LL-L: "Language varieties" LOWLANDS-L, 14.JUL.2000 (02) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

 ======================================================================
 L O W L A N D S - L * 14.JUL.2000 (02) * ISSN 189-5582 * LCSN 96-4226
 Posting Address: <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>
 Web Site: <http://www.geocities.com/sassisch/rhahn/lowlands/>
 User's Manual: <http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/1.8c/userindex.html>
 Archive: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/lowlands-l.html>
 =======================================================================
 A=Afrikaans, Ap=Appalachean, D=Dutch, E=English, F=Frisian, L=Limburgish
 LS=Low Saxon (Low German), S=Scots, Sh=Shetlandic
 =======================================================================

From: Criostoir O Ciardha [paada_please at yahoo.co.uk]
Subject: Local languages

Dear all,

This is a short note concerning some of the phonetics
of my language, Nottingham English. If you recall, I
argued that its phonology was much derived from Norse,
and was sufficiently different from standard English
for many local people to have lost self-esteem as a
result of their appalling treatment at school.

I have had massive difficulty in isolating and
transcribing many of the phonemes, mainly because as a
native speaker it is problematic to notice what is
'transcribable', i.e., peculiar. Similarly, many of
the sounds are so far removed from my own knowledge of
the International Phonetic Alphabet that I don't feel
I would be doing my language justice.

A number of phonemes particular to my variety include
(and this is in no way definitive or exclusive):

1) A unique 'click' /k/ evidenced in final position in
'kick', 'click' 'lick' etc. In informal speech this
phoneme takes on an obvious 'click' value. It is
pronounced almost as a glottal, but with the tongue
tensed and very far back in the mouth, and with a
constriction of air around the sides of the tongue
comparable to the aspirate [l] in Welsh 'Llan' and
'Llwyd'. This phoneme does not occur initially, and
medially it lacks the 'click'.

2) Apparently unique /g/ evidenced in final position
in 'bag', 'mag', 'dog' etc. It resembles a voiced
'gulping' sound, and, as above, this is accentuated in
informal speech. The tongue touches the teeth at the
side, but the phoneme is pronounced in the throat.
Perhaps a development from the 'ghamma' sound, but the
gulping is quite unique, and comic to speakers of
Catalan and Chinese that I know.

3) Excessive semi-vowel glides after all vowels. These
could perhaps be represented as [j:] and [w:], but
they have discernible rising tones in medial and final
positions in monosyllables. In polysyllables these
semi-vowels are often accentuated, whilst in Latinate
words they appear to be conspicuous by their absence.

4) Clipped or 'imploded' vowel sounds. I noticed
yesterday when I went to buy some milk that the
speaker there, when I asked if I should shut the door,
said [li^v vi^t o^pe^n], and the /o/ sound was
particularly striking, closest perhaps to Scottish
English pronunciation of 'coffee'. I had not noticed
this in my own speech, but it is there. Could this be
a development from Norse tailed /o/? The vowels are so
clipped as to be semi-hiatuses; could this be
construed as vowel harmony? I noticed that dentals
following said imploded vowels were articulated with a
'tap' aspiration which was very pronounced - or
rather, more pronounced than is usual.

5) Lingering consonants. This primarily occurs in the
context of imploded vowels, where [o^] is followed by
[n:], [m:] or [l:]. However, it occurs in all final
consonants (excluding /g/ and /k/) at the end of a
sentence or clause. Normal lengthening conventions are
not adequate to show the 'lingering' nature of these
phonemes: the tongue is pushed hard into an /n/
position and tensed to articulate the 'lingering'.
Also causes lenition in the following word so that
'and others' is pronounced [@n: n:@D at z:].

6) Absence of [h]. I suspect this is due to the weight
of semi-vowels. As I have asserted, heavy semi-vowels
at the end of a monosyllable cause lenition in the
following word, so that [aij:] (I) followed by [aen:]
(haven't) becomes [aij: j:aen:].

7) Schwa as an irreducible vowel value. All vowels can
be reduced to schwa (here represented as [@]), the
indeterminate vowel, depending on context. Informal
speech allows [@n:] for 'and' whereas formally or for
emphasis this is pronounced [aen:d]. 'Controversy' is
articulated as [k at n:tr at v@rs'si:]or in Beeston English
[k at nt'r at v@rsi^]. I suspect that the schwa is used
primarily to indicate familiarity and informality. For
example, if one was to use the articulation [@n:
Dae^j] for 'and that' in a context such as an office
or an interview one would be considered flippant and
over-confident.

