7/31/2019 sosio bab 8

1/10

1

Language Change

This sociolinguistic study offers a theoretical framework for understanding

the diffusion of language change. Advanced statistical analysis methods are used

in rigorously testing the supposed norm-enforcement effect of social networks

within a rural community. In this analysis, social factors are considered to operate

simultaneously and variably on the individual, and the individual is considered to

respond variably. Revisions to the social network model are proposed, allowing

the effects of various social factors operating on the process of resistance to

language change to be evaluated simultaneously. Most linguists have maintained

that change in self cannot be observed; all that you can possibly hope to observe

are the consequences of change.

The Traditional View

The traditional view of language change is the only changes that are

important in a language are those that can be demonstrated to have structural

consequences. Consequently, over a period of time a distinction between two

sounds may be lost in a language, as occurred historically in most varieties of

English in the vowels of meet and meat or horse and hoarse. A distinction may be

gained where there was none before, as in a house with an [s] but to house with a

[z], or finally in thin and thing, the [n] and []. In each of these cases a single

phonological unit became two: there was a structural split. So we can find

instances of phonemic coalescence, situations in which a contrast existed at one

time but later was lost, and instances of phonemic split, situations in which there

was no contrast at one time but a contrast developed. Variation is either controlled

by circumstances, e.g. allophonic (as when the p in pin is aspirated but the p in

spin is not), or it is free, i.e. random. Internal change in a language is observed

through its consequences.

A second kind of change in a language is external in nature. This is change

brought about through borrowing. Of these two kinds of change, internal and

7/31/2019 sosio bab 8

2/10

2

external, linguists view the former as being far more important even though it is

the latter that is inclined to come to public attention, as when efforts are made to

purify languages.

The traditional view of language change also favors a family tree account

of change and of the relationships among languages. Linguists tend to reconstruct

the histories of related languages or varieties in such a way that sharp

differentiations are made between those languages or varieties, so that at one point

in time one thing (that is a language itself, or a variety, or even a specific

linguistic item) splits into two or more, or it lost.

In what the writer will call the traditional view of language change, the only

changes that are important in a language are those that can be demonstrated to

have structural consequences. Consequently, over a period of time a distinction

between two sounds may be lost in a language, as occurred historically in most

varieties of English in the vowels ofmeetand meator horse and hoarse. In most

dialects these vowels have fallen together (or coalesced).

So we can find instance ofphonemic coalescence, situations in which a

contrast over-reporting refers to informants claiming to use prestige variant

more often than they are actually observe to use it; underreporting is, of course,

the opposite.

Some Changes in Progress

Various linguists have observed and reported on what they consider to be

changes in progress. In the table 8.4 existed at one time but later was lost, and

instances ofphonemic split, situations in which there was no contrast at one time

but a contrast developed. Such change, of course, is not restricted to phonology.

The morphology and syntax of a language change in the same way. It is possible,

therefore, to write internal histories of languages showing the structural changes

that have occur over periods of time through use of this principles ofcontrast vs

lack of contrast.

7/31/2019 sosio bab 8

3/10

3

A second kind of change in a language is external in nature. This change

brought about through borrowing. The traditional view of language change also

favors a family tree account of change and of the relationships among languages.

A third view of change is that particular changes diffuse throughout a language,

sometime in rather idiosyncratic ways. It is in the last two views of change,

through use of the concepts of wave and diffusion, that they see the

possibilities that the study of variation opens up to us for understanding the

process of change.

Various linguists have observed and reported on what they consider to be

changes in progress. Phonetician, Gimson (1962, pp. 83-5) has observed that in

Received Pronunciation (RP) the first part of the diphthong in a word like home is

tending to become increasingly centralized and the whole diphthong itself

monophthongized. This tendency is seen mostly in the pronunciation of the

younger members of fairly exclusive upper-class and professional social group,

but it can also be observed to be spreading into less exclusive varieties of RP, e.g.

the more general variety favored by the BBC (see also Rosewarne, 1994, for the

development now referred to as Estuary English). Bailey (1973, p. 19) has

pointed out that in the western United States the distinction between the vowels in

such pairs of words as naughty and notty, caught and cot, and Down and Don is

disappearing. In each of the examples just cited the factor of age seems to be

important: younger speakers can be observed to use the language differently from

older speakers.

One study which was able to make use of roughly comparable sets of data

from two periods of time is Labovs study (1963) of certain sound changes inprogress on Marthas Vineyard. The explanation that Labov offers is that the

change is merely an exaggeration of an existing tendency to centralize the first

part of the diphthong. At the time of the survey for the Linguistic Atlas, it

appeared that this centralizing tendency was being eliminated. It was virtually

extinct in (aw) and in only moderate use in (ay). What has happened apparently is

that, instead of eliminating the tendency, residents have exaggerated it to show

their solidarity and their difference from the summer population.

7/31/2019 sosio bab 8

4/10

4

Labov (1981, p. 185) points out that, when found, such behavior is a

characteristic of the second-highest status group in a society. It is found in that

group when its members adopt a formal style, and it is also found when they self-

report their linguistic usage, and respond to subjective reaction tests that require

them to evaluate their own and others linguistic usages.

