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

SALIENCE IN LANGUAGE CHANGE
Table 3 Percentage use of variants of /a8/ (MOUTH), Reading Working Class,
interview style
[RGN] [RF] [RQ] [a QJ ] [æG] [aG]
SED informants ✓
Elderly (2f, 2m) 53.5 38.1 3.3 0 4.1 0.7
Girls age 14 (n=8) 0 2.3 0 8.0 0 90.4
Boys age 14 (n=8) 3.8 3.2 0 5.7 0 87.1
speakers who use both old and new variants actually switch between these
two, with no phonetically intermediate variant. To sum up: both Reading
vowels are undergoing quite rapid change (dramatically so for MOUTH), while
Hull PRICE remains relatively unlevelled, showing little convergence with
southern or even majority northern variants.
Let us now look more closely at these vowels in terms of the
motivating factor of markedness/naturalness. There is no reason to suppose
that any of the variants which are being lost (viz., Reading [RGN]/[RF] for
MOUTH, [OF]/[PNF]/[PF]for PRICE) are less natural than the variants that are
replacing them. On the other hand, the position for Hull PRICE is quite
different. The allophonic distribution vowel was doubtless originally
phonetically motivated, and hence natural, but that motivation has,
presumably, long since been lost. Importantly, its continued existence in fact
represents the maintenance of a complex, or more marked feature. This is a
fact for which we must seek language-external explanations. Elsewhere
(Williams & Kerswill 1999), we argue that this feature’s maintenance is due
to the relative geographical and social isolation of the Hull working-class
speakers, leading to close-knit networks.
Returning to the salience notion, we find that none of the variants is
reflected in orthography, nor is there a phonological contrast at stake
anywhere. However, there are differences with regard to phonetic distance.
Both the Hull PRICE vowel and the Reading MOUTH vowel involve relatively
large differences, with little tendency for intermediate variants. These facts
are certainly reflected in the switching in Reading between the variants of
MOUTH; users of the traditional Reading variant are often aware of it, and
younger users often have their attention drawn to it by non-users, who may
83