Reading Working Papers in Linguistics 4 (2000) - The University of ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

P. KERSWILL & A. WILLIAMS Despite some problems, Trudgill’s version of salience is a testable hypothesis which can be measured against new data, and this is done in the research to be reported in the next section. To anticipate our conclusions: there is a strong need to view individual linguistic features more explicitly and carefully in terms of their social embedding and evaluation (to use Labov’s terms). This is because, even over a relatively short period of time, social embedding changes rapidly and in often unpredictable ways. Second, even within one community, embedding and evaluation may not be shared. Third, different linguistic features which are undergoing change vary in their social patterning in ways that may be related to their linguistic level (discourse, grammar or phonology), or sub-level (e.g., vowels or consonants). Differences related to linguistic level are not discussed by Trudgill; as Cheshire suggests, explanations for variation in grammatical, particularly syntactic, features may well be found in pragmatic and interactional factors. However, Trudgill believes factors 4 and 5, degree of phonetic difference and surface contrast (1986:37), to be the at the core of the salience notion, and we shall argue that these remain useful so long as they are seen as interacting with language-external factors. 5. The Dialect Levelling project 5.1 Premises and structure The study reported here 2 set out to investigate dialect levelling across urban centres in England. Its premises were the following: • In areas of high population movement, there may be rapid changes in dialect and accent features, including levelling. The speech community is diffuse • Membership of a close-knit, stable social network with strong local ties leads to linguistic conformity. This inhibits change, including that manifesting as levelling. The speech community is focused 2 Funded by the Economic and Social Research Council of Great Britain (ref. R000236180). See Cheshire 1999; Kerswill & Williams 1997, 1999, forthcoming; Williams & Kerswill 1999; Cheshire, Gillett, Kerswill & Williams 1999. 74
SALIENCE IN LANGUAGE CHANGE • The distance of a town from a metropolis (in this case London) is inversely proportional to the degree to which the town adopts linguistic features from that metropolis (the gravity model: see Trudgill 1983) • Language change is most visible through the comparison of teenage language with that of adults The project investigated teenage speech in three towns, Milton Keynes, a new town lying 70 kms north-west of London and having a highly mobile population (Kerswill & Williams 2000), Reading, a well-established town lying 60 kms west of London, and Hull, a northern city with declining industries. The choice of southern towns (Milton Keynes vs. Reading) enabled us to assess the effect of geographical mobility vs. stability and open vs. close-knit social networks on dialect levelling, while the choice of Hull allowed us to investigate the presence of convergence or divergence between North and South. In order to find evidence of parallel trends across social classes, in each town two broadly defined social groups were investigated, ‘working class’ and ‘middle class’, sampled by targeting schools in different catchment areas. In each town, 32 14-15 year olds were recorded in interviews and group discussions. Additionally, in each town, four elderly working-class residents were recorded. The following variables were quantified: • 4 vowels (those in the lexical sets of PRICE, GOOSE, GOAT and MOUTH 3 ) • 4 consonants (T-glottalling, fronting [?] -> [f], fronting [1 -> [v], H- dropping) • 12 non-standard grammatical (morphological and morphosyntactic) features • the focus marker like 5.2 Results We now look in detail at the geographical and social spread of a number of these variables. In order to investigate the role of salience, we will first try to assess the possible reasons for the difference in their spread in relation to one of the internal factors mentioned in section 3, that of markedness vs. 3 These words are used mnemonically, following Wells (1982). 75
Page 1 and 2:
Reading Working Papers in Linguisti
Page 3:
Reading Working Papers in Linguisti
Page 6 and 7:
K ALJENAIE testing ground. To what
Page 8 and 9:
K ALJENAIE causative form is basica
Page 10 and 11:
K ALJENAIE person diagram, the two
Page 12 and 13:
K ALJENAIE 3.2 Data Analysis The sa
Page 14 and 15:
K ALJENAIE Table 4 Osama’s longit
