Andrew Radford - Linguistics An Introduction [Second Edition]

conform to the expected neat and regular patterns. Instead, they found instances of what has come to be known as lexical diffusion. Taking its name from such instances, the lexical diffusion hypothesis also depends on two principles, which are directly opposed to the principles of the Neogrammarians. This hypothesis maintains that (a) rather than being phonetically gradual, sound changes are

Sound change

69

Table 10 [ɑː] and [æ] in Standard British English (RP)

following phonetic

environment

RP [ɑː]

RP [æ]

_f#

laugh, staff, half

gaffe, faff, naff

_fC

craft, after, shaft, daft

faffed

_θ

path, bath

math(s), Cathie

_st

last, past, nasty

enthusiast, aster

_sp

clasp, grasp

asp

_sk

ask, flask, basket

gasket, mascot

_sl

castle

tassel, hassle

_ns

dance, chance, France

romance, cancer, fancy

_nt

aunt, grant, slant

rant, ant, canter

_n(t)ʃ

branch, blanch

mansion, expansion

_mpl

example, sample

ample, trample

_nd

demand, remand

stand, grand, panda

(# indicates a word boundary and C any consonant in the top two

entries of the left hand column in this table; the crucial vowel is in bold

throughout)

phonetically discrete, ‘jumping’ from the old sound to the new one without

passing through any intermediate phonetic stages; and (b) rather than the whole lexicon undergoing the sound change at the same time, individual words change from the old form to the new one in a manner which is not phonetically predictable in a neat way.

One often-cited example of lexical diffusion in English is a sound split which took place in southern British English and is sometimes known as the TRAP–

BATH split. In the latter part of the seventeenth century, the [æ] in some but not all words which contained it began to lengthen, and then move back, ultimately to [ɑː]. Currently, in Standard British English we have the pattern in table 10

(remember that RP is Received Pronunciation, a rather conservative variety of British English):

Notice that the change charted in table 10 is not altogether phonetically regular.

There are some tendencies: most words with following /f/ have undergone the

change – there are only a few rarely occurring exceptions. Overall, however, from a phonetic perspective, we have a picture of a rather messy and irregular change.

Since it has not taken place in a phonetically regular way but has seen individual words change independently of any precise phonetic conditioning, it provides an example of lexical diffusion (exercise 2).

The change from [æ] to [ɑː] appears to be most advanced in Standard British

English and other southern British English dialects but has most notably not taken place in northern England. Between the north and the south we have a mixed

picture, and we can search for more evidence of the lexical nature of the shift by

70

sounds

looking at a dialect which has not yet advanced quite as far as Standard British English in the reallocation of words from [æ] to [ɑː]. Such a dialect is that of the small urban centre of Wisbech, a town located between those areas of England where the shift has or has not taken place, that is, roughly the south and the north.

There are two findings about the Wisbech dialect that are notable here. Firstly, younger residents of the town are more likely to have acquired or almost acquired the Standard British English system than the older ones – a good, though not totally reliable indication that change is still under way. Secondly, there does not seem to be a ‘common route’ through the change that all speakers in the community follow. In other words, while some speakers will have, for example, [læst],

[plænts] and [kæsl], but [ɡlɑːsəz] and [pɑːθ], others, with very similar social backgrounds, will have [ɡlæsəz] and [plænt], but [lɑːst], [kɑːsl] and [pɑːθ].

Research by William Labov comparing examples of regular sound change with

lexical diffusion suggests that regular sound change is most common in vowel shifts (fronting, raising, backing, etc.) and lexical diffusion most widespread in cases of vowel lengthening (such as the TRAP–BATH split) and shortening. It appears to be the case, then, that rather than one of our hypotheses being the universally correct one, each seems to apply to different sorts of change (exercise 3).

Suprasegmental change

As well as affecting vowels and consonants, change may also occur

among suprasegmental phenomena such as stress and intonation. An example of

such a suprasegmental change is the shifting of stress in disyllabic words from the second to the first syllable. Particularly interesting are some noun–verb pairs in which the verb is becoming indistinguishable from the noun because of this process. It will be recalled from section 2 (pp. 41–2) that the standard pattern in Modern English is for disyllabic verbs to be stressed on the second syllable, whereas corresponding nouns are stressed on the first syllable. Thus, we have such pairs as (44) and (45): (44) a.

They won the [΄kɒntɛst] easily (noun)

b.

She wanted to [kən΄tɛst] the case in court (verb)

(45) a.

She hired an [΄ɛskɔːt] (noun)

b.

The bouncer needed to [əs΄kɔːt] the drunkard from the club (verb)

An exception to this pattern is provided by address in most varieties of British English, which is stressed on its final syllable, irrespective of whether it is a noun or a verb:

(46) a.

Give me your [əd΄rɛs] (UK, noun)

b.

She demanded the right to [əd΄rɛs] the audience (UK, verb)

Now, at the beginning of the seventeenth century, many words which could

function as either nouns or verbs behaved like address. So, for example, increase,

Sound change

71

protest and record carried stress on their final syllables even when they functioned as nouns. We thus see that there has been a process of shifting stress from the final to the initial syllable in such words when they are used as nouns, a process which has not (yet) taken place in the case of address in British English.

Interestingly, address has undergone this stress shift in American English:

(47) a.

Give me your [΄ædrɛs] (USA, noun)

b.

She demanded the right to [əd΄rɛs] the audience (USA, verb)

Furthermore, there is evidence that the stress shift is extending to the verbal use of some words in varieties of British English, as illustrated by the examples in (48)

and (49):

(48) a.

There was a steep [΄ɪŋkriːs] in inflation last month (noun)

b.

The government was forced to [΄ɪŋkriːs]/[ɪŋ΄kriːs] interest rates yesterday

(verb)

(49) a.

Bob’s [΄tɹænsfɜː] to the personnel department was proving difficult (noun)

b.

She went to the bank to [΄tɹænsfɜː]/[tɹæns΄fɜː] some money (verb)

What we have, therefore, is a situation where some 400 years ago there was generally no stress-based distinction between our pairs of nouns and verbs. Such a distinction has been introduced in the intervening period, with address exceptionally maintaining its original properties in British English. And now, under a general tendency for stress to shift forward from the final syllable, the distinction is beginning to be lost again, even though the pronunciations of both nouns and verbs are different to what they were 400 years ago. The word envy offers a final perspective on this process. In 1600, it already exhibited the ‘modern’ stress-based contrast between its uses as a noun and a verb. However, stress-shift has applied to the verb in the intervening period with the result that today we have only the single pronunciation [΄ɛnvi]. The examples in (48) and (49) suggest that increase and transfer are embarking on the route which envy has already completed.