Andrew Radford - Linguistics An Introduction [Second Edition]

equivalents in Old English and Modern German

Old English

Modern German

Modern English

ic

helpe

Ich

helfe

I

help

thu

hilpst

Du

hilfst

You (sing.)

help

he/heo

hilpth

Er/Sie

hilft

He/She

helps

we

helpath

Wir

helfen

We

help

ge

helpath

Ihr

helft

You (pl.)

help

hi

helpath

Sie

helfen

They

help

100

90

m

80

or

70

60

50

male

40

female

30

20

% use of the non-standard f

10

0

Sydney, Australia

Wellington, New Zealand

Norwich, England

City

Figure 46 Speaker sex and the use of (ing) in casual speech in three English-speaking cities (based on Horvath 1985, Bell and Holmes 1992 and Trudgill 1974) Over the centuries, then, morphological change in English has largely been in a direction of radical reduction and simplification of inflections to an extent not seen in most other Germanic languages.

The reduction of two former Old English inflections -inde and -inge/-ynge

to Modern Standard English -ing has had a considerable effect on present-day variation in English. In most English-speaking countries, there is social variation in the pronunciation of (ing), some pronouncing it [ɪŋ], which is the standard form, and others [ɪn] or [ən], the widely used non-standard forms. Sociolinguists have found variation in (ing) particularly interesting for a number of reasons.

Firstly, a number of studies from around the English-speaking world have

found that, all else being equal, women use a higher proportion of the standard

[ɪŋ] form than men. Some representative results appear in figure 46.

Secondly, variation in (ing) appears to be fairly stable over the entire speech community of English. In other words, neither form seems to be replacing the other, but there is a pattern of stable variation, with [ɪŋ] being the acrolectal form

Lexical variation and change

235

100

90

mor 80

70

60

50

40

30

20

% use of the non-standard f

10

0

lower working

middle working

upper working

lower middle

middle middle

class

class

class

class

class

Social class

Figure 47a Social class and the use of (ing) in casual speech in Norwich (based on Trudgill 1974)

100

90

m

80

or

70

60

50

40

30

20

% use of non-standard f

10

0

casual speech

formal style

reading a passage reading a list of words

Speech 'style'

Figure 47b Speech style and the use of (ing) among upper working-class

residents of Norwich (based on Trudgill 1974)

(used in higher social classes and in more formal contexts) while [ɪn] or [ən], the basilectal forms, are used among working-class groups and in more informal

contexts. Figures 47a and 47b support this assertion.

Finally, research has shown that people use different proportions of [ɪŋ] and [ɪn] or

[ən] at different stages of their life. A study in Norwich in eastern England, for example, found that young people predominantly used the non-standard [ən] form, but changed their behaviour in middle age to use a greater proportion of the standard form, before reverting to a greater use of the non-standard form again in retirement (see figure 48).

Peter Trudgill, who conducted the Norwich study, has suggested that people

come under the pressure of the standard variety more in their economically active

236

words

Table 21 Changes in the Old English suffixes -inde and -inge/-ynge

Ol d English -inde

Ol d English -inge /-ynge

Changes since Ol d Eng lish

(verba l suffix)

(verba l noun suffix)

reduction of final /e/ to /ə/

-ində

-ιŋə

loss of final /ə/

-ind

-ιŋ

reduction of consonant clusters

-in

-ιŋ

English of about 1400

-in

-ιŋ

100

90

m

80

or

70

60

50

40

30

20

% use of non-standard f

10

0

10–19

20–29

30–39

40–49

50–59

60–69

70+

Age

Figure 48 Changes in the use of (ing) in Norwich across the generations

(based on Trudgill 1988). Adapted and reprinted by kind permission of John Benjamins Publishing Company, Amsterdam/Philadelphia.

years than in their youth or in their retirement, and that this would account for the variation in (ing) use across a person’s lifespan.

Synchronically, (ing) can be regarded as a phonological variable, the alternation of velar and alveolar nasal realisations of the final segment (ng). Historically, however, it must be considered as a morphological variable since [ɪŋ] and

[ɪn] /[ ən] come from two different Old English morphemes and still retain signs of their former grammatical roles within present-day variation. The relevant changes be twe en O ld Eng li sh an d t he E ng li sh o f ab out 1400 a re s et out i n table 21.

By the middle of the fifteenth century, -ing had encroached on - in(d)’s territory as a verbal suffix in the south of England but retained its more restricted role in the north and in parts of East Anglia. In Modern English times, we can see that this geographical variation (- in in the north and -ing in the south) has evolved nation-wide into social and stylistic variation. The former roles of - inde and -inge are, however, still reflected in present-day variation. Research has demonstrated that

[ɪ n] is much more likely to be found in progressives (Madonna is singing again) and verbal complements (I don ’t mind listening to Madonna) than in nominal -ing forms (I don’t like Madonna’s singing ). The -in /-ing alternation, therefore, retains

Lexical variation and change

237

90

80

70

iantar 60

VE v 50

40

30

20

% use of AA

10

0

3rd person present -s deletion

possessive -s deletion

Morphological variable

African Americans with little contact with Whites

African Americans with considerable contact with Whites

Whites with considerable contact with African Americans

Figure 49 Ethnicity, levels of interethnic contact and the use of AAVE morphological features (based on Ash and Myhill 1986). Adapted and reprinted by kind

permission of John Benjamins Publishing Company, Amsterdam/Philadelphia.

morphological importance, as well as being a salient marker of social and stylistic information around the English-speaking world (exercise 7).

Finally in this section, we shall consider the role of social contact on morphological variation. In section 4, we saw how the strength of social networks in the speech community has a considerable effect on the maintenance of local dialect forms and susceptibility to language change. In a study carried out on the speech of the African American and white populations of Philadelphia, Sharon Ash

and John Myhill have found that there is a strong link between ethnicity, social network ties and the use of certain non-standard morphological features. We have already noted that one prominent characteristic of African American Vernacular English (AAVE) is the absence of the suffix -s as a marker of third person singular agreement (see the examples in 216 above). Additionally, possessive -s is not used in this dialect and we find examples such as those in (219):

(219) a.

I met his brother wife

b.

His cat name is Peanut

Ash and Myhill’s research has revealed that there is a strong relationship between the use of these AAVE features and the levels of social contact between whites and African Americans in Philadelphia. Those blacks who have very little contact with whites use the AAVE features most, while those with more contact with the white population use them less frequently. Similarly, those whites who have little contact with the African American community rarely if ever use the AAVE features, while those who have more contact do use these features, albeit rarely (see figure 49).