DOCSLIB.ORG

The Vocalization of Semivowels in Medieval English a Quantitative Study

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Vocalization of Semivowels in Medieval English a Quantitative Study Sprache, Literatur, Kommunikation – Geschichte und Gegenwart 8 Patrick Maiwald The Vocalization of Semivowels in Medieval English A Quantitative Study Gießener Elektronische Bibliothek 2017 Maiwald – The Vocalization of Semivowels in Medieval English Sprache, Literatur, Kommunikation – Geschichte und Gegenwart / Nr. 8 The Vocalization of Semivowels in Medieval English A Quantitative Study Patrick Maiwald Gießen Gießener Elektronische Bibliothek 2017 _______________________________________________________ Sprache, Literatur, Kommunikation – Geschichte und Gegenwart / Nr. 8 Hg. von Thomas Gloning _______________________________________________________ Schlagwörter: Englische Sprachgeschichte; Mittelenglisch; Altenglisch; Lautwandel; Vokalisierung; Halbvokale; Korpuslinguistik ISBN: 978-3-944682-14-3 http://geb.uni-giessen.de/geb/volltexte/2017/11938/ urn:nbn:de:hebis:26-opus-119386 Zugleich: Dissertation der JLU Gießen; Tag der Disputation: 12.02.2016. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/BY-NC-ND/3.0/de Diese Veröffentlichung wird unter der Creative Commons Lizenz BY-NC-ND 3.0 (Namensnennung, nur nicht-kommerzielle Nutzung, keine Bearbeitung) publiziert. Table of Contents List of Figures ........................................................................................................ ix List of Tables ......................................................................................................... xv Acknowledgements .............................................................................................. ixx Abbreviations and symbols .................................................................................. xxi 1. Introduction ................................................................................................. 1 1.1 The topic ................................................................................................ 1 1.2 The approach ......................................................................................... 4 1.3 The structure of this study ..................................................................... 6 2. Theoretical foundations .............................................................................. 9 2.1 Problems relating to corpus-based historical phonology ...................... 9 2.1.1 Synchronic vs. diachronic linguistics ......................................... 9 2.1.2 Clashing theories within diachronic linguistics ........................ 13 2.1.3 Paradigmatic and syntagmatic changes .................................... 14 2.1.4 The notation of speech sounds ................................................. 17 2.1.5 The relationship between spoken and written language ........... 21 2.2 Problems relating to the early Middle English period ........................ 27 2.2.1 Periodization ............................................................................. 28 2.2.2 Textual evidence ....................................................................... 29 2.2.3 Speech and writing in medieval English .................................. 30 2.2.4 The question of a previous standard orthography .................... 34 2.2.5 The absence of a contemporary standard orthography ............. 36 2.2.6 Local spelling systems .............................................................. 40 2.2.7 The notation of spellings .......................................................... 43 2.3 Problems relating to semivowels and vocalization ............................. 45 2.3.1 Discrete terms: Consonants, vowels, and semivowels ............. 46 2.3.2 Continuous terms: Sonority, strength, and lenition .................. 50 2.3.3 Semivowel vocalization ............................................................ 58 2.3.3.1 Semivowel vocalization as sonority increase and lenition ........................................................................ 58 2.3.3.2 Semivowel vocalization as nuclearization ................. 58 2.3.3.3 Semivowel vocalization as a source of new diphthongs .................................................................. 61 2.4 The relevant sounds and their development ........................................ 64 2.4.1 The palatal semivowel [j] ........................................................ 65 2.4.1.1 General facts ............................................................... 65 2.4.1.2 [j] in the history of English ........................................ 68 2.4.1.3 Accounts of [j] vocalization in medieval English ..... 69 2.4.2 The labial-velar semivowel [w] ............................................... 83 2.4.2.1 General facts ............................................................... 83 2.4.2.2 [w] in the history of English ...................................... 84 vi Contents 2.4.2.3 Accounts of [w] vocalization in medieval English ... 86 2.4.3 The voiced velar fricative [ɣ] .................................................. 91 2.4.3.1 [ɣ] in the history of English ....................................... 