NCE0-63C ERIC REPORT RESUME

EC CIC C52 1C-C6-66 24 (REV) COMPLNICATION FARRIERS TO THECULTURALLY DEPRIVEC. MCCAVIC, RAVEN I. * AUSTIN,WILLIAM M. C71'09354 UNIVERSITY 3F CHICAGO CRP-21C7 GGP21135 ILLINOIS INST. CFTECHNOLOGY, CHICAGO ECRS PRICE MFESC.27 HC-..$7.16 179P.

*MIDDLE CLASS, *CULTURALDISADVANTAGEMENT, *COMMUNICATIONPROBLEMS, *NONSTANCARD DIALECTS, *NEGRODIALECTS, URBAN AREAS, SOCIAL RELATIONS, PRONLNCIATION,CHICAGO, ILLINOIS

THIS REPORT VAS DESIGNED (1)Te PROVIDE A MORE DETAILED ANC SOPHISTICATED KNOWLEDGE ABOUT SOCIALDIFFFRENCES IN ORAL COMMLNICATION ANC (2) TO ASCERTAINTHE ACCURACY WITH WHICH SUBJECTS COLIC IDENTIFY THE RACE ANC EDUCATIONCF SPEAKERS WHOM THEY COULD NOT SEE. TO CETERMINE REACTIONSTO PRONUNCIATIONS, THE INVESTIGATORS DEVISED AN INSTRLMENT COMPOSEDOF PRONUNCIATIONS BY SPEAKERSOF SPECIFIC REGIONAL ANC ETHNICBACKGROUNCS. THIS INSTRUKNTWAS ACMINISTERED TO SOME THREE HUNCREERESPONDENTS, WHITES ANE NEGROES IN ALMOST EQLAL NUMBERS, OF VARIOUSEDUCATIONAL BACKGROUNDS IT WAS FCLND THAT DIFFERENCES BETWEENLOWER-CLASS WHITE SPEEC AND MIDDLE -CLASS TO LOWERCLASSNEGRO SPEECH ARE MUCH PORE DIFFICLLTTO DETECT THAN DIFFERENCES BETWEENTHE SPEECH OF WHITE CHICAGOANSAND SOLTHERN NEGROES. IT IS AN INTUITIVEREACTION THAT SUPRASEGMENTALS AND PARALANGLAGE ARE MORE EFFECTIVEINCICATORS OF ETHNIC BACKGROUND THAN VCCACLLARY, GRAMMAR, CRPRONUNCIATION. (a) U. 8. DEPARTMENTOF HEALTH, EDUCATIONAND WELFARE Office of Education This documenthas been reproduced person or organ:zalion exactly as receivedfrom the orig'natingft. stated do PG.r...71of viewor opinions not nezcsoarityrepresent official position or policy. Ott.ce of Education

Communication Barriers to the Culturally Deprtfed

Cooperative Research ;?rojeet 2107

liAlria I. LioDAVID, JR. Professor of Znglish The University of Chicago

tJILLIAII L. AUSTIN Professor of Linguistics Illinois Institute of Teohnolomy

1966

The research reported herein was cupported by the Cooperative Research Program of the Office of Zduoation, Us S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Table of Contents

Preface

Social Dialects: Cause or Symptom of Social I. clad (MoDavid)

Gatherins. the Data (Davis and NoDattid)

Chicago Phonology (Davis)

Phonolosical Indices of Social Dialects in Chicago (Pederson)

Social Aspects of Paralanguage (Austin)

Reactions to Pronunciations (14.and Co Larsen) araish and the Culturally Deprived: A3ibliosrraphy (Hoffman)

Each chapter is paginated separately and is followed by its own supplementary tables, etc. if such occur Preface

erma.ta.mmimeatiowno0 "wwwislireUrn

This report summarizes the findings of a cooperative research project (No. 2107) in social dialects sponsored by the

University of Chicago and the Illinois Institute of Tech- nology and supported by a grant from the U.S. Office of

Sducation.

As conceived by the investigators, the design of the project was simple. It seemed easy enough to find repre- sentatives of middle class and log er class speech, of whites and ITegroes, to codify the differences, to select characteristic utterances of each group, to dub these on tape in random order, to record the uay in which selected populations of respondents identified the racial and social status of the speaker of each utterance, and then to deter- mind the validity of such identifications* Yet from the beginning, zomplications crept in.

Dialect interviewing in urban areas is difficult enough; but it was assumed that the experience of the investigators and their assistants would take these difficulties in strides

So it might have been in any previous year; so it might well be in th.: future, Dut, as anyone who reads American news- papers must realize, the period from .-La summer of1963 through the election of 1964 was *ne in which there were more than usual difficulties for the interviewer ot urban inform

ii wants, especially in the Agro slums. Only the persistence and dedication of the intervieuers-milelvin Hoffman,Lee

Pederson, and John P. Willis.prolvided the field interviews, upon which the rest of the project depended.

It*.. ~as on hoped that the data from the field lAterviers could be puton punch cards for computer analysis.

However, it soon became apparent thatno program existed for treating anytYlnl but the lexical and grammaticaldata, for both of which the intuitive and informalsocial identi- fication is already accurate. Programs for phonemic corre. latiuns are !:ew; for sub-phonemic differentes in pronunoia. tion no satisfactory program has yet been 'workedout, though

2oser Shuy of ilichigan State should perfectone before the end of 1965. For suprasegmentals and pareanguage the programs are not yet conceived. Consequently, it was decided to sort the pronunciation data manually- -old fashionel and slow, perhaps, but more accurate than machinemanipulation could be.

The preparation of the instrument for ascertaining sociolinguistic reactions also poseda number of technical problems, notably the finding of representativespeakers from each group whose tapeswere of high eaough fidelity to be easily duplicated in parts, the selectionof control sub- jects, and the search foran extant computer program that could be adapted to the needs of theprojecto lihatever success this part of the project has achieved is due tothe intelligence and devotion of Vernon S. and Carolyn E.Larsen, iv whose formal training in linguistics has been enriched by their knowledge of psychology and statistics, by their practical experience as test designers and publishers9 editors, and by their deep appreciation of individual human dignity. They were aided by i.arylou Lionellst by Phyllis

Implant and especially by Thorns., Creswell, whose lifelong intimate experience with Chicago schools- -from kindergarten pupil to teacher of methods courses in Englishprovides in- sights into the direction which amore effective school program must take.

