I.  Historical Factors (see previous lecture)

II. Social Factors (see previous lecture)

III. Linguistic Factors--

The other side of explaining dialects is rooted in the structure of language as opposed to the structure of society (see historical and social factors in earlier sections of chapter 2).  People often assume that dialects of a language differ from each other and from the standard in random, illogical, or irrational ways.  However, the evidence from examining actual dialects suggests that there are always principles of language structure that guide how dialects will differ from each other.  Differences are almost always systematic and follow certain orderly principles of language development.  Listed below are some of the major linguistic principles that govern the development and the analysis of dialects.

Language change-- As a starting point we need to understand that all languages are dynamic systems that are constantly in the process of changing.  The language of Shakespeare seems "archaic" to us because the English language has changed dramatically since the Renaissance.  The English language continues to change today; in fact, people several centuries from now will look back on the English we speak as "archaic." The only language not undergoing change is a dead language (like Latin), one without any native speakers.

Under constant pressure to change, some speech communities will adopt a particular change while others will not.  This selective adoption process results in a dialect difference if the adopted form stabilizes as a characteristic of some social group of speakers.

A. External Changes: Some of these changes may originate from contact with other language communities, as structures are borrowed from other languages or dialects.  These are referred to as external changes or changes from outside (see historical and social factors listed on previous handout for a description of these).

B. Internal Changes: Other changes may originate in the system of language itself, as the patterns within the language are adjusted and readjusted because of how the system is organized. In other words, the patterns of the language itself direct change in certain ways. These are referred to as internal changes or changes from within.

Clearly there are interelationships between external and internal changes. Sometimes, external factors can lead to the development of internal changes. However, for the purpose of simplicity we will look at these separately. Keep in mind that these internal changes can affect the grammar, phonology, and lexicon of a language or dialect.

Some examples of internal change are described below:

1. Rule Extension-- Speakers of a language seem to prefer language rules that are general as possible. Therefore, there is always a tendency for language systems to become more generalized in the way their patterns operate.  Thus, a language rule of liminted application may come to apply in more and and more situations and affect broader sets of items. That is, a pattern or rule may expand the linguistic context in which the pattern applies or may extend the class of items affected by the rule. Another way to think of this is in terms of the Generalization or Expansion of language rules.

Example 1-- Rule of negation in SAE states that only one negative marker can be used.  The use of a negative marker is restricted.

                              The dog didn't (did not) like anybody.
                              Nobody was there.

The rule of negation in many vernacular varieties of English states that two or more negative markers can be used.  The use of negative markers is generalized or expanded.

                              The dog didn't like nobody.
                              Nobody wasn't there.
                              I ain't done nothin' to nobody.

So-called double or even triple negatives were quite common in earlier periods of the English language. For example: "There was no many nowhere so vertuous" (Shakespeare); "He taketh nothing to hold of no man ne [nor] of no woman" (Chaucer).  Many current languages also make exclusive use of multiple negative markers to form negative constructions (Spanish and French, for example).

Example 2--  In SAE, deletion of initial [w] when using modal verbs like "will" or "would."  Rule is restricted to these words only.

                              I will go > I'll go
                              I would go > I'd go

In many vernacular varieties of English, this pattern is expanded or generalized, extending the deletion process to other classes of words beginning with [w].

                              They was finished > They's finished
                              You ones [all of you]  come here > You'uns come here
                              Young ones > Young'uns
 

See Wolfram 2.2.1 for additional examples.
 

2. Analogy-- The term analogy is typically used to refer to a similarity or likeness of things that are otherwise different. In the study of language, the notion is extended to refer to existing patterns of a language that are then used as the basis for bringing other forms into conformity with these dominant patterns. Analogical changes that eliminate exceptions are referred to as regularization.

Example 1-- Dominant rule for plural nouns in SAE:

                               Noun + s/es = door/s; class/es; fox/es

At one point (centuries ago) there were over seven different noun classes in English, so that a plural noun like FOXES was spelled/pronounced FOXEN. We see remnants of this noun class in such words as ox/oxen and child/children. But over time, most nouns in the other classes changed their plural ending to conform to the dominant s/es paradigm via analogy.

Speakers of many AE vernaculars regularize these other plurals taking analogy to its logical conclusion. This we get such non-standard plurals as DEERS, OXES, SHEEPS and CHILDS or CHILDRENS.