91 2.4.3.2 Accounts of [ɣ] vocalization in medieval English .... 95 2.4.4 Summary ................................................................................. 100 2.4.4.1 Factors mentioned in secondary literature ............... 100 2.4.4.2 Factors not mentioned in secondary literature ......... 101 2.4.5 Spellings of the relevant sounds ............................................. 103 3. Data and methods .................................................................................... 107 3.1 Corpus data ........................................................................................ 107 3.1.1 Problems with edition-based corpora ..................................... 107 3.1.2 The LAEME Corpus of Tagged Texts (LAEME CTT) ......... 112 3.1.2.1 Corpus markup ......................................................... 112 3.1.2.2 Transcription practice ............................................... 115 3.1.2.3 Sampling and text division ....................................... 118 3.1.2.4 Dating the texts ......................................................... 119 3.1.2.5 Localizing the texts .................................................. 120 3.2 Methods ............................................................................................. 123 3.2.1 Coding variables ..................................................................... 123 3.2.1.1 Predictor variables .................................................... 124 3.2.1.1.1 Directly retrieved variables ...................... 127 3.2.1.1.2 Lexically and lexicogrammatically bound variables ........................................ 127 3.2.1.1.3 Text-bound variables ................................ 134 3.2.1.2 Outcome variables .................................................... 138 3.2.2 Extracting data ........................................................................ 143 3.2.2.1 Preliminary steps ...................................................... 143 3.2.2.2 Identifying and extracting relevant lexemes ............ 144 3.2.2.2.1 Identifying OE [j] in the Baker mini corpus ....................................................... 146 3.2.2.2.2 Collecting lexemes containing post-frontvocalic [j] ................................. 146 3.2.2.2.3 Collecting lexemes containing postvocalic [w] ........................................ 149 3.2.2.2.4 Identifying OE [ɣ] in the Baker mini corpus ....................................................... 151 3.2.2.2.5 Collecting lexemes containing postvocalic [ɣ] ......................................... 152 3.2.2.3 The resulting data spreadsheet ................................. 154 4. Analysis ..................................................................................................... 157 4.1 Individual variables ........................................................................... 157 4.1.1 Outcome variables: Spelling types ......................................... 157 4.1.1.1 Description ............................................................... 158 Contents vii 4.1.1.2 Spelling-sound correspondences .............................. 160 4.1.2 Time variables ........................................................................ 162 4.1.2.1 Description ............................................................... 162 4.1.2.2 Analysis: Spellings ~ time ........................................ 165 4.1.2.2.1 MSDATE.................................................... 166 4.1.2.2.2 MSDATE25 ............................................... 171 4.1.2.2.3 QUARTERCENT .......................................... 173 4.1.2.2.4 HALFCENT ................................................. 178 4.1.2.3 Summary ................................................................... 180 4.1.3 Space variables ....................................................................... 180 4.1.3.1 Description ............................................................... 181 4.1.3.2 Analysis: Spellings ~ space ...................................... 184 4.1.3.3 Analysis: Spellings ~ space + time .......................... 184 4.1.3.3.1 Broad dialect areas ................................... 184 4.1.3.3.2 Smaller dialect regions ............................. 191 4.1.3.4 Summary ................................................................... 198 4.1.4 Input consonants ..................................................................... 199 4.1.4.1 Description ............................................................... 199 4.1.4.2 Analysis: Spellings ~ input consonants ...................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 4. R-Influence on Vowels