It should be emphasized, however, that though the table of contents indicates primary credits, each investigator and research associate has discussed and examined each part and has made his contribution tnroughout. Credit is also due petty Jacobsen, editorial assistant durinrs theprepara- tion of the report, and to two groups toonumerous for specific listing: the administrative staffs of the two sponsoring institutions and the citizens of Chicago vho servedas informants, as respondents and as liaison between these groups and the investigators.

The study of specific correlations between pronuncia. tions and social judgments will not stop with thisreports

It vould be interesting to see whatresponses would be made in eastern or Southern communities; the conclusions here presented are valid only for the Chicago metropolitanarea, though one might expect similar reactions in other Inland

Aorthern urban areas. These conclusions, tentatively ad. venced, are as follors: 1. Vocabulary reflectscultural experiences andcan be expected to changeas people become adjusted to city living*

The survival of certainhumble ethnic words in ethnic neigh- borhoods, of whateverkind, is traditional; itmay even be reinforced by a feeling forin-group solidarity.

2. Grammar reflectssocial and educational advantages.

Grammatical differences betweenmiddle-class and lower-class speech are easily identified. They are most striking in areas (such as the Southeasternand South-Central states) where sharp differences ofcaste and class have long been recognized. Since the Negroes of theChicago slums are nor- mally from the lower classof the lower caste of suchregions-- whether born thereor in Chicago- -it is to be expected that their speech would showstrong divergences from thegrammatical norms of middle class Chicago, and thatin turn middle class

Chicagoans would identifyas "Negro grammar" features that are widely distributed in uneducatedSouthern speech of both races. The existence of thesedivergent grammatical forms has long been recognizedin the schools; the traditional treatment, however, has beenin terms of lapses,errors or deviations, with no recognitionthat they are part ofa regular system. Future educationalprograms should be de- veloped in terms of substitutingfor the grammatical system of lower-class Southern speechthe system of middle-class

Chicago white speech--at leastfor those economic andsocial situations where grammaticalnorms are important.

3. In pronunciation, differencesbetween middle-class vi and loi%.;r-olass white speech or between middle-class and lower- class Negro speech are much less easy to detect than differ- ences between the speech of white Chicagoans and Southern

Negroes° Loreover, the fact that middle-class white Chicagoans often identified as a Southern Negro the Southern white contrcl speaker suggests that for middle-class white Chicagoans any palpably Southern pronunciation is automatically registered as Negro, rural and uneducated though the speaker in question is city bred and the most highly educated of the speakers selected for the instrument. This kind of identification suggests that any educational application of this project should take two directions*

(a) Since for the moment the strongly Southern pronun- ciation of the Chicago lower-class Negro constitutes a social handicap, it would be desirable to teach Chicago middle- class pronunciation to the children of this group, beginning with nursery school. Such teaching should be informal at the beginning, in an effort to provide a substitute for the characteristic language learning process where children arriv-A ix g from various communities pick up the local idiom from older children in their neighborhood. Since the normal

situation will operate only after genuinely integrated res-

idential patterns are established, teachers in this artificial

situation must recognize a discrepancy between the "target

pronunciation" in the schools and the home pronunciation-- and avoid stigmatizing the latter. The air is functional

1141212.91aute, with the children able to switch codes as vii occasion demands.

(b) At thesame time, as a part of education in human understandins, it would be desirableto include in the school

Znglish program, froma rather early period, something about the nature of languao;e, theorigins of dialects, and the variety of cultivated pronunciationsto be found in the

United States. Some textbooks already provide thiskind of information, and several series ofillustrative recordings are either in progressor planned,

4. It isan intuitive reaction that suprasegmentals and paralanguageare more effective indicators of ethnic background than vocabulary,grammar cr pronunciation. Since only the crudest statementsexist of regional and social differences in these features,extensive further research is necessary.

Raven I. McDavid, Jr. William M. Austin April 196 Social Dialects: Causeor

Symptom of Social ioaladjustment

Raven I. HoDavid, Jr.

University of Chicago

I am going to be somewhat anecdotal,but I think this

treatment will lead intosome of the complications that we

encounter in workingon social dialects, and perhaps the

anecdotes will helpus to realize how intricately these

problems are inter-relatedwith research, with one'sown

personal Weltanschauunc', andwith one's pedagogicalcareer

and interests. Here we might make a minimal statementof

the commitment of theznglish teaching professionas a

commitment to see that ina democratic society, every

citizen should havea command of the standard idiom suf-

ficient to enable him to fulfillhis intellectual potentiali-

ties, whatever kind ofjob, career or ambitionshe may have.

Now if this sounds likeone of the early phrases in Milton's

Of Wucation, the similarityis deliberate, as comingfrom a retired hiltonist.

We have three strands ofoperation, leaving out allof the things thatare going on in our major cities,in the halls of Congress, in theU.N. and so on, tocome to grips with the fact that a number of citizens of vartomscountriesa of var- ious soolo-ethnic backgrounds,are not being given anop- portunity to fulfill theirpotentialities. Let us first re-

1 2 view the research of the lastgeneration. It is 33 years since the Linguistic Atlas of theUnited States and Canada was begun with fieldwork in New England. 1)e have in this atlas the first attempt in linguisticgeography to take into account the problems of socialdifferences and the dimension of time. Those of us who have been working withthe Linguis- tic Atlas haveno illusions about having definitiveanswers, and no illusions that thefindings of the thirties and forties are applicable to other situations thathave kept on arising.

In fact, from thevery beginning mans Mirath, director of the

Atlas, has insisted thatwe needed zany larger scale studies on particular problems. tie simply could not covermore in the first investigation whiohhad, as its major purpose, estab- lishing the baselines andthe general direction of apparent change in the speech of the United States.

.tae first suggestion that maybewe ought to say some- thing to the social scientistscame from Gordon Blackwell, then chairman of sociology at"forth Carolina, now President of Furman University, where he and.I were classmates. One day when we were talking about theatlas materials, he said that we ought to havesome comments in Social Forces so that we could at least start arguing intelligently. This convert. sation led to an article in the December 19469Social Forces, pointing out the directions whichmy concern, with social dia- lects has since taken. Tho intricate problem of the status indicator In South Carolinawas then discussed in American

Speech, 1948.Later came a note, basedon the situation in 3 Buffalo and elsewhere, which sot into Studies in Linguistics.1

In 1951, my wife and I did a paper for the Dialect Society and the Speech Association at the request of Allen TgalkerRead on the relation of ti-Ti speech of American Negroes to the 2 speech of Whites. Lorenzo Turner's 20 years of investiga- tion of Gullah along the Caroi3.na- Georgia coastwas one of the major items that we had to take into account in this paper and that everyone who starts from some of the moremar- ginal social dialects in the United States will have to take into consideration. For a number of years since then I have been involved in working through the materials put together first by the late He Le heneken, and part of theproblem of updAtins and reorganizing these statements entailedrecapit- ulatinG what had been said about problemsin social dialects.