What is important is that it is the women of a particular social class who seem to

be in the vanguard of change so far as r is concerned in New York City. In this

case, the change seems to be motivated by a desire to be like those who have

higher social prestige. Trudgill found that the distribution of the variants of the

(ng) variable showed that there were very marked differences between the usage

of working-class males and working-class females: males favored the [n] variant

(i.e., pronunciations such as singin rather than singing) much more than did

females. He found similar results with other variables, with woman showing much

stronger preferences for standard forms than men. He suggests that women may

be more status-conscious because they are less secure and have less well

developed social networks than men. Another important factor in this differential

usage is that working-class speech has connotations of masculinity and women

often want to dissociate themselves from it for that reason, preferring types of

speech which are regarded as more refined. Trudgill devoted a considerable part

of his research effort to investigating working-class speech and what he calls the

hidden values associated with non-standard speech which may be particularly

important in explaining the sex differentiation of linguistic variables (p. 183).

A further analysis showed that both middle-class and working-class speakers

produced very much the same levels of under-and over-reporting, so the

phenomenon appears to be sex-linked rather than social-class-linked. Trudgillemphasizes that, though it may be correct that in certain communities middle

aged-class women and the young are in the forefront of change toward the

standard norm, in Norwich, at least, there appears to be considerable number of

young WC working-class men marching resolutely in the other direction (p. 194).

Cheshires (1978) finding in Reading, England, that lower-class boys use more

nonstandard syntax than lower-class girls further supports the thesis that change

may be motivated by a desire for solidarity.

7/31/2019 sosio bab 8

5/10

5

A Spanish community Holmquist (1985) described how women show

preferences for a standard variety of a language rather than a nonstandard one and

for marital partners who speak that standard variety. Woman may be more active

participants than men in some changes, but the situation may be reversed in

others. Although the young are usually in the vanguard of most changes, in some

it is the not-so-young who lead.

The Mechanism of Change

Bright (1960) examined the Brahmin and non-Brahmin caste dialects. His

examination revealed that the Brahmin dialect seems to have undergone

unconscious change, that is, changes in phonology and morphology. He suggested

that the upper-class appear to originate sound change at the phonetic level and

that, in their chase to initiate such phonetic changes, the lower classes bring about

change at the phonemic level, that is, changes which eventually have structural

consequences for the language. This is indeed what happens when the social

distribution of the variants is caste-based rather than class-based.

Labov (1981) has pointed out how difficult it is to get the right kinds of data

on which to base claims about linguistic change in progress and how easy it is to

make either false claims or incorrect predictions, giving several instances of the

latter from Switzerland, Paris, and Philadelphia (pp. 177-8). He stresses the

importance of having good data on which to base claims. Since individual

linguistic usage tends also to vary in fixed ways according to the age of the

individual, such age-grading must also be taken into account because this process

is an independent one. That is, the relationship between diachronic (historical)

matters and synchronic (descriptive) one is a two-way relationship. That is what

Labov calls a dynamic dimension to synchronic structure, so that the past helps

to explain the present and the present helps to explain the past.

Labov (1972b, pp. 178-80) proposes a rather detailed outline of what he considers

to be the best the basic mechanism of sound change. The mechanism has thirteen

stages, and Labov points out that the first eight deal with what he calls change

from below, that is, change from below conscious awareness, whereas the last five

deal with change from above, that is brought about consciously. (p. 204)

7/31/2019 sosio bab 8

6/10

6

All the model is useful in that it tries to deal with certain complex issues in

an elegant way: the issues of both conscious and sub-conscious induced linguistic

change; the place that social class plays in such changes; and such concepts as

indicators, markers, stereotype, and hypercorrection. Change from above is

conscious change. This change is to involve a movement toward standard

linguistic norms. It is actually not initiated within the highest social group in

society. This group is a kind of reference group to groups lower down in the social

scale. Change from below is unconscious and away from existing norms. Many

observers believe that in our society such as ours women are in the vanguard of

the first kind of change and men in the vanguard of the second, because members

of the two sexes have different motives. In this view women are motivated to

conform to, and cooperate with, those who are socially more powerful whereas

men are more inclined to seek solidarity with peers.

Labov viewed (1994, p. 23) that cities have always been at the center of

linguistic innovation. Labov adds that his conclusions are valid only for the

speech of non-blacks in Philadelphia. Blacks do not use this vowel system at all,

preferring instead one usually referred to as the Black English System. He

suggests that the future direction of change in the vowel system in Philadelphia

will depend very much on social changes that are occurring in the city.

Bailey and Maynor (1989) have also proposed that Black English and Standard

English are diverging in the Brazon Valley in Texas with only Black speakers

using constructions like he always be tryin to catch up and resisting the

adoption of post-vocalic r in words like farm.

