anne fabricius roskilde university, denmark iclave #5, copenhagen june 27th, 2009 short vowels in...
TRANSCRIPT
ANNE FABRICIUSROSKILDE UNIVERSITY, DENMARK
ICLAVE #5 , COPENHAGEN JUNE 27TH, 2009
Short vowels in real time: TRAP, STRUT and FOOT in the South of
England
ICLAVE#5, June 2009
2
Introduction
Language change in progress, its social embedding, predictions and complications A real-time diachronic study of some features of modern
RP/changing SSBEAt one level a quantitative study of patterns of variation
implicated in linguistic change in some casesAt another level, a study of the evolution and
devolution/transformation of modern RP as a social practice and its place in the sociolinguistic landscape of the UK
Here: an exemplificatory look at short vowel configurations
ICLAVE#5, June 2009
3
Background
Phonologically and phonetically the RP accent has been well described in the past (native speaker phoneticians e.g. Daniel Jones’ EPD, Gimson & Cruttenden)
Methodological foundations in the structuralist tradition of phonetics, a ‘variety’ perspective
“axiom of categoricity” vs sociolinguistic/variationist school of thought
Historical roots of RP are discussed by Mugglestone (2003): Talking Proper: the rise of accent as social symbol
the traditional ‘non-regional’ accent /as consequence of the insularity of public school boarding life/preparatory schools from age ~7, 8
4
RP: fact and fiction (Ramsaran 1990)
ICLAVE#5, June 2009
‘Native RP’ (s)
Sociolinguistically observable through a defined population in successive generations
Sociologically Socioeconomic background Educational background and
experiences Phonological system(s) with
phonetic variations …
Change is a different phenomenon in each case
All ‘varieties’ have this potential ambiguity
‘Construct RP’ (s)
Systematically related to n-RP but distinct and with its own diachrony
Here the notion of ‘standard’ comes into play, and can change
E.g. on age-graded reactions to t-glottalling
Each generation has its own cutoff points: ‘posh’ Examples of ‘clergy-speak’
A sociolinguistics of perception… (Harrington , Kleber and Reubold 2008, on generational perceptions of /u/-fronting)
5
Modern RP or SSBE?
ICLAVE#5, June 2009
A question of naming practiceWhy ‘Modern RP’ Why ‘SSBE’
What do the titles emphasize and de-emphasizeStandard as a label mixes form and function, Southern
as a result of regional historyModern RP emphasizes a generational sociolinguistic
continuity which however may be illusory in some individual cases Ask what is the ‘breaking point’, empirically, for a
decisive cut with the earlier label… Connotations of ‘RP’ led many to abandon it in the 60’s.
ICLAVE#5, June 2009
6
Empirical background: Social polarities in the UK
Historical social differentiation in UK secondary education: public school - independent school – grammar school - state school (similar to Australia, vs e.g. Denmark, Scandinavia)
Universities, Govt. Education policy and Access schemes
Are educational backgrounds blurred or maintained in a higher education context?
Application rates to e.g. Cambridge are rising (Access)Present Economic situation (?)What are students’ perceptions? (North-South divide,
levelling, do accents ’matter’ to people)
ICLAVE#5, June 2009
7
Theory: sociolinguistics and class
Chambers (1995:37), The “upper class,” consisting of people with inherited wealth and privileges, is so
inconsequential – nonexistent outside Europe and Asia and dwindling rapidly there - that it will not be considered here.
Schneider's (1999:51) review of Chambers "we are less well-informed about [upper-class] speech patterns, attitudes, ... and
although it may be true that for sociolinguistic purposes they are rather irrelevant, that still does not imply non-existence, - for sociolinguistic modelling, a continuum of which one pole just does not exist, would not be very convincing."
Macaulay (2002: 398) points out, social class was to some extent sidelined compared to ethnicity, social networks and gender as important sociolinguistic categories.
(My interviewees MC/UMC rather than aristocratic UC)
ICLAVE#5, June 2009
8
Kroch 1996
Anthony Kroch’s interview-based study of the upper-class of Philadelphia
members of that group were users of the same phonological system as other Philadelphians
E.g. complex phonetic conditioning of features such as Philadelphians short /a/.
What distinguished them in their speech and in the perception of others was a distinctive set of prosodic and lexical behaviours. (c.f. creak in RP)
ICLAVE#5, June 2009
9
Thus...
A research interest in the sociolinguistics of the successor to RP, e.g. speakers’ rates of participation in ongoing England-wide vernacular changes (such as discussed in Foulkes and Docherty 1999)
Is non-regionality breaking down/changing, e.g. in Oxbridge contexts?
What does Higher education contribute to koinéization processes (Bigham 2008)?