I grew up in a community wherewe said there were three races: whites, Negroes and cotton-mill workers. Here we had white and black separated by caste lines. We also had an in- dustrial system of tin closed mill village, the closedem- ployment situation with the company store selling almost everything on credit, andwe had separate, segregated schools for the cotton mills. In this community we could seea num- ber of social differences in dialects. We learned, very easily, that certain vowels were identified with thepoor whites, the hillbillies, and their derivatives, the cotton millworkers.

Ile knew that there was a rural white speech- -not hillbilly-- which nice but unassuming people usedt be knew that, in the city _Lot only were there differences in white speech and 4

Negro speech; we even learned that many of themore intelli- gent Negroes were bi-dialectal. Lhat Is, then they were speaking to the quality they woulduse one mode and when they were speaking back in the kitchen or to the yard man, they would use another. This intuitive perception is the kind of thing that one might expect from little boysplaying around in grandmothers' houses and hearing things that maybe they were not supposed to hear; they would conclude intuitively that people learn to differentiate their mode ofcommunication according to the situation in which theywere communicating and according to the people to whom theywere attempting to communicate.

In the course of my particular pedagogicalcareer, I was translated to Charleston acrossa major bundle of isoglosses and observed there another kind of dialect situationwhere in many phonological matters the urban Negro and the urbanwhite, upper-upper, were very much alike. The city also had the strivers and strainers, in between, whowere not accepted by either of these groups. On the streets, one could hearsome of the varieties of Gullah fromthe flower sellers andsea- food peddlers who would come into town. Going out for fish- ing in the country, we often had troublefinding our way because we did not know the languagein which to ask directions properly or to ascertain what thedirections were when we got them.

Later, I spent two years in Louisiana,in the center of the Cajun country. -there were many excellent speakers of 5 local standard English. Unlike the situation in South

Carolina, there were few poor whites who were native speakers of non-standard varieties of 2nglish. In their place were the rural CajunsFrench-speaking poor whites.According to

Wallace Lambert, of LeGill,3these people are doubly unfortu- nate -- almost completely deculturized, illiterate in all langua- ges; they have been made to feel that French is inferior, but have not been given a fair opportunity to learn anything approximating standard English.

Somewhat later, after three years with the Armed Forces

Language Program and two decades with the Linguistic Atlas, I found myself increasingly involved in the problems of teaching in metropolitan areas.

In the fall of 1959, preparations for the Darwin

Centennial drew me into a profitable association with the

Chicago Department of Anthropology. One of the first fruits of that association was an invitation to participate in a seminar in °caste and class," along with fie:am Marriott and

Julian Pitt-Rivers. As a scion of an old family of British landed gentry, Julian could evaluate the American scene objectively and dispassionately; he remarked several times that, in the allegedly open society, social competition becomes keener and the unstructured markers of class increasingly important. He pointed out that the new "open society" has actually created a pattern of social segregation to the new one-class neighborhoods, and particularly the one-class suburbs like Levittown and Park Forest: as people move up 6 economically they want to move away from those that they feel are economic and social threats, and toward those with whom

they feel entitled to associate because of their new affluence.

The flight from the central city to the suburbs is not

solely white backlash, but a reflection of the fact that

people in a democratic society have to keep running on the

treadmill if they want to keep their place, and if they

stop, they fall off and are considered failures, From these

observations have come the motives for such research as the 4 dissertations of Lee Pedersonand GeraldUde1159and the

proposed dissertations of Thomas Creswell, John Dawkins and

Vernon Larsen.

So much for the theoretical background of our Chicago

research. As we would like to think, these theories have been

influenced by practical teaching problems in particular sit-

uations, beginning with my first teaching in South Carolina.

The first striking situation where it was clear to me that

work in social dialects was a necessity for the schools was

that in southern Louisiana. Since the democratic philosophy

of the state school system sought to avoid saddling students

with the stigma of failure, no matter how submarginal their

accomplishments: many freshmen who entered the state college

with diplomas and four units of Enslish could literally not

read, writes speak or understand English. In orthoGraphys in

grammar and pronunciations there was a sharp divergence be-

tween the language practices of these people and those of the

dominant .Lnglish-speaking culture. Uoreovers it was apparent 7 that the Negro speakers of French in southern Louisianawere much more removed from standard southern Louisiana English than were the white Cajun French, because Louisiana then rigidly maintained the Southern tradition of separateand unequal accommodations in education and other socialamenities.

Clearly, in southern Louisiana, it was desirable to begin,at an early age, the teaching of Znglish as a foreignlan'uage.6

After Uorld dar II and several years of field work, I went to Western Reserve, in Cleveland, Ohio,a quality university with periodic illusions of footballgrandeur.

Harrison Dillard, the great Negro hurdler,was a former student under our coach, :Eddie Finnegan; thusReserve attracted many

Negro athletes, especially from Warren, Ohio. Warren, a town of about fifty thousand, is not largeenough for educational segregation to haveany particular impact on the quality of ',1;nglish teachingin high schools. Yet the Negro

;graduates from MarrenHigh, who usually did rellon the college boards, shorted in theircompositions all of thegrammatical features we associate withuneducated Negro speech,especially the nomadicappearance of the inflectionalendino:s of verbs and nouns. One concluded that thoughthe schoolswere not segregated, other socialcontacts were, sincethese grammatical forms could not havesurvived if whites andNegroes lived side by side andplayed togetheras equals.