Butters (1989) argue that there is no evidence to support the divergenceclaim. He points out that the though there may be divergent features there are also

convergent ones. Wolfram (1990) also discusses the idea that these varieties of

English, are diverging and concludes that the evidence is flimsy (p. 131) James

and Lesley Milroy (1992) are two others linguists who are interested in how

change begins. They says that, groups linked internally mainly by relatively weak

ties are susceptible to innovation and add that innovation between groups are

generally transmitted by means of weak rather than strong network ties. They

7/31/2019 sosio bab 8

7/10

7

point out that change begins therefore in the middle of social class hierarchy is

entirely consistent with Labovs finding that innovating groups are located

centrally in the class structure, characterized by him as upper-working or lower-

middle class.

Eckerts findings (1988, 1989, and 1991) what she calls jocks and

burnouts. Life style also seems to be a factor of change. Jocks are either middle-

class students or students with middle-class aspirations, and Burnouts are either

working-class students or students who wish to identify themselves as such. Jocks

tend to be college-bound and white-collar-oriented; burnouts will leave school for

the blue-collar workplace. Jocks willingly participate in the activities of the

schools; burnouts find activities outside school more attractive. Burnouts were

much more active than Jocks in participating in the kinds of vowel shifting that

are occurring in the northern cities of the United States.

What is particularly interesting about such shifts is that they are slow,

unconscious, and systematic, i.e. they have a direction. Much Lobovs work is

concerned with trying to understand these kinds of systematic changes and how

individuals participate in them.

The wave of theory of change and the theory of lexical diffusion are very

much alike. Each attempts to explain how a linguistic change spreads through a

language: the wave theory makes claims about how people are affected by change

whereas lexical diffusion makes claims concerning how a particular change

actually occurs.Labov insists that the best studies of change in progress look for

different kinds of data sources, are very much concerned with assesing the

accuracy of these sources, and are quite cautious in the claims they make. Afterconducting a number of investigations of sound changes in progress, Labov

(1972b, pp. 178-80) proposes a rather detailed outline of what he considers to be

the mechanism of sound change. The mechanism has thirteen stages, and Labov

points out that the first eight deal with what he calls change from below, that is

change from below, that is change from below conscious awareness, whereas the

last five deal with change from about, that is, change brought about consciously.

The thirteen stages are as follows.

7/31/2019 sosio bab 8

8/10

8

1. The sound changes usually originated with a restricted of the speechcommunity, at a time when the separate identity of this group had been

weakenead. The linguistic form which began to shift was often a marker of

regional status with an irregular distribution within the community. At this

stage, the form is an undefined linguistic variable.

2. The changes began as generalizations of the linguistics form to all membersof the subgroup; we may refer to this stage as change from below, that is,

below the level of social awareness. The variable shows no pattern of

stylistic variation in the speech of those who use it, affecting all item in a

given word class. The linguistic variable is an indicator, defined as a

function of group membership.

3. Succeeding generations of speaker within the same subgroup, responding tothe same social pressures, carried the linguistic variable further along the

process of change, beyond the model set by their parents. We may refer to

this stage as hypercorrection from below...

4. To the extent that the values of the original subgroup were adopted by othergroups in the speech community, the sound change with its associated value

of group membership spread to these adopting groups..

5. The limits of the spread of the sound change were limits of the speechcommunity...

6. Being expansion, the linguistic variable became one of the norms whichdefined the speech community, and all members of the speech community

reacted in a uniform manner to its use (without necessarily being aware of

it). The variable is now a marker, and begins to show stylistic variation.

7.

The movement of the linguistic variable within the linguistic system alwaysled to readjustment in the distribution of other elements within phonological

space.

8. The structural readjustments led to further sound which were associatedwith the original change. However, other subgroups which entered the

speech community in the interim adopted the older sound change as a part

of the norms, and treated the newer sound change as stage 1. This recycling

7/31/2019 sosio bab 8

9/10

9

stage appears to be primary source for the continual origination of new

changes..

9. If the group in which the change was not the highest-status group in thespeech community, members of the highest-status group eventually

stigmatized the changed from..

10. This stigmatization initiated change from above, a sporadic and irregularcorrection of the changed form status group towards the models of the

highest status-that is, the prestige model. This prestige model is now the

pattern which speakers hear themselves using.

11. If the prestige model of the highest status group does not correspond to aform used by the other groups in some word class, the other groups will

show a second type of hypercorrection, shifting their careful speech to a

form further form the changed form than the target set by the prestige group.

We may call this stage hypercorrection from above.

12. Under extreme stigmatization, a form may become the overt topic of socialcomment, and may eventually disappear. It is thus a stereotype....

13. If the change originated in the high-status group of the community, itbecame a prestige model for all members of the speech community. The

changed form was then adopted in more careful forms of speech by all other

groups in proportion to their contact with users of the prestige model, and to

a lesser extent, in casual speech.

Whenever the change begins and whatever its causes, it is not an

instantaneous event for the language as a whole. It has to establish itself. A

number of linguists have proposed a theory of change called lexical diffusion.

According to this theory, a sound change spreads gradually through the words in

which the change applies. For example, a change in vowel quality is not

instantaneous, affecting at some specific point in time all words in which that

vowel occurs, as if you went to bed one night with vowel quality A in those words

and got up next morning with vowel quality B. Instead, only some words that

have the vowel will be affected initially, then others, then still others, and so on

until the change is complete.

7/31/2019 sosio bab 8

10/10

10