Reflects a changing picture of (fluid) relationships between language and socioeconomic privilege and historical processes
Part of the picture of English in the UK in its entirety
ICLAVE#5, June 2009
10
Moreover
When is an accent variety no longer the same, when has it changed beyond recognition (mutually intelligible still across generations or breaking down: through changes below consciousness... yeast/used, toasties/tasties)
Linguistic Variety perspectives and social practice/social constructionist perspective potentially complement each other (having an accent versus doing being a student at Cambridge linguistically)
Thus, linguistic and ethnographic/sociological perspectives can/must potentially intertwine...
Need an updated model of the generational picture also for ’modern RP’ speakers (cf Rampton’s model based on Wells 1982)
ICLAVE#5, June 2009
11
The research questions arising here
To what extent is there still a non-regional accent of English in the UK?
What phonetic characteristics does it maintain from earlier generations?
and to what extent are ongoing UK-wide processes of vernacular change visible here?
Are there changes particular to this variety alone?
What is its relationship to ongoing metaprocesses of standard-formation/devolution/transformation
ICLAVE#5, June 2009
12
Methods
Interview corpus with present author as interviewee40+ interviews collected 1997/199840+ interviews collected 2008At Cambridge UniversityStudents with independent school backgroundsStructured sociolinguistic interviews, 1hr duration
Ongoing project Quantitative studies of phonetic variation to ’map’
the accent variety empirically to an extent not attempted before
ICLAVE#5, June 2009
13
Presuppositions
The forces of linguistic change which act on all varieties of a language will also apply to n-RP
whether internally-motivated endogenous or contact-induced exogenous changes (Trudgill 1999)
Popular or folk-linguistic notions of, and about, correctness or standardness also undergo change, due to historical societal developments,
these changes represent developments in c-RPs (cf Rampton’s ’posh’ performances)
ICLAVE#5, June 2009
14
The unity of varieties...
Varieties emerging from dialectologically-focussed studies Demarcation lines become important; Wells 1982 (RP, near-RP…) However, difficulties of demarcation and definition in late modern
societies are sometimes emphasized (Rampton Language in Late Modernity)
So is the British accent landscape characterized by stability as well as change?
Coupland and Bishop 2007 reporting stability in regional vernacular downgrading
Plus younger speakers’ rejection of standard prestige in highly decontextualised attitudinal rating settings
Report ”disappointingly familiar conservative tendencies”..(2007:84) Alongside findings for younger listeners ” [that] at least to a limited
extent, challenge the inference that there is a consolidated, single ideological set in the evaluation of English accents” (2007:85)
ICLAVE#5, June 2009
15
...contra social practice perspectives
Social practice emerging through ethnographic approach
We could for example ask how do students do being at Cambridge linguistically
speaking differently when they start and when they finish… (Evans and Iverson 2007)
Are there gender distinctions? (are they potential motors of wider change?)
Communities of practice in the Cambridge University landscape: rowing clubs, choirs, subject groups (Classics?), different colleges, could form basis for ethnographic studies
ICLAVE#5, June 2009
16
Data set Analysis
CORPUS FEMALE MALE
1998 4 4
2008 4 4
Lexical items with tone group prominence
PRAAT analysis using standard settings (adjusted with greater Hz range for female voices)
PRAAT script by Tyler Kendall to extract mid-point formant values
900 tokens in all, 8 keywords Hand checked, 4 tokens
discarded
Data: short vowels in reading passage data
FLEECE KIT FOOT
DRESS LOT
TRAP STRUT
START
ICLAVE#5, June 2009
17
Comparisons presented here
Compare reading passage data in year and gender cohorts
For comparison with trends in RP over the course of the twentieth century, see Fabricius 2007a and b.
TRAP-STRUT rotation brought about by (1) trap backing and lowering (2) STRUT raising to central or back of central position
FOOT fronting (and unrounding) towards KITChanges in short vowel system only. Comparisons needed with long vowels e.g. START
ICLAVE#5, June 2009 18
Male speakers, 1998 cohort
ICLAVE#5, June 2009 19
TRAP-STRUT
LOT-FOOT
M3’s interview speech
ICLAVE#5, June 2009 20
Male speakers, 2008 cohort
ICLAVE#5, June 2009 21
Female speakers, 1998 cohort
ICLAVE#5, June 2009 22
Female speakers,2008 cohort
ICLAVE#5, June 2009
23
Tendencies suggested
TRAP/STRUT configuration stableLOT raising vis a vis FOOT
Females 2008 plus 1 male 2008 speakerFOOT remains distinct from KIT, process has
slowed STRUT/ START overlapping needs further
investigation
Importantly, individual differences can be tracked
Unity and diversity...
