What is more common
in language uniformity or variability?
In language is more common variability because in
languages are always changes.
What kinds of
variability exist?
There are 3 kinds of variability:
-register: depending on the context I´ll be.
-dialect: depends on the geographical variability.
-social classes.
How do we decide if a
particular group of speakers belong to a particular dialect or language?
We can identify speakers in a particular dialect or
language because of their pronunciation.
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?
It can be unreasonable because a language is variable-is
always changing- so we should study a diachronic linguistic.
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 changes are not abnormal because a language
is always changing and in progress to adapt to new 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?
A non-professional attitude could be when people talk
about a language without having a deep knowledge of that language.
Why does Milroy use
“scare quotes” around non-standard and
errors?
Milroy use “scare quotes” when he writes something but
these aren´t his ideas.
Are non-standard dialects “incorrect,
irregular, ungrammatical and deviant.”?
It can be said that they are incorrect because a
non-standard dialect doesn´t follow the standard rules.
Which of these
systems is more irregular? Why?
|
Myself Yourself Himself Herself Ourselves Themselves |
Myself Yourself Hisself Herself Ourselves Theirselves |
The first system is more irregular because follows the
possessive form, and also we can say that this system is the standard. On the
other hand, the more regular is the second system or non- standard.
“… 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?
All of us know that all languages have norms or rules,
but these norms not always are followed. For example we are used to omit them
when we are speaking in a colloquial manner.
In the phrase “He ate the pie already” we can say that in a formal context
it is incorrect because we have to say: “He has already eaten the pie” but on
the other hand it can be correct in a colloquial manner.
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 analyze 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.
http://www.usingenglish.com/glossary/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?
The prestige motivation for change is the way we refer
to our view of our language and also hw other people speak it. In contrast,
solidarity constrait,is the way we use the language to feel equality to our
mates.
Sound change: post-vocalic /r/ in
Some people who speak English, pronounce a word that
contain a vowel followed by an “r”, like they write this word, but on the other
hand, others speakers don´t pronounce this “r”.
Actuation: Why did
/k/ palatalize before certain front vowels? PrsE: cheese, German käse English/Norse
doublets shirt/skirt?
The phoneme /k/ palatalizes before certain front
vowels to differentiate the meanings of doublets, which are words that are very
similar in their shape.
What is the
biological metaphor in language change?
What is the
difference between internal and external histories of a language?
Internal history of a language refers to the historical
development of its linguistic forms (phonology, morphology, syntax, and lexicon)
and semantics.
External history of a language refers to the social and
geopolitical history of the language: migrations, conquests, language contact,
and uses of the language in trade, education, literature, law, liturgy, mass
media, etc.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_history
Look up Neogrammarians and lexical diffusion. Why are they often found in the same paragraph
or chapter?
The Neogrammarians (also Young Grammarians,
German Junggrammatiker) were a German school of linguists, originally at
the
In historical linguistics, lexical diffusion is
both a phenomenon and a theory. The phenomenon is that by which a phoneme is
modified in a subset of the lexicon, and spreads gradually to other lexical
items. For example, in English, /uː/
has changed to /ʊ/
in good and hood but not in food; some dialects have it in
hoof and roof but others do not; in flood and blood
it happened early enough that the words were affected by the change of /ʊ/ to /ʌ/, which
is now no longer productive.
The related theory, proposed by William Wang in 1969 is
that all sound changes originate in a single word or a small group of words and
then spread to other words with a similar phonological make-up, but may not
spread to all words in which they potentially could apply. The theory of
lexical diffusion stands in contrast to the Neogrammarian hypothesis that a
given sound change applies simultaneously to all words in which its context is
found.
William Labov, in Principles of Linguistic Change,
takes the position that there are two types of sound changes: regular sound
change (respecting the Neogrammarian hypothesis) and lexical diffusion. Labov
lists a typology, according to which certain phenomena are typically or
exclusively regular (example, vowel quality changes), while others (example,
metathesis, or vowel shortening) tend to follow a lexical diffusion pattern.
Paul Kiparsky, in the Handbook of Phonology (Goldsmith
editor), argues that under a proper definition of analogy as optimization,
lexical diffusion is not a type of sound change. Instead, Kiparsky claims it is
similar to leveling, in that it is a non-proportional type of analogy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lexical_diffusion
Both, Neogrammarians and lexical diffusion appear in the same paragraph
because they defend different theories or point of view.
Look up social norm-enforcement, childish errors and slips of the tongue. What have they to
do with language change?
A Social norm 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.
Slips of the tongue are errors
in speaking in which a word is pronounced incorrectly, or in which the speaker
says something unintentionally.
Childish errors refer to some mistakes that are made when
there is a lack of knowledge.