In 1956.57 my wifetaught in the Clevelandextension program of tent State University,aimed at produciri cadet teachers for the Clevelandpublic schools. In the programon 6 the east side of Cleveland, the overwhelming majority of the students were '4%egroes. They "ere, as a rule, highly motivated and highly intelligent, but most of them had the non-standard grammar one associates with iiississippi or Alabama, for many had grown up in those states. Lany of these students had to take non-credit English before they could get into freshman work. The grammatical problems were especially acute with the non-credit students, just as they have been in my wife's remedial and freshman English courses at Chioago Teachers

College, South. A casual comment of hers--"All week I have been trying to teach standard :inglish as a foreign lansuage.b4-- was probably the first auggestion I hsd that the techniques of second language teachins. might be adapted to this problem.

At the same time I discovered, through evening classes for in-service teachers, that the classroom teachers in Chicago are aware that the grammar of the slum Negro is a major problem.

However, most teachers do not know' what to do with, this problem, and when they start to talk about the grammatical character- istics that distinguished Negro and white speech, professional raoemen may say, "Don't mention this; this is discrimination.

3ut among scholars ooncerned with the fate of our country, mentioning these features isnot discrimination; we must talk about things thatoccur, for failure to mention them and to seek a cure will help perpetuatediscrimination.

Lhus theoretical concern, social observationand practical experience lie behind rederson'sdissertation and the growing cooperation with public andprivate groups inter- ested in removing the educational, ecomonio and social 9 handicaps of the underpriviledged urban ilegro. A conclude that we must remove their linguistic handicaps if our educa- tional system is to survive. The grammatical problems are of such an order that we advance the suggestionwhich iiencken had reported before the war and which my wife independently derived from her teaching experiencethat in our urban slums and other areas where diver :ent social dialects exist, we might teach standard. Znglish as a foreign language.

One other problem is involved in our projects to convey to the dominant culture a better understanding of what standard ienglish actually is. T!e must keep reminding our neighbors that standard American Znglish has many varieties, all good. Ue must remind them not to confuse what is regionally and rhat is socially different.And we must also realizeand make others realize--that a person's dialect is one of his most intimate possessions. We may want to give a person other modes of ills language to communicate with in other situations, but we do not want to make him too self-conscious about the fact that he and his family and friends naturally use a non-standard dialect. After all, it may sometimes be to one's advantage to be able to switch back into the child- hood mode, to communicate naturally with those who are still striving to improve their lot. 4 A

Notes

1. Raven I..oDavid, Jr., "Dialect Geography and Social Science Problems," Social, Forwas, vol. 25, pp. 165-72 (Dec. 1946); "Postvocalic 7:7-77n South Carolina: A Social Analysis," American Speech, vole 23,pp. 194-203 (Oct.-Dec. 1948); Sialect Differences and Inter-Group Tensions," Studies in Linalptics9 vol. 9,PP. 27-33 (April 1951).

2. Raven I. haavid, Jr., and VirginiaGlenn hcDavid9 "rile Relationship of the Speech of AmericanNegroes to the Speech of Whites," American Smech,Vol. 26, pp. 3-17 (Feb. 1951)9

3. Professor Lambert is the author ofnumerous studies on bilingualism, second-language learning, and relatedtopics.

4. Lee Pederson, ThePronunciation of Enaish in Chicamo,s Cnsntsoona and Vowell, University ofChicago, 19M.

5. Gerald Udell the attah of Akron, Ohis:A Study in Urbanization, Universityof Chicago,1765.

6. It is ironicalthat these people do notappear in the census rolls as speakers offoreiGn languages becausethe 1960census indicates only the nativetongue of the foreign born; presumably,everyone growing up in thiscountry is a native speaker of English. Catherine the klato

Alva L. Davi°

and

Raven L. Hi:David, Jr0

The evidence on which die specific studies are bleed ;A= col/eat/1 by a modification of techniques firLt &vt8 for thokaa.r.A.Ragttiel de la Frencts (190N A0), Uy its &rector Juies Giiii on:

Izdentifiable informants. Trained luvesttgators, tnterviewlog in a situation familiar to the inf6rmant6 44 A questiennaire of specific relevant items. 5. Simultaneous tantsception cu ghn spot, in a findly grcded phonetic a4babet. 6. Rezordtre of a sin3la spovtanecus nave respoasso

Cf the prIpettles8 f38 bud 4 were to/Iowa sonsistently. The others vreTe modiaed soffit becauso 42 thesituation, and because of a tech- nological advance through the Invention rf he tape recorder.Since every PatArview wag recorded on tam. it wt;possible to use interviewers lees bigny gkilled in agate-rem phonetic transtrittion than, say.

Edmond Efaont. cf thett Freoch Anent or Quy S. Iowans Jr., of tbtkinaintfee.

Atlas of New Erggland; only Pederson was experienced in field intervimins, and aver4 he had found tot tape recorder provided opportunities for checking field tvanseriptigns end for picking ep adZia.weal unvertle4 responses. A good deal of tho tranamiption frythe tapeincluding the refinement of field worker trsnscriptions-mss done by Davis. Since a part of the record of &Wien dialect:4 (andparticularti? of Poci21 dials t.) is the vacillating between competing form* variants ware noted insofar as they occurred in therecord.'

IAdetailed investigation of a limited number of variables isfound in the dissertation of William Labov of Columbia University,published /en 1966 by the Center for Applied Linguistics, Washington, D.G. Unlike traditional linguistic atlases, the Chicagoinvestigation did

not confine itself to natives of the community;a precedent is Juanita

Williamson, A PhoncloePA and ycjat.10.0d.aiglati ofthe Speech of the item o= Memphis, Tennessee, dies. (microfilm U. ofMichigan, 1961.

To ascertain the linguistic acculturation of recent immigrants,

notably Southern Negroes, twogroups of informants were chosen, representing

shorter and longer residence in Metropolitan Chicago. For the local baseline, one is referred to Lee Pederson, The Pronounciation ofEnglish

in Maw Co nsonants and Vowels, dissertation (MS),U. of Chicago, 1964.

The questionnaire was basedon the Short Work Sheets for the

Linguistic Atlas of the United States and Canada, originally devisedin ,

1939 by Eats wrath, Director of the Linguistic Atlas, and modified in

1949-for the North-Central States by Davis and McDavid. Since the North,.

Ceatral version as used in the field comprises something like 600 items

and requires /*out five hours of interviewing, it was considered desirable

to ebridge them further for this study*The final version comprises

about 160 of the most easily elicited items, and can be covered it an hour

and a half.Moat of the items are significant for oromumustion

dtfferences; several of the grammatical items that might reveal social

distinctions are retained, and a very few of the vocabulary items. The

omissions Ore almost always matters of vocabulary, especially items of

cld-faabloned rural culture ant have been found unproductive In urban

areas and of little consequence for social difference. At moat they would reveal what is known already, that recent a river, a fres Appalachia

or the Deep South have a familiarity with rural living that native

Chicagoans do not have.