Example 2-- Most past tense verb forms in English are made by adding an --ed suffix to the verb stem; through analogy, many vernacular varieties of English extend this rule to regularize all verb forms.

                           I knew the woman (SAE).
                           I knowed the woman.

We see a similar example in the distinction between grow/grew and grow/growed. Note that many words in this class have already switched over, such as show/showed.

Another type of linguistic analogy involves LEVELING. In leveling, a group of words that have different forms (depending on their function) are made identical. For example, see the two paradigms for the verb to be in Wolfram, page 41.

3. Transparency Principle-- While language rules are usually moving toward greater simplification or generalization, it is equally important for meaningful distinctions to remain clear as possible. Therefore, simplification is often stopped by the need for distinctions or even repetition that will make clarify or emphasize a specific meaning.

Example1-- See Example 1 under Rule Extension (#1) above. The rules for negation in many AE vernaculars are the product of both rule extension and the transparency principle.

Example 2-- Consider the differences in sound between CAN and CAIN'T in many AE dialects. How does this clarify meaning when compared to SAE words CAN and CAN'T?
 

4. Grammaticalization-- This linguistic factor is very similar to #3 above, since it involves clarification of meaning that often results in non-standard grammatical forms. However, grammaticalization differs from transparency because it creates a new or additional meaning which does not exist in SAE (at least in a simplified way).

Grammaticalization is the process whereby a new meaning becomes linked to a particular grammatical structure. Usually this grammatical structure is non-standard (different from SAE).

Example 1-- The use of double modals in vernacular speech.

Notice how the meaning in these sentences differs:

                        I might go (SAE)
                        I could go (SAE)
                        I might could go (I may be able to go with you, but I'm not really sure)

Example 2-- The counterfactual use of liketa (like to have) in Southern AE

                       It was so cold, I liketa died

Typically you only see this word used in a figurative sense, not as a statement of fact. It is a way of signaling emphasis or intensity while at the same time acknowledging it is not entirely literal.
 

Example 3-- The use of be in certain AE vernaculars

In many AE vernaculars (like African American Vernacular English) be is often used in certain types of sentences to indicate habitual or ongoing actions:

                       He is always coming to school late [all the time]. (SAE)
                       He always be coming to school late. (AAVE)

Compare these to the following:

                       He [is] coming to school late.

The inclusion of be is frequently used to stereotype certain ethnic dialects by including it in a variety of sentence constructions (you hear this on television and in movies all the time), but in reality it only appears in certain situations to communicate habitual action.
 

5. Pronunciation Phenomena -- While the changes in #1-4 above are related to the grammatical structure of a language, similar changes can occur within the sound system of a language. I do not expect you to know all of the ones describe by Wolfram in 2.2.5; however there are a couple that you do need to know.

A. Deletion--Some sounds in a language are more difficult to than others because they involve more complex or intricate movements of the vocal tract. If we grow up hearing (and imitating) these sounds, we may not be aware of how difficult they are. However, whenever we encounter a foreign language, we often struggle to produce certain sounds.

For example, many non-native speakers of English struggle with pronouncing voice and voiceless th (think or these), resulting in pronunciations such as "tink" or "fink" for "think".

We see this process throughout SAE. Consider these:

                                   Knight                           Tempts
                                   Knee          OR              Tests
                                   Gnaw                            Sixths

This even occurs among speakers of certain dialects of AE. Consider the following:

                                   With >> Wif
                                   Bath >> Baf
                                   Nothing >> Nuttin'
                                   Soft > Sof

We see a similar process of simplification in other combination of sounds such as

                                    Kept >> Kep
                                    Help >> Hep

B. Assimilation-- A sound change whereby neighboring sounds become more similar to one another. Some of these have even been accepted as part of SAE.

Example 1-- (see Wolfram) Assimilation of the prefix -in (eg. Inexcusable) so that it becomes

                                    Inregular >> Irregular
                                    Inlogical >> Illogical
                                    Inpossible >> Impossible

This process also accounts for such nonstandard forms as

                                    Business >> Bidness
                                    Wasn't >> Wadn't

C. Insertion-- Another way to eliminate difficult consonant clusters is to break them up by including vowels. Consider these examples:

                                    Athlete >> Athelete
                                    Desks >> Deskes or Desses
                                    Chimney >> Chimley or Chimbley