    4. R-influence on vowels Before you study this chapter, check whether you are familiar with the following terms: allophone, centring diphthong, complementary distribution, diphthong, distribution, foreignism, fricative, full vowel, GA, hiatus, homophone, Intrusive-R, labial, lax, letter-to-sound rule, Linking-R, low-starting diphthong, minimal pair, monophthong, morpheme, nasal, non-productive suffix, non-rhotic accent, phoneme, productive suffix, rhotic accent, R-dropping, RP, tense, triphthong This chapter mainly focuses on the behaviour of full vowels before an /r/, the phonological and letter-to-sound rules related to this behaviour and some further phenomena concerning vowels. As it is demonstrated in Chapter 2 the two main accent types of English, rhotic and non-rhotic accents, are most easily distinguished by whether an /r/ is pronounced in all positions or not. In General American, a rhotic accent, all /r/'s are pronounced while in Received Pronunciation, a non-rhotic variant, only prevocalic ones are. Besides this, these – and other – dialects may also be distinguished by the behaviour of stressed vowels before an /r/, briefly mentioned in the previous chapter. To remind the reader of the most important vowel classes that will be referred to we repeat one of the tables from Chapter 3 for convenience. Tense Lax Monophthongs i, u, 3 , e, , , , , , , 1, 2 Diphthongs and , , , , , , , , triphthongs , Chapter 4 Recall that we have come up with a few generalizations in Chapter 3, namely that all short vowels are lax, all diphthongs and triphthongs are tense, non- high long monophthongs are lax, except for //, which behaves in an ambiguous way: sometimes it is tense, in other cases it is lax.
    [Show full text]
  • Study on Unique Pharyngeal and Uvular Consonants in Foreign Accented Arabic
    Study on Unique Pharyngeal and Uvular Consonants in Foreign Accented Arabic Yousef A. Alotaibi, Khondaker Abdullah-Al-Mamun, and Ghulam Muhammad Department of Computer Engineering, College of Computer and Information Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia {yalotaibi, mamun, ghulam}@ccis.ksu.edu.sa common to all Arabic-speaking countries. It is the language Abstract used in the media (television, radio, press, etc.), in official This paper investigates the unique pharyngeal and uvular speeches, in universities and schools, and, generally speaking, consonants of Arabic from the automatic speech recognition in any kind of formal communication situation [4]. (ASR) point of view. Comparisons of the recognition error Arabic texts are almost never fully diacritized and are thus rates for these phonemes are analyzed in five experiments that potentially unsuitable for automatic speech recognition and involve different combinations of native and non-native synthesis [3]. Table 1 shows all Arabic alphabet letters and Arabic speakers. The most three confusing consonants for their correspondences to consonant and semivowel phonemes. every investigated consonant are uncovered and discussed. This table also shows the phonetic description of each Results confirm that these Arabic distinct consonants are a phoneme including the place of articulation. In this paper we major source of difficulty for ASR. While the recognition rate use Language Data Consortium (LDC) WestPoint Modern for certain of these unique consonants such as /H/ can drop MSA database phoneme set rather than International Phonetic below 35% when uttered by non-native speakers, there are Alphabet (IPA). This was decided because we are using advantages to including non-native speakers in ASR.
    [Show full text]
  • Redalyc.A Summary Reconstruction of Proto-Maweti-Guarani Segmental
    Boletim do Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi. Ciências Humanas ISSN: 1981-8122 [email protected] Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi Brasil Meira, Sérgio; Drude, Sebastian A summary reconstruction of proto-maweti-guarani segmental phonology Boletim do Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi. Ciências Humanas, vol. 10, núm. 2, mayo- agosto, 2015, pp. 275-296 Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi Belém, Brasil Available in: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=394051442005 How to cite Complete issue Scientific Information System More information about this article Network of Scientific Journals from Latin America, the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal Journal's homepage in redalyc.org Non-profit academic project, developed under the open access initiative Bol. Mus. Para. Emílio Goeldi. Cienc. Hum., Belém, v. 10, n. 2, p. 275-296, maio-ago. 2015 A summary reconstruction of proto-maweti-guarani segmental phonology Uma reconstrução resumida da fonologia segmental proto-mawetí-guaraní Sérgio MeiraI, Sebastian DrudeII IMuseu Paraense Emílio Goeldi. Belém, Pará, Brasil IIMax-Planck-Institute for Psycholinguistics. Nijmegen, The Netherlands Abstract: This paper presents a succinct reconstruction of the segmental phonology of Proto-Maweti-Guarani, the hypothetical protolanguage from which modern Mawe, Aweti and the Tupi-Guarani branches of the Tupi linguistic family have evolved. Based on about 300 cognate sets from the authors’ field data (for Mawe and Aweti) and from Mello’s reconstruction (2000) for Proto-Tupi-Guarani (with additional information from other works; and with a few changes concerning certain doubtful features, such as the status of stem-final lenis consonants *r and *ß, and the distinction of *c and *č ), the consonants and vowels of Proto-Maweti-Guarani were reconstructed with the help of the traditional historical-comparative method.
