, requiring news terms to refer to them Cultural: events or changes in ideologies: the introduction of printing (Caxton), the Christianization of the country, the Renaissance, etc.
18) Look up Neogrammarians and lexical diffusion. Why are they often found in the same paragraph or chapter?
-Because both deal with the aspect of phonological change in a language. In one hand Neogrammarians defends that sound-change operates in all items without making any type of exceptions at the same time and on the other hand lexical diffusion theory supports that sound-change can occur in a gradual manner.
19) Look up social norm-enforcement, childish errors and slips of the tongue. What have they to do with language change?
-After the idea of social norm-enforcement, they admitted and presented the research in which is introduced both arguments , the primary change (speakers innovation) and secondary change ( linguistic change into grammars of language), in this sense they study the possible causes of change, as children’s language, sex-differences and others, all them involved in language contact. With regards to ‘childish’ errors in language, we can say that children often make mistakes due to their lack of knowledge of possible linguistic irregularities .A slip of the tongue is an error in speaking in which a word is pronounced incorrectly, or in which the speaker says something unintentionally. (Sloppy Spanish=not correct)