For purposes taf comparimon the page numbers of the North-Central worksheets have been retelued.

-2- Worksheets for Metropolitan Chicago

Introductory page Date:

Transcribed by: Reviewed by:

Locality

Pull Address

Naze Age

Place of Birth

Other communities where informant haslived (give dates):

Education: Occupation:

Social Contacts (church., lodges, other associations):

Family history:

Character of the community

Character sketch and speech characteristics (familiarity with other dialects, tempo, clearor elutred, stress and pitch range, etc.):

Items by Pages

1) one tut) three four five six seven eight dime ten eleven wave thirteen fourteen

2) twenty twenty-seven thirgy :forty forty -four seventy hundred thousand first second third fourth fifth sixth ninth tenth all at once twice as (good)

3) January February April Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Saturday good morning

4) yesterday tomorrow half past

5) this year this -here

6) chimes:

6 A) a list of rooms in the house

7) soot ashes crwir furniture

3) window 14.

9) laundry washing and ironing porch shut the door drive/past tense/

10) roof I have heard it /note unstressed have/ T. haven't done it /stressed and unstressed; note ain't, 1444a/ be does

12) dairy

13) china

15) wash the dishes rinses faucet (on kitchen sink) faucet (in yard) whip

16) bag sack

17) candle

18) brush

19) (railroad) trestle

20) grease /verb/greray oil kerocene (inner) tube

I am going: vv. . they., . /is auxiliary verb omitted?' Am I going (to get some?), . .they

21) I am not (going to hurt hfie), he, e theye /note use of aia't, train, gt/ (I'm right) em I not? /note ain't IV We were (going to do it) No, ft.Z wasn't me

22) brought bulge

23) purse umbrella (it goes) Blear (across)

25) cement road (he isn't) at home ulthout (milk) with (milk) noith before voiced vound/ toward (s)

26) dog (he was) bitten(by a dog)

27) cow horse

201 (he fell) off (the horse) horseshoes

33) a little way anywhere at all /record examples of 12.2E-19 49.11E.1, 41174 WM/ !examples of multipie negative/

34) yours ours theirs hie hers

35) you /record sing. andpl./

36) (to) pounds (of flour) yeast yolk

37) yellow /the color/ boiled eggs /what does *soul food" -.."31,-* meant/

38) (we) ate(at six o'clock) (have you) eaten (Iln ,oinit to) make coffee 5 39) a glass of water milk (I) drank (it) (how much have you) drunk sit down! /invitation to sit down at table: for family; for strangers/ (1) sat down help yourself

40) warmed over /of food/ vegetables genuine those (boys) this way

43) tomatoes onions

45) (I) can't (I) done (work( all day) /only enphatic ?/

47) cobweb /in house/ spider web /in woods or fields/

49) (my) husband (tnY) wife widow parents

50) daughter eon boy girl

52) /slow and fast form of Mts./ (your) aunt

53) Judge(Krzshall)

54) forehead the right ear

55) beard mouth palm /of the hand/ fists joint

56) chest (Ytm) eraid (she) didn'tusettto (be afraid) /negative of used .52j careless

57) tired

58) (she) got sick (he) caught a cold hoarse (haven't you) taken(your medicine) deaf (he) sweated (he) took (it)

59) boilla 'discharging Lore/pus

60) (they are in) mourning don't worry

62) married

63) railway station /contrast with bus station; try for four-stress items/ hotel hospital nurse

64) Alabama Louisiana Tennessee Mississippi

65) Detroit Birmingham

66) (they) joined(the church)

67) a haunted house (I'd) rather not go)

68) (fit) costs (too much)

69) borrow (I) swam (across) (he) dived (in) (he was) drowned (he) climbed (a tree)

70) (she) kneeled (down) (I) woke up (early) eta bil (the floor) 71) pull push (don't you) touch (it)

72) (who) caught (it?) give me another chance? (Z have) written (to his)

73) (Oho) taught (you that?) (that's the one you)gave (me) (he) began(to talk) (he) ran (away)

74) (he) came (over to see sue) (ha) saw (me go in) loompowhowmA ave... :Lima WOW milt WOW, Wel.som WWOM eac) did (it)

75) always (they) fought might could(do it)

-6- Chicago Phonology

Alva L. Davis

Illinois Instituteof Technology

In Language (1933)Leonard 3loomfield setsup 32

'primary phonemes'and nine 'secondaryphonemes' for Chicago speech. Although more recentstudies of the pitchesand

stresses have resultedin the establishmentof four stresses and, four pitch levels (with thestrong possibility thatthe highest pitch may be part of theparalanguage and thatthe stresses may be predictable from pitchcontours), 2loomfield's description was highlyuseful, The Linguistic Atlasframework for stresses issimilar to his in allrespects, while pitches are not systematically recorded. It is now generallyheld that investigation of the pitches,stresses and juncturesmust be studied In longerutterances than thoseusually elicited by the Atlasquestionnaire.

Lloomfield's symbolsfor the segmentalphonemes differ somewhat from thoseused by the LinguisticAtlas:

J.) LA.

A, e

The 32 'primary phonemes'consisted of 24consonants and eight vowels, with eightdiphthongs (or 'compoundprimary phonemes e) consisting ofa vowel plus one of thesemivowels

41,14A The secondary phonemesconsisted of fourtypes of 2

stress.-extra loud, loud, less loud, syllabicity(for syllabic consonants)--and five levels of pitch. - falling, rising-falling, rising, extra high ("distorted') and pause - continuing.

In his treatment of the vowels Bloomfield findstwo lower- mid phonemes /e,o/ and two low phonemes/a, / (or Aso, a, 1).

There has been no certain evidence in the materialscollected for this study to substantiate the/a, / difference, as in alms, odd, a difference which he notes for some CentralIld-

Uestern speakers. His use of /0/ for [A,9], and forto3 when followed by /w/ is consistent. Another way of handlins

the same data would be to write o for(u) and separate his

two allophones of /o/i;

ow

O

0

For unstressed /6/ 3loomfield uses syllabicity, or mere re.

duction of the related stressed vowel, as in/batm/ 'bottom',

/err/ 'error", /batl/ 'bottle', /gleam/ eglassessWienderli

'landed.'