    [Show full text]
  • A Different Look at the Lutsk Karaim Sound System (From the Second Half of the 19Th Century On)
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Jagiellonian Univeristy Repository Studia Linguistica Universitatis Iagellonicae Cracoviensis 128 (2011) MICHAŁ NÉMETH Jagiellonian University, Cracow A DIFFERENT LOOK AT THE LUTSK KARAIM SOUND SYSTEM (FROM THE SECOND HALF OF THE 19TH CENTURY ON) Keywords: Lutsk Karaim, Karaim phonetics and phonology, Ukrainian dialects Abstract After endeavouring to examine the grammatical descriptions published in the literature to date and to reconstruct the sound system of the south-western dialect of Karaim as it was presented in the literature, it can certainly be concluded that the matter is far from clear. This is for the simple reason that these works contradict each other at various points. The reason for such discrepancies should be sought in the historical and linguistic backgrounds of the two main centres of the south-western Karaim population, i.e. Lutsk and Halich. Even though these two centres were always in close communication with one another, and the language that was spoken in them originates beyond any doubt from one common root, they remained for centuries under slightly different linguistic influences as a result of the Slavonic languages surrounding them. The present paper aims to present and, where possible, clarify the differences which follow from the studies on the Karaim sound system we have at our disposal. An attempt is also made to identify some differences between the Lutsk and Halich subdialects of south-western Karaim, and explain their origin. Since the grammatical descriptions we are dealing with here and the written sources we are able to work with concern the end of the first half of the 19th century at the earliest, the time scale of our interest is limited to the second half of the 19th and the first four decades of the 20th century.
    [Show full text]
  • ELL101: Intro to Linguistics Week 1 Phonetics &
    ELL101: Intro to Linguistics Week 1 Phonetics & IPA Tomonori Nagano <[email protected]> Education and Language Acquisition Dept. LaGuardia Community College August 16, 2017 . Tomonori Nagano <[email protected]> Edu&Lang Acq. Dept., LaGuardia CC 1/41 Fields of linguistics • Week 1-2: Phonetics (physical sound properties) • Week 2-3: Phonology (speech sound rules) • Week 4: Morphology (word parts) • Week 5-6: Syntax (structure) • Week 7-8: Semantics (meaning) • Week 7-8: Pragmatics (conversation & convention) • Week 9: First & Second language acquisition • Week 10-12: Historical linguistics (history of language) • Week 10-12: Socio-linguistics (language in society) • Week 10-12: Neuro-linguistics (the brain and language) • Week 10-12: Computational linguistics (computer and language) • Week 10-12: Evolutional linguistics (how language evolved in human history) . Tomonori Nagano <[email protected]> Edu&Lang Acq. Dept., LaGuardia CC 2/41 Overview Phonetics Phonetics is a study of the characteristics of the speech sound (p.30; Yule (2010)) Branches of phonetics • Articulatory phonetics • how speech sounds are made • Acoustic phonetics • physical properties of speech sounds • Auditory phonetics • how speech sounds are perceived • See some examples of phonetics research: • Speech visualization (acoustic / auditory phonetics) • ”McGurk effect” (auditory phonetics) . Tomonori Nagano <[email protected]> Edu&Lang Acq. Dept., LaGuardia CC 3/41 Acoustic phonetics (example) • The speech wave (spectorogram) of ”[a] (as in above), [ɛ] (as in bed), and [ɪ] (as in bit)” 5000 ) z H ( y c n e u q e r F 0 0 . .0.3799. Time (s) . Tomonori Nagano <[email protected]> Edu&Lang Acq. Dept., LaGuardia CC 4/41 Acoustic phonetics (example) • The speech wave (spectorogram) of ”Was that a good movie you saw?” 5000 ) z H ( y c n e u q e r F 0 0 2.926 Time (s) .
