Variation and Change

What is more common in language uniformity or variability?

Variability is more common in language than uniformity. We find different and correct ways of speaking a same language, what means that not just one is the correct.

What kinds of variability exist?

Social with different registers
Geographical in which we find the different dialects
Chronological, which refers to the time, the different epochs.
Historical

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

We should base on the different kind of varieties of that particular dialect or language. Also the historical, socio-political and economical factors can help us to decide it.

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 affirmation is not reasonable. To study a language, it must be used and it is important the diachronic descriptions which help us to analyse the development of a language over a period of time, and the synchronic ones, which focuses on a particular point of time.

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?

This is not abnormal because languages are in constant evolution and the changes that can be found in a language do not disturb the structure, it is just a way to show how the language adapts to different situations.

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 think we can find an example of non-professional attitudes in Spanish with the colloquial speech. People are normally used to cut words or verbs, fact which is understand as an incorrect way of using Spanish.

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

He shows with those words his disagree.

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

It depends of what is understood as non-standard dialects. From my point of view they can be irregular because there must be differences with the standard language but it does not mean they are incorrect.

Which of these systems is more irregular? Why?

 I think the first system is more irregular as we know the personal pronouns for the third person in singular and plural are his and their but it is the correct use of the  reflexive pronouns that we can find on the grammatical rules. The second system makes our constructions more regular and easy, just using the subject pronouns to form the reflexive pronouns without any irregularity.

We can contrast it with the information found in The American Heritage, Dictionary of the English Language:

Speakers of some vernacular American dialects, particularly in the South, may use the possessive reflexive form hisself instead of himself (as in He cut hisself shaving) and theirselves or theirself for themselves (as in They found theirselves alone). These forms reflect the tendency of speakers of vernacular dialects to regularize irregular patterns found in the corresponding standard variety. In Standard English, the pattern of reflexive pronoun forms shows slightly irregular patterning; all forms but two are composed of the possessive form of the pronoun and –self or –selves, as in myself or ourselves. The exceptions are himself and themselves, which are formed by attaching the suffix –self/–selves to the object forms of he and they rather than their possessive forms. Speakers who use hisself and theirselves are smoothing out the pattern's inconsistencies by applying the same rule to all forms in the set. •A further regularization is the use of –self regardless of number, yielding the forms ourself and theirself. Using a singular form in a plural context may seem imprecise, but the plural meaning of ourself and theirself is made clear by the presence of the plural forms our– and their–. Hisself and theirselves have origins in British English and are still prevalent today in vernacular speech in England.

The American Heritage^® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published

by the Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

  “… 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?

Because, from my point of view, interpretations of written data and decontextualized citation forms are fairer to the grammar rules than the spoken language in context, which can vary depending on speakers and contexts and  it implies a difficult job to base the theories of change on the observations of spoken language. I think, this is the reason why theories of change are based on the interpretations of written date and decontextualized citation forms.

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? 

  The grammar of a language follows rules and norms, but there are possibilities that those norms have exceptions, which are caused by the colloquial variety. We can observe this on the example”He ate the pie already” considered non-standard what means it might be acceptable by the colloquial register. In opposition to the sentence” He has already eaten the pie”, which is considered more formal and correct.

The same fact, we can observe it in many examples into the Spanish language. Sentences as: “He venido del medico hace cinco minutos” which is considered more correct than“Vine del medico hace cinco minutos” because follows grammatical norms.

What is the difference between descriptive and prescriptive grammars?

A prescriptive grammar is one that lays down the rules for English language usage, while a descriptive grammar synthesises rules for English usage from the language that people actually use. A prescriptive grammarian believes that certain forms used are correct and that others, even though they may be used by native speakers, are incorrect. Many prescriptivists feel that modern linguistics, which tends to place emphasis on actual rather than perceived language usage, is responsible for a decline in the standard of language.

Descriptivists look at the way people speak and then try to create rules that account for the language usage, accepting alternative forms that are used regionally and also being open to forms used in speech that traditional grammars would describe as errors.

http://www.usingenglish.com/articles/descriptive-prescriptive-grammar.html

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 refers to the way we view our language and how others speak it. Sometimes it tends to express a superior posture with the speakers due to that some speakers use terms considered not grammatically correct and shows us how we often use language to express our superior social status.
 
By contrast, solidarity constraint requires the speakers to conform to local community norms rather than to norms that are viewed as ‘external’.

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

In some people's speech this 'dropped' r reappears when the word is followed by a vowel, so you sometimes hear nevah but never again. Such speakers occasionally go on to insert an r where it doesn't belong, and say sofa but sofer and chair.

Looked at geographically, 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. Even though there is no officially recognized 'standard' English in the U.S., 'r-speakers' are clearly an overwhelming majority, something you hear reflected in the mass media.

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 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.

http://www.pbs.org/speak/seatosea/americanvarieties/southern/dahling/

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 differentiate the meaning between the word doublets.

What is the biological metaphor in language change?

The biological metaphor is relating to the fact that languages go through generations.

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

Internal histories of a language usually focus on sound-change and morphological change while external histories of a language discuss the speaker-attitudes to a variation.

The history of any language can be divided into external and internal history. The former aspect concerns the political and social developments in the community speaking the language while the latter involves the changes which take place over time within the language itself. Needless to say these two aspects are connected to each other but it is a one-way street: the external history can affect the internal one but not vice versa. For instance the rise of bilingualism between the Scandinavians and the English in the north of the country in the 9th and 10th century had repercussions for the structure of English. However, one cannot say that an internal change such as the Great Vowel Shift in any way influenced external developments in England.
http://www.uni-duisburg-essen.de/SHE/HE_ExternalHistoryIntro.htm

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

They are often found in the same paragraph or chapter because the theory of both aspects is opposed. Milroy explains,with a theory proposed by William Wang in 1969, that  lexical diffusion refers to the fact that all sound changes derive from a variation of a single word or a small group of words that later affects other words with similar characteristics, but don’t necessarily have an effect on all words that they potentially could do.
The Neogrammarian hypothesis states that a given sound change applies to all words with related features simultaneously. Milroy tells us that sound changes have normally been observed to spread gradually through the lexicon (lexical diffusion), and that there is no evidence to support the Neogrammarian assumption.

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

Social norm- enforcement is the sociological term for the behavioral expectations and cues within a society or group. They have been defined as "the rules that a group uses for appropriate and inappropriate values, beliefs, attitudes and behaviors. These rules may be explicit or implicit. Failure to stick to the rules can result in severe punishments, the most feared of which is exclusion from the group. They have also been described as the "customary rules of behavior that coordinate our interactions with others. The social norms indicate the established and approved ways of doing things, of dress, of speech and of appearance. These vary and evolve not only through time but also vary from one age group to another and between social classes and social groups. What is deemed to be acceptable dress, speech or behaviour in one social group may not be accepted in another. Deference to the social norms maintains one's acceptance and popularity within a particular group; ignoring the social norms risks one becoming unacceptable, unpopular or even an outcast from a group.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norm_(sociology)

Childish errors refers to the mistakes children do when the are speaking , and these mistakes can happen by accident do not pronounce some words correctly due to a lack of knowledge.

Slips of the tongue refers to accidental mistakes that people do at talking.