For present day middle-class Chicago speech the fol-

lowinG vowel sound units can be set ups

Front Central Back

high i (10 u (uw)

I (i) U (u)

mid e(ey) e (e) o (ow) e (or) (e) low m (m) n (0 3

The symbols in parenthesesindicate the Tzzer-Smith equiva- lents, which have "Jeen used by _,tierican linguists during the last fifteenyears. TI,.: use WA the simple symbols is in accordance with thepractice r7rually employed in handling Lins.uistio Maasdata, but the Trager-Smith notation could be used for theChicago materials by substitutionof the appropriate symbols.

In the high-centralarea of the chart, no phoneme has been set up for Chicagonative speech. Phonetically, the vowel does occur, but it isallophonic with /I/or with /e /.

Li the stressed vowel of wishit may be interpretedas /I/ retracted and lightly roundedby the initial /ww4; in the second syllable of furnitureand ashes, it may be interpreted as a central vowel raised by the adjacentpalatalize. alveolar.

Use of an over-all frame ofphonemics would justify the settinG up of the high central phoneme but thereTiould be no resul- tant economy in representationfor this dialect, and sucha procedure would tend to obscuredialect differences in phonemic oppositions. Anon.syllablo variant of the hi!7h- central vowel is aisoa very common second element in such diphthongs as those ofbaand lw The wide diphthongs to beset up ares

al (ay) aU (aw) oX (o7)z 4

Examples from the Data

Cii3 Clv, 1:1

three eleven fourteen twenty creasy thirty kerosene seventy we January he February me chimney yeast laundry eaten greasy depot cement Louisiana Mississippi Tennessee Detroit

In stressed syllables/i/ has a slightly higher off-glide. In unstressed syllables the off-glidemay be absent.

/I/

six bit fifth little living his kitchen drink window this chimney widow did fists dishes Mrs. whip ill in both stressed and unstressed position EI)is typical. After /W/, as in whiz windor,there may be centering and rounding.

Before tautosyllabie /r/,as in sear, here, beard, ear, it may be lengthened and sometimes slightlyraised. ate eight April day make way tomatoes taken station gave came may railroad Tuesday

Stressed /e/ is a diphthong beginning a little lower than [e] and gliding to a higher position, close to lower high - central. In railroad the off-glide may be absent. In unstressed position, as in the names of the days of the week,

/e/ may alternate in careful speech with Ili.

/e/ seven yesterday ten bedroom eleven trestle twelve umbrella twenty trestle seventy umbrella second cement seventh fell Wednesday help chest deaf

Ee3 is usual, but there may be an in-glide as deaf, sweat, knelt, chest. In ma the in-glide is common.

Before tautosyllabio Inas in chair, theirs, scared,

careless, lengthening usually oocurs.

In trestle some centering occurs: This may be a

goompromise vowel,' in that the folk pronunciation has the

vowel of cut, and the word is rare in urban speech. 6

man candles Saturday sat January glass half past can't bath aunt ashes Alabama taps swam bag began sack ran

A centering off-glidemay occur in any of these words, without apparent patterningbut perhaps caused by tempo or sentence-stress, In Da& the off-glide often extends to the high-central position.

Such words as aunt, half East, bath,glass.. shibboleths for the "broad a"In other forms of English-- regularly have the vowel of bat.

/a/

wash cob palm borrow calm not hospital water

/a/ is likely tbhave length and a centering off- glide. There seems to be no contrast betweenlower low. front and lower low-back, as betweenbalm and bomb,.

Before /r/, as in March, are, there is fronting.

/0/ Laundry haunted wash caught faucet taught brought saw dog fought off coffee soft daughter hegularly in stressedopen syllables, as in law,

frequently elsewhere as in ought,, this vowel is accompanied by length and a centering off glide.

four door fourteen towards forty horse fourth hoarse tomorrow morning porch mourning

The vowel of law is regular before Inin these and similar words, but there isan occasional raised variety

in four, a remnant of the former contrast betweensuch pairs as horse and hoarse.

/0/ toU)

drove tomorrow go window won't yellow over tomatoes home widow yolk borrow cold depot hotel dove don't

/0/ is regularly diphthongized instressed position.

In weak final position, as in tomorrow, theremay be no perceptible off-glide. 8

lul

good Pull soot took roof push your

/Vi is ueually accompaniedby a centering off-glide.

In ash the off-glide isvery high, almost suggesting the /uy/ of. Tragerand Smith. Before /r/, as inma, /V/ varies with the vowel of cut,depending upon stress.

/u/ (uw, u.w)

two February Tuesday January room genuine you tube

In stressed syllables /u/is a diphthong, the

first element fronted after /t/0

sensact, January, February, thesyllabic is

monophthongal, with /w/beginning the followingsyllable.

/0/ one, once onions hundred son sudden judge front pus done touch does something brush nothing bulge drunk

In stressed position thevowel of outmay vary

from mid-central to advancedlower mid-back; it isusually monophthongal, thougha centering off-glidemay occur. 9

In unstressed position, as in sofa, as2, it is usually mid-central, slightly raised before /d, s, z, n/ as in added, careless, asheskitchen.

thirteen girl thirty worry first nurse third heard Thursday were furniture hers worked over

In both stressed and unstressed positions the vowel of sir, father always has constriction, which usually begins with the onset of the vowel.

nine spider white wife twice right dining tired ironing climbed I've, I might china why

/aI/ normally begins in the low-.central position,

sometimes slightly fronted, and glides to lower high-

central. Even in unstressed syllables it is clearly

diphthongal.

AU/

thousand pounds without down cows mouth ours drowned 10

/au/ normallybegins in the low-central position,

sometimes slightly fronted,and glides to lower high-back, with increasing lip rounding.

/031

oil boy, boys Detroit joint boil joined

hi/ begins in theupper low-back position and Tides to lower high-central.

Syllabic consonants

Ev, 13

thousand candle sudden trestle haven't vegetables bitten eaten and (weak stressed) written

Syllabic n and I are regular after /t, s,

In this position the 1 is always dark.

No evidence for syllabic [T, n3.. as in zassm, bacon-. was found in the materials examined for this study.

/I/ ashes window furniture widow

No firm evidence appears which would justify setting up a phoneme /1/. The occurrences of a phonetic 11 high-central vowel can be expletned as allophones of the vowels of but or bit.