    [Show full text]
  • An Acoustic Analysis of the Vowels in Fuzhou Chinese
    AN ACOUSTIC ANALYSIS OF THE VOWELS IN FUZHOU CHINESE Changhe Chen Department of Linguistics and Translation, City University of Hong Kong [email protected] ABSTRACT acoustic analysis based on speech samples from speakers (20 speakers for monophthongs and 10 for This study is an acoustic description of the vowels in diphthongs and triphthong) in their fifties in 2011. At Fuzhou Chinese produced by 10 speakers (5 males present, no published article is found for the vowels and 5 females) in their thirties. The vowels include 8 of the younger generation, but some vowel changes monophthongs .h x d 1 ` N n t., 14 diphthongs .ht th are expected. dh dt `h `t nt 1x Nx hd h` xn tn t`., and 1 triphthong This study aims at reinvestigating the vowels in .t`h. in open syllable. Compared with existing Fuzhou Chinese of speakers aged 30-39, younger studies, this study finds (i) that sometimes .d. is than those in [6]. diphthongized; (ii) that diphthong may undergo .xn. 2. METHODOLOGY change to become ZX\; (iii) that diphthong .Nx. seems to have merged with .t`h. and .1x. in open syllable, All test words are (C)V and (C)VS syllables, 2 and .dt. also shows a tendency to merge with .ht.; frequently used in daily life . For each diphthong and (iv) that the acoustic realization of diphthong .nt. can triphthong, two syllables associated with two types of be Zɞt\, ZPt\ and ZNt\ but not Znt\, and diphthong tones are used in order to investigate possible vowel alternation. But due to space limit, only results of the .hd.
    [Show full text]
  • Diphthongs Andtriphthongs
    chapter 5 Diphthongs and Triphthongs 5.1 Introduction The combination of a vowel and either of the semivowels *w and *y in the same syllable is traditionally referred to as a diphthong in Semitic linguistics, although it is unclear to what degree these combinations behaved like single vocalic phonemes, as the term ‘diphthong’ implies. Similarly, the combination of two vowels with an intervening semivowel is frequently called a triphthong; strictly speaking, this is incorrect, as ‘triphthong’ usually describes a single phoneme with three vocalic places of articulation occurring within the same syllable, while Semitic triphthongs are always disyllabic. To avoid confusion, however, the traditional terminology will be maintained in this chapter. The reader will recall that W represents any semivowel, i.e. *w or *y. Diphthongs and triphthongs are often treated together, but as we shall see, they are better considered separately. Accordingly, the first section of this chap- ter will investigate the development of the original diphthongs *aw and *ay. The other diphthongs are not discussed, as their development is either unprob- lematic or very difficult to ascertain. Quite clearly, *iy > *ī and *uw > *ū, as in he was‘ הוַּרד < he will suck (pause)’,*huwrada > *hūrad‘ ִייָ֑נק < yiynaqu > *yīnaq* brought down’. *uy seems to develop to *ī, but the evidence is limited to a few ויישם it may be poured (pause)’ in Exod 30:32 and the kṯiḇ form‘ ִיי ָ֑סְך forms like ,(in Gen 24:33 ַוֻיּיַשׂם in Gen 50:26 and ַוִ֫יּיֶשׂם and he/it was placed’ (vocalized‘ most other cases of *uy having been affected by analogy.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Character of Vowel Changes in the Evolution of Latin Into French