ICLAVE#5, June 2009
24
Some sound samples
1997-1998 corpus: M2
M32008 corpus:
F1
F4
ICLAVE#5, June 2009
25
Future plans with corpus data
1997-8 and 2008 materials will be transcribed and annotated
Building up a series of inductive quantitative sociolinguistic-oriented studies of stability, variation and change-in-progress
Mapping the current features of Modern RP/SSBE from a dynamic perspective which integrates individual and group differences
ICLAVE#5, June 2009
26
Language change in progress examples
GOAT fronting/merging with FACE GOAT-allophonyMOUTH-PRICE onsetsMonophthongisationT-glottallingR-sandhiVowels in unstressed syllables (weak vowels)L-Vocalisation (variants)
Gender differentiations, lexical effects, style effects in all of the above
ICLAVE#5, June 2009
27
Potential comparison points
BBC Newsreader corpus (Hannisdal)London WC (Kerswill, Torgersen, Fox &
Cheshire)DyViS – 100 male SSBE speakers in
Cambridge (Nolan, McDougall et al)
ICLAVE#5, June 2009
28
Bibliography 1
The Modern RP page www.akira.ruc.dk/~fabri Bigham, D. 2008. Dialect contact and accommodation among emerging adults in a
university setting . Ph.D. Thesis, University of Texas at Austin.Chambers, J.K. 1995. Sociolinguistic Theory. Oxford UK and Cambridge USA: Blackwell.Cruttenden, Alan. 2001. Gimson's Pronunciation of English. 6th edition. Oxford UK: Oxford
University Press.Coupland, Nikolas and Hywel Bishop. 2007. Ideologised values for British accents. Journal
of Sociolinguistics 11, 1: 74-103. Fabricius, Anne. 2007a. Variation and change in the TRAP and STRUT vowels of RP: a real
time comparison of five acoustic data sets. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 37:3: 293-320.
Fabricius, A. 2007b. Vowel Formants and Angle Measurements in Diachronic Sociophonetic Studies: FOOT-fronting in RP. Proceedings of the 16th ICPhS, Saarbrücken, August 2007. www: www.icphs2007.de/.
Fabricius, Anne H. 2002a. RP as sociolinguistic object. Nordic Journal of English Studies, Vol 1, nr 2:355-372.
ICLAVE#5, June 2009
29
Bibliography 2
Fabricius, Anne H. 2002b. Weak vowels in modern RP: an acoustic study of happY-tensing and KIT/schwa shift. Language Variation and Change. Vol 14, nr 2: 211-237.
Fabricius, Anne H. 2002c. Ongoing change in modern RP: evidence for the disappearing stigma of t-glottalling. English Worldwide 23, 1:115-136.
Foulkes, P. and G. J. Docherty. eds. 1999. Urban Voices: Accent Studies in the British Isles. London: Arnold.
Labov, William. 1994. Principles of Linguistic Change volume 1: Internal Factors. Oxford: Blackwell.
Hannisdal, Bente Rebecca . 2007. Variability and change in Received Pronunciation : a study of six phonological variables in the speech of television newsreaders . University of Bergen PhD thesis. http://hdl.handle.net/1956/2335
Harrington, J., F. Kleber and U. Reubold. 2008. Compensation for coarticulation, /u/-fronting, and sound change in standard southern British: An acoustic and perceptual study. JASA 123,5: 2825–2835.
Macaulay, Ronald. 2002. "Extremely interesting, very interesting, or only quite interesting? Adverbs and social class." Journal of Sociolinguistics. 6.3:398-417.
Mugglestone, Lynda. 2003. Talking Proper: the Rise of Accent as Social Symbol. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2nd edition.
Rampton, B. 2006. Language in Late Modernity: Interaction in an urban school. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
ICLAVE#5, June 2009
30
Bibliography 3
Ramsaran, Susan. 1990. RP: fact and fiction. In Ramsaran, Susan, ed. Studies in the Pronunciation of English: A Commemorative Volume in honour of A.C. Gimson. London: Routledge.
Schneider, E. W. (1999). Review of Chambers 1995. Journal of English Linguistics. 27,1. 49-56.
Trudgill, P. 1999. Norwich: endogenous and exogenous linguistic change. In P. Foulkes and G.J. Docherty 1999, 124-140.
Wells, J.C. 1982. Accents of English, 3 volumes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
ICLAVE#5, June 2009
31
Acknowledgements
Department of Culture and Identity, Roskilde University
Department of Linguistics, Cambridge University Francis Nolan, Kirsty McDougall, Toby Hudson
Tyler Kendall, Duke University and North Carolina State University.
ANNE FABRICIUSROSKILDE UNIVERSITY, DENMARK
ICLAVE #5 , COPENHAGEN JUNE 27TH, 2009
Short vowels in real time: TRAP, STRUT and FOOT in the South of
England