Consonants

Although the anaaysis and organization of the vowels of American Ehglish has been a controversial subject for more than three decades, this has not been :rue of the

consonants except for minor details. Accordingly the

following description is somewhat condensed.

Stops

voiceless voiced

bilabial

alveolar

velar

The voiceless stops in initial position in strongly

stressed syllables are followed by a puff of breath

(laspirationl).

porch two careless past Tennessee kerosene pounds taught cold pull twice caught push Tuesday can't

After I's/. when initial in unstressed syllables,

between vowels, or in poet-vocalic position the aspiration

is nr'" present, except occasionally for emphasis at the

ends of words. 12

April taught scared whip past second spider front make hospital soot milk Mississippi station taken

/t/may be aspirated in twice, When intervocalic

/t/ followsa strongly stressed syllable and precedes a weakmstressed ones it is normally voiced andmay become a flap. In this positions /t/ is often indistinguishable from /d /; for many Chicago speakers tkure isno contrast between intervocalic /t/ and id/. Aglottalized /t/ occurs occasionally as in mountains at down.

thirty seated seventy sweated Saturday tomatoes water daughter

/k/ varies its position,depending upon accompanying sounds. It is fronted or palatalized in sixs makeskerosene; velarized in22231Ltoold: cools school,

The voiced stops have little ifany aspiration.

They may be partially devoiced in word- initialand wordm final pobition. Like /k/s /g/ varies in the position of articulation from front to backs according toenvironment,

bedroom dining good bag door bag brush drove greasy umbrella do go bitten sudden dog beard hundred glass February bed gave tube window rag :1.3

Fricatives

voiceless voiced f v

6 8

zV

AY and /v/are labiodentals with air passing through the teeth or between the teeth and lower lip.

ocasional bilabial fricative may be substituted in rapid speech.

four seven, seventh five eleven fourteen twelve forty seventy first of front drive, drove furniture haven't roof over off vegetables soft soft coffee wife

/C/ and /a/ appear to be most commonly aade with the ti, of the tongue behind the upper teeth, but other varieties occur, as with the tip of the tongue between the teeth or against the lower teeth,

a

three they thirteen there third eithout with those this In with and without both the voiceless and the voiced fricatives occur.

/s/ and /z/ are articulated at the alveolar ridge;

/zi may show considerable unvoicing, especially in final

position. This unvoicing is most frequent in neighborhoods with heavy concentrations of recent immigrants from Central

and Eastern &rope.

mix Tuesday seven dishes first candles sudden is, was faucet towards whips cows sack yours

ng middle-class natives of Chicago frzeast

always has intervocalle

sig/ is made a little farther back than /sit often

with lip rounding and a wide flat opening between the

tongue and the alveolar ridge.

washed shut dish shall

/V, the voiced counternartofblitioccurs far

less frequently than any other English consonant, especially

in initial and final position. Words in which it would

occur most frequently,, as pleasure, dkvision, were in-

frequent in the data gathered for this project.

/6/ and /Pare phonetically affricates; that is,

they are combinations of stop and spirant. /6/ is Et] plus 15

(4, and /3/ is (d) plus [4.

March January chimney bulge kitchen genuine chair judge furniture joint porch joined

Nasals

The nasals /m/,/n/, and /n/ es- bilabial,alveolar and velar -- are regularlyvoiced and show littleallo. phonic variation; exceptthat /r/ has a variationfrom front to back similar tothat for /k/ and/g/.

man one morning March seven ironing room nine going me ten drink milk thousand drunk warm eaten shrank Alabama once something mother window nothing not

Lateral /1/

/1/ is produced with thetip of the tongue atthe

alveolar ridge and airpassing over the sidesof the tongue. It

may be voicelessfollowing a voiceless stop orspirant, as in class, wale,slippery. Dark /1/ (velarized) is

common in allpositions, and regular when/1/ is post-

vocalic or syllabic. 6

eleven twelve candle glass all oil Lonisiana April milk little boiled pull hospital will girl vegetable olirb class

/r/

Although In is often called 'retroflex' it is perhaps best characterized by the pressure of the tongue against the molars. The tip of the tongue may or may not be turned back. In three the ir/ may be a voiceless flap or scrape, in Detroit a voiceless scrape, in drove a voiced scrape,

room four rinse forty railroad fourteen horse chair torn door parents morning merry marry

Monophthongal vocalic r has been discussed with the vowels.

/14/

/w/ isa u-like glide sound, beginning high to mid.baoko depending on the height of the following vowel..

It is voiceless e voiceless consonants, as in twice, twenty, swim. 17

one, once won't twenty, twice were January towards Wednesday warm window genuine wash way we work

In the Trager-Smith analysis, post-vocalic /w/ appears as the final component in the syllable nuclei' of cow, Ea, do. This has been previously discussed.

/h/

A syllable-initial /h/, sometimes classified as a fricative or as a voiceless vowel (whose position varies according to the position of the following vowel), appears under all conditions except weakest stress; it is lacking fron such common forms as the weak-stressed variants of he, his, her, him, have.

husband hoarse, horse hundred hotel haven't hospital he, him, his, hers heard home

There is no sure evidence for setting u-tl:g for

Chicago speech, a post-vocalic /hi as proposed by Tragar and Smith.

/hw/, sometimes calleda voiceless /w /, is perhaps best analyzed as a cluster. Ix middle-class Chicago speech it occurs regularly in words like why, ?pith. where. However, there is considerable variation in its 18

incidence from speaker tospeaker, especially in the de. scendants of recentimmigrants from Southern and Eastern Europe.

/3/

/3/ isa front i -type glide which, like its back counterpart /wil, varies withthe position of the following vowel,

you January yesterday yeast yolk yellow onion yes

The analysis of the final vocaliccomponents of bee, Dab bum,b as a post-vocalic /3/ .. the analysis proposed. by Trager and Smith.. has been previously discussed,

Lower-Class White Speech

The phonology of lower-class nativeChicago white speech is remarkably similarto that of the middle class.

Variations from middle-classnorms are not consistent, for all informants showan awareness of "correct" forms.

The following remarks accountfor most of these variations:

(1) Substitution of /t/ for i/L/ inninth, tenth, three, thirsty, throat, think,and substitution of /d/ for

/a/ in the. those_ T i .S.te emarame oesemosi calleras='" seems, however, that some speakers with this featurestill maintain a phonemic distinction, in that theit, d/ derived. from/6, 3/ may be dentals,contrasting with alveolar/t, d/ in ten, dead. More research mustbe done before adefinitive statement can be made.