    ON THE CHARACTER OF VOWEL CHANGES IN THE EVOLUTION OF LATIN INTO FRENCH Chae-Seong Chang . The purpose of this paper is to show that Latin vowel changes are included in the important phenomena of the forward movement which includes the simplifica­ tion of the word by vowel-dropping. The Vulgar Latin has been deeply transformed in Gau!. The Gallic population could not understand the delicate variation of the Latin language and thus its vowel system suffered deep transformations. We tried to show the direction of these transformations in the oral cavity. I. INTRODUCTION Pronunciation evolves according to time and space. When the circumstances allow it, sounds alter very rapidly and the words change to the point of becoming unrecognizable_ The circumstances allowing such changes are the absence of any stable authority that would keep an unchanging and uniform faith to the word's original pronunciation. Correct pronunciation of a word is to give to each of its elements, vowels or consonants, the values that they ought to have_ But even people who have studied their own mother tongue following precise grammatical rules, and who tried to pronounce it correctly cannot help modifying its pronunciation accord­ ing to the climate and the age. The Vulgar Latin, transferred to different peoples, has undergone many changes as in Gaul. The Gallic population which received Latin tried to adapt it in such a way that everybody could speak it well without any special effort. In that way great pronunciation-change occurred inside the Latin vowel system. The study of the character of these vowel changes will be the object of this paper.
    [Show full text]
  • The Phonetic Nature of Consonants in Modern Standard Arabic
    www.sciedupress.com/elr English Linguistics Research Vol. 4, No. 3; 2015 The Phonetic Nature of Consonants in Modern Standard Arabic Mohammad Yahya Bani Salameh1 1 Tabuk University, Saudi Arabia Correspondence: Mohammad Yahya Bani Salameh, Tabuk University, Saudi Arabia. Tel: 966-58-0323-239. E-mail: [email protected] Received: June 29, 2015 Accepted: July 29, 2015 Online Published: August 5, 2015 doi:10.5430/elr.v4n3p30 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.5430/elr.v4n3p30 Abstract The aim of this paper is to discuss the phonetic nature of Arabic consonants in Modern Standard Arabic (MSA). Although Arabic is a Semitic language, the speech sound system of Arabic is very comprehensive. Data used for this study were collocated from the standard speech of nine informants who are native speakers of Arabic. The researcher used himself as informant, He also benefited from three other Jordanians and four educated Yemenis. Considering the alphabets as the written symbols used for transcribing the phones of actual pronunciation, it was found that the pronunciation of many Arabic sounds has gradually changed from the standard. The study also discussed several related issues including: Phonetic Description of Arabic consonants, classification of Arabic consonants, types of Arabic consonants and distribution of Arabic consonants. Keywords: Modern Standard Arabic (MSA), Arabic consonants, Dialectal variation, Consonants distribution, Consonants classification. 1. Introduction The Arabic language is one of the most important languages of the world. With it is growing importance of Arab world in the International affairs, the importance of Arabic language has reached to the greater heights. Since the holy book Qura'n is written in Arabic, the language has a place of special prestige in all Muslim societies, and therefore more and more Muslims and Asia, central Asia, and Africa are learning the Arabic language, the language of their faith.