Page 16 and 17:
K ALJENAIE The asterisk indicates t
Page 18 and 19:
K ALJENAIE which is the transitive
Page 20 and 21:
K ALJENAIE confirming Hyams (1986)
Page 22 and 23:
K ALJENAIE Table 12 Sara’s realiz
Page 24 and 25:
K ALJENAIE Table 15 Number of Infle
Page 26 and 27:
K ALJENAIE masculine forms are cons
Page 28 and 29: K ALJENAIE Motar, A. (1969). Khasai
Page 30 and 31: P. COUTSOUGERA Plural Plural Singul
Page 32 and 33: P. COUTSOUGERA e.g. [peδja'] *[pe
Page 34 and 35: P. COUTSOUGERA Tableau 1: Opacity i
Page 36 and 37: P. COUTSOUGERA As can be seen, in r
Page 38 and 39: P. COUTSOUGERA 6.1 Selection of the
Page 40 and 41: P. COUTSOUGERA /alevr-I-a/ Tableau
Page 42 and 43: P. COUTSOUGERA different areas of t
Page 44 and 45: P. COUTSOUGERA ruled out as it viol
Page 46 and 47: P. COUTSOUGERA operation McCarthy p
Page 48 and 49: P. COUTSOUGERA Tableau 6: Applicati
Page 50 and 51: P. COUTSOUGERA References Anderson,
Page 52 and 53: R. INGHAM cognitive deficits. They
Page 54 and 55: R. INGHAM 2. Subjects and hypothese
Page 56 and 57: R. INGHAM good as their CA matches
Page 58 and 59: R. INGHAM 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30
Page 60 and 61: R. INGHAM Did the [+LD] group perfo
Page 62 and 63: R. INGHAM using the Wilcoxon ranked
Page 64 and 65: R. INGHAM representations but also
Page 66 and 67: R. INGHAM Van der Lely, H., & L. St
Page 68 and 69: P. KERSWILL & A. WILLIAMS some vene
Page 70 and 71: P. KERSWILL & A. WILLIAMS far soone
Page 72 and 73: P. KERSWILL & A. WILLIAMS outside l
Page 74 and 75: P. KERSWILL & A. WILLIAMS 3. Intern
Page 76 and 77: P. KERSWILL & A. WILLIAMS • Varia
Page 80 and 81: P. KERSWILL & A. WILLIAMS naturalne
Page 82 and 83: P. KERSWILL & A. WILLIAMS apparent
Page 84 and 85: P. KERSWILL & A. WILLIAMS Summary f
Page 86 and 87: P. KERSWILL & A. WILLIAMS Table 2 T
Page 88 and 89: P. KERSWILL & A. WILLIAMS regard it
Page 90 and 91: P. KERSWILL & A. WILLIAMS The ‘gr
Page 92 and 93: P. KERSWILL & A. WILLIAMS Table 4 (
Page 94 and 95: P. KERSWILL & A. WILLIAMS sociodemo
Page 96 and 97: P. KERSWILL & A. WILLIAMS Bardovi-H
Page 98 and 99: P. KERSWILL & A. WILLIAMS språkfö
Page 100 and 101: S. KULKARNI in the Indian caste hie
Page 102 and 103: S. KULKARNI ideologies, each emphas
Page 104 and 105: S. KULKARNI century. The Sabha was,
Page 106 and 107: S. KULKARNI The main study includes
Page 108 and 109: S. KULKARNI 4. Quantitative Analyse
Page 110 and 111: S. KULKARNI comparatively lower (in
Page 112 and 113: S. KULKARNI Table 3: Percentage use
Page 114 and 115: S. KULKARNI showing an almost compl
Page 116 and 117: S. KULKARNI 50 mean % std. score 40
Page 118 and 119: S. KULKARNI 100 mean % std. score 9
Page 120 and 121: S. KULKARNI Marathi the kin term /m
Page 122 and 123: S. KULKARNI not by the less-privile
Page 124 and 125: S. KULKARNI Bapuji, B.R. (1994).
Page 126 and 127: S. KULKARNI Sastry, J.V. (1993). Re
Page 128 and 129:
J. MARSHALL 2. Change versus Resist
Page 130 and 131:
J. MARSHALL have become more expose
Page 132 and 133:
J. MARSHALL anthropologists. As man
Page 134 and 135:
J. MARSHALL for data such as Milroy
Page 136 and 137:
J. MARSHALL To some extent, [networ
Page 138 and 139:
J. MARSHALL these close-knit ties a
Page 140 and 141:
J. MARSHALL Life mode 1. Life modes
Page 142 and 143:
J. MARSHALL There are, however, som
Page 144 and 145:
J. MARSHALL can choose a high level
Page 146 and 147:
J. MARSHALL Pedersen therefore, lik
Page 148 and 149:
J. MARSHALL case that these people
Page 150 and 151:
J. MARSHALL 6. Research Question an
Page 152 and 153:
J. MARSHALL ‘are high in frequenc
Page 154 and 155:
J. MARSHALL 6.5. Morphological Vari
Page 156 and 157:
J. MARSHALL 4 Do you work/go to sch
Page 158 and 159:
J. MARSHALL 8) I never eat brose or
Page 160 and 161:
J. MARSHALL mentioned, a ‘real ti
Page 162 and 163:
J. MARSHALL 3. LEXREC. This is an i
Page 164 and 165:
J. MARSHALL which comes nearest to
Page 166 and 167:
J. MARSHALL LIFMODLEXREC 60 50 40 L
Page 168 and 169:
J. MARSHALL the different tests wer
Page 170 and 171:
J. MARSHALL PHOVAR = 21.1 + 0.573 A
Page 172 and 173:
J. MARSHALL There is no significant
Page 174 and 175:
J. MARSHALL 7.6. SOCNET as a Predic
Page 176 and 177:
J. MARSHALL SOCNET is again not sig
Page 178 and 179:
J. MARSHALL integrated sociolinguis
Page 180 and 181:
I. SINKA, M. GARMAN AND C. SCHELLET
Page 182 and 183:
Page 184 and 185:
Page 186 and 187:
Page 188 and 189:
Page 190 and 191:
show all

Reading Working Papers in Linguistics 4 (2000) - The University of ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?