8) Variety of consonants and vowels for different
situations. I can pronounce [n], [n:], [N] ('tap' /n/)
and a number of other /n/ variations that have
specific contextual functions. I have noticed that [N]
is used instead of standard English [ng], so that
'hunting' is pronounced [@^n:Ti^N] (with [T]
representing 'tap' /t/, not theta).

9) The sure identifier of a local language speaker is
how she or he pronounces what in standard English
should be pronounced [au]. Here this is pronounced as
a very long and apparently unique [ae] sound, that has
a rising tone. Perhaps best represented as /aa/, and I
have tentatively assumed that this may be related to
Danish /a/ with - for want of a better description - a
circle above, as in Arhus, etc.

Well, that's it for now. If something could help with
the classification of any of the above features,
please help. Similarly I would like to know if any of
the above can be traced definitely to Norse, and if
not, to what languages they can be attributed.

And can anyone tell me an easy way of representing
some of the above, and some of the non-standard
phonemes? I'm sure there's a way of doing it on this
computer...

Thanks,

Criostoir.

----------

From: Stefan Israel [stefansfeder at yahoo.com]
Subject: LL-L: "Language varieties" LOWLANDS-L, 13.JUL.2000 (04) [E]

John Tait wrote about my comment on Shetlandic and
sociolinguistics:

Stefan:
> >Many looked-down upon vernacular varieties, such as
> >Cockney, Black English and many other varieties of
> >stigmatized social groups continue to exist or even
> >thrive, despite stigma, despite ample access to
> more
> >mainstream varieties.  These speakers often take
> local
> >pride in their variety, giving it what linguists
> have
> >called 'covert prestige', but many badmouth their
> own
> >vernacular, are ashamed of it-- but won't give it
> up.
>
John:
> The sociolinguistic model is of dubious value in
> analysing the Shetland
> situation, where there is little social
> stratification in any case, and even
> less identification between such stratification as
> does exist and language.

I'm actually not referring to social stratification in
Shetland.  Shetlanders interact with the larger world,
and -there- is the question of social interaction.  We
do not need to focus on social strata either.
investigating social stratification is revealing in
many cases, but obscuring in others, as increasing
numbers of linguists are realizing.
There are far more factors to bear in mind: identity
based on solidarity within an age group, within
members of a club, or a gang or clique, identity based
region or religion, profession, etc.

How do Shetlanders of varying groups (by age,
profession, education, neighborhood, degree of
rootedness in a small or large community etc.)
interact with the larger Anglophone world?
Too broad a question, I know, but it might shed light
on Shetlandic developments.

> It is almost as if, having
> adopted the Labovian model for analysing speech, the
> linguistic establishment
> must force all varieties of language into that
> mould.

That is exactly what often happens (with any fairly
successful theory, really), but you'll find younger
linguists getting beyond Labov and his approach.

> It may be that this very lack of a 'covert prestige'
[of Shetlandic] > factor will hasten its
> decline. As more young people in Lerwick grow up
> speaking standard English,
> the identification between Shetlandic and Shetland
> identity will probably
> become less clear cut; and, there being no social
> reason to continue to speak
> Shetlandic, it may simply be abandoned

We may be closer than it seemed:  what I was saying
was that identity is the leading factor in language
shift  (sometimes vertical social strata are involved,
often it's social groupings that are not defined that
way)--  and voila: Shetlandic identity has weakened,
and Shetlandic is threatened with decline.

We could take the case of Swiss German-- before the
First World War, the dialect was certainly spoken, but
was stigmatized and under pressure.  A command of High
German was used to emphasize group identity (in this
case higher social class).  The two World Wars led all
Swiss to want to distance themselves from Germany, and
all Swiss touted Swiss German as a badge of Swissness,
to demarcate themselves from that other group.  In
both cases we see the role of identity: language
choice helps mark who is in what group, and who isn't.

Stefan Israel
stefansfeder at yahoo.com

==================================END===================================
 You have received this because your account has been subscribed upon
 request. To unsubscribe, please send the command "signoff lowlands-l"
 as message text from the same account to
 <listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org> or sign off at
 <http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html>.
 =======================================================================
 * Please submit contributions to <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>.
 * Contributions will be displayed unedited in digest form.
 * Please display only the relevant parts of quotes in your replies.
 * Commands for automated functions (including "signoff lowlands-l") are
   to be sent to <listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org> or at
   <http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html>.
 * Please use only Plain Text format, not Rich Text (HTML) or any other
   type of format, in your submissions
 =======================================================================