    [Show full text]
  • Norn Elements in the Shetland Dialect
    Hugvísindadeild Norn elements in the Shetland dialect A Historical and Linguistic Review B.A. Essay Auður Dagný Jónsdóttir September, 2013 University of Iceland Faculty of Humanities Department of English Norn elements in the Shetland dialect A Historical and Linguistic Review B.A. Essay Auður Dagný Jónsdóttir Kt.: 270172-5129 Supervisors: Þórhallur Eyþórsson and Pétur Knútsson September, 2013 2 Abstract The languages spoken in Shetland for the last twelve hundred years have ranged from Pictish, Norn to Shetland Scots. The Norn language started to form after the settlements of the Norwegian Vikings in Shetland. When the islands came under the British Crown, Norn was no longer the official language and slowly declined. One of the main reasons the Norn vernacular lived as long as it did, must have been the distance from the mainland of Scotland. Norn was last heard as a mother tongue in the 19th century even though it generally ceased to be spoken in people’s daily life in the 18th century. Some of the elements of Norn, mainly lexis, have been preserved in the Shetland dialect today. Phonetic feature have also been preserved, for example is the consonant’s duration in the Shetland dialect closer to the Norwegian language compared to Scottish Standard English. Recent researches indicate that there is dialectal loss among young adults in Lerwick, where fifty percent of them use only part of the Shetland dialect while the rest speaks Scottish Standard English. 3 Contents 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 5 2. The origin of Norn ................................................................................................................. 6 3. The heyday of Norn ............................................................................................................... 7 4. King James III and the Reformation ..................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • AJ Aitken a History of Scots
    A. J. Aitken A history of Scots (1985)1 Edited by Caroline Macafee Editor’s Introduction In his ‘Sources of the vocabulary of Older Scots’ (1954: n. 7; 2015), AJA had remarked on the distribution of Scandinavian loanwords in Scots, and deduced from this that the language had been influenced by population movements from the North of England. In his ‘History of Scots’ for the introduction to The Concise Scots Dictionary, he follows the historian Geoffrey Barrow (1980) in seeing Scots as descended primarily from the Anglo-Danish of the North of England, with only a marginal role for the Old English introduced earlier into the South-East of Scotland. AJA concludes with some suggestions for further reading: this section has been omitted, as it is now, naturally, out of date. For a much fuller and more detailed history up to 1700, incorporating much of AJA’s own work on the Older Scots period, the reader is referred to Macafee and †Aitken (2002). Two textual anthologies also offer historical treatments of the language: Görlach (2002) and, for Older Scots, Smith (2012). Corbett et al. eds. (2003) gives an accessible overview of the language, and a more detailed linguistic treatment can be found in Jones ed. (1997). How to cite this paper (adapt to the desired style): Aitken, A. J. (1985, 2015) ‘A history of Scots’, in †A. J. Aitken, ed. Caroline Macafee, ‘Collected Writings on the Scots Language’ (2015), [online] Scots Language Centre http://medio.scotslanguage.com/library/document/aitken/A_history_of_Scots_(1985) (accessed DATE). Originally published in the Introduction, The Concise Scots Dictionary, ed.-in-chief Mairi Robinson (Aberdeen University Press, 1985, now published Edinburgh University Press), ix-xvi.
    [Show full text]
  • Wagner 1 Dutch Fricatives Dutch Is an Indo-European Language of The
    Wagner 1 Dutch Fricatives Dutch is an Indo-European language of the West Germanic branch, closely related to Frisian and English. It is spoken by about 22 million people in the Netherlands, Belgium, Aruba, Suriname, and the Netherlands Antilles, nations in which the Dutch language also has an official status. Additionally, Dutch is still spoken in parts of Indonesia as a result of colonial rule, but it has been replaced by Afrikaans in South Africa. In the Netherlands, Algemeen Nederlands is the standard form of the language taught in schools and used by the government. It is generally spoken in the western part of the country, in the provinces of Nord and Zuid Holland. The Netherlands is divided into northern and southern regions by the Rijn river and these regions correspond to the areas where the main dialects of Dutch are distinguished from each other. My consultant, Annemarie Toebosch, is from the village of Bemmel in the Netherlands. Her dialect is called Betuws Dutch because Bemmel is located in the Betuwe region between two branches of the Rijn river. Toebosch lived in the Netherlands until the age of 25 when she relocated to the United States for graduate school. Today she is a professor of linguistics at the University of Michigan-Flint and speaks only English in her professional career. For the past 18 months she has been speaking Dutch more at home with her son, but in the 9 years prior to that, she only spoke Dutch once or twice a week with her parents and other relatives who remain in the Netherlands.
    [Show full text]