(2) A glottal stop is a commonsubstitute for

/t/ in sit down, Saturdaz, andfor /f/ in half 2124/. CA In word initial/w/ often replaces/hw/ in whin, where, iittp etc. As we have indicatedbefore, however, this replacementalso occurs in Chicagomiddle- class speech.

(4) The participial suffix-au (and the final

syllable of such words aslona& somethine may appear

with /n/9 either syllabic orpreceded by aweak.-stressed

mid central or high-frontvowel. This feature is rarein

Chicago middle -class speech.

(5) A full diphthong of thetype [III] appears

occasionally in kie.

(6) Stress is reduced fromtertiary to weak, as

in the final syllableof avenue, or fromsecondary to

tertiary, as in the finalsyllable of kerosene. In the

names for thedays of the week, whichoften have/e/

under weak stresswith middle-classspeakers, /i/ is

regular with weak stressin the speech ofthe lower class. 20

It must be emphasized here that not all ofthese

features are diagnostic for lower-classwhite speech in other communities. In British Received Pronunciation

(3) is regular,as in parts of the Eastern United States and the Lower Mississippi Valley; inthe Old South, and in British "county" families (4) and (6)are comnon; in parts of the South (5)appears even in educated, speech.

The small sample of lower-class, non-Chicagowhite

speech examined for this project hasa very different dialect base.- that of the Southern Uplani, commonly called

South Midland in the Americanlinguistic atlases. This speech has been described at lengthin Hans Kurath and

Raven I. McDavid, Jr., The Pronunciation ofEnglish in the

Atlantic States (Ann Arbor, 1961). Some of the character- istics of this regional type of speechare:

(1) AI/ asa monophthong in all positions:

ride, right. In extreme cases this becomes

homonymous with the vowel of father; byNortherners

it is often confused with that vowel.

(2) /it after /t, d, n/in tube, due, new, etc.

(3) Contrast between horse and how,morning and mourning, etc.

(4) A fronted and raised beginning ofthe diphthong /aU/,as in out, loud.

(5) /u, U/ with high-centralrather than high. back articulation. 21

(6) /z/ increasy.

(7) /U/ in bum, bulk, budget.

(8) /0/ in /221,you, etc.

(9) rut with the vowel of cut.

Of these features only the last is characteristic of the lower class in the South Midland region. However, since a majority of the South Midlanders that the average

Chicagoan encounters are of the lower (or at best, lower middle) class, they may be considered popular socialmarkers of speech ia Chicago.

Incidence of Phonemes

Besides the phonological organization which

characterizes dialects, some distributions of phonemes are also typical; that is one dialect may have /s /,

another /z/ intervocalically in greasy. Some items show

consistency in native Chicago speech, while others do not.

Before tautosyllabic as in four, fourteen, g2=-four, horses hoarse, 2orch, tore, torn, only the vowel of law occurse

Similarly, in chair, there, careless, spared only

the voNel of bet is found.

Before intervocalic /rift in tomorrow, the vowel

of law is more common than that of father; in borrow the

situation is reversed, with the vowel of father predominant. 22

The vowel /U/ is regular in roof,soot (one occurrence ofkil); the vowel /u/ is regular in room (one speaker has/V).

Wash shows both the vowel of lawand that of alar, with the latter more commonin the lower-class samrle. It usually has an off-Glideto central, some- times to lower high-central. Water normally has the vowel of laws but/a/ occurs; one speaker hal/af in water_ onl ii the phrase hot water.

Won :t regularly rhymes withdon't.. Eptssialofaueet always have/a/.

vowel of law. amitt, illialrays have the MUMMER,

Greasy, always has/sh

With and withov.t occur withboth /,1 and /8/. The

former predominates in with,the latter in without.

Rinse occurs with both the vowelof bit and that

of bet, with *che former more common. The final consonant

is occasionally affricatedsriving pronunciationsof the

type rinch, renchl in middle-classspeech.

Forehead commonly has secondary ortertiary stress

on the secondsyllable, with the/h/ pronounced.

Grammar

In grammr the speech of themiddle-class

Chicagoan shows little or nodeviation from standard 23

forms, For the lower class, substandard formsare riot common in guarded speech; but drank as a participle

(perhaps avoiding the connotationsof the adjective drunk), ourself, we done,occur even there. In guarded speech there is general avoidance of ain't andof third-singular don't, possibly because theseare the best known gramma. tical shibboleths. You-all is not found as a generous plural; the form youse.. known to occur in lower-class

Chicago white speech did not appear in the sample for this study.For all informants dove (with /o/) is the normal past tense of dive

Extended accounts of the verb morphologyare available in E. Bagby Atwood, Verb Forms in the Eastern

United States, (Ann Arbor, 1953) and in Virginia McDavid,

Verb Forms in the North-Central States and Ems Midwest, dissertation (microfilm) University of Minnesota, 1956. 12

'2-=.ble I

Primary Paonefies

v v v p t k f Q g s c

b d v 6 i Z 3

mn'jr 1 j w r

i u e o c o r. a ,

e 0i :3j aj

+ w

t I UWI i uw few

OW aw

Secondary Phonemes

'Aresses extra loud, loud, less loud syllabicity for syllabic /1, in,ns Of r/ Pitches falling, rising-falling, rising, extra high ( ' distorted1), pitch-continuing Table II

Ai:xe,m)les of "ri.mry and Compound-2rimary Phonemes

/pin/ 'pin' /tin/ 'tin' /ket/ 'cat' /big/ 'big' /dig/ 'digl &iv/ 'gives /f sr./ 'fan' /v n/ 'van' /gin/ 'thin' /03en/ 'then' /sea/ 'sad' /zip/ 'zip' igovi fsAoiret/ruwk./ 'rouge' /c in/ 'chin' /3em/ 'gem' /mis/ 'miss' /nik/ 'nick' /sit)/ 'sing' /red/ 'red' /lam/ 'lamb' lies/ 'yes' /wcg/ 'wag' /hand/ 'hand' /pin/ 'pin' /put/ 'put' /eg/ 'egg' /op/ 'up' Ad/ 'add' lot/ touLAt'

'alm6 ?odd' . /WA/ 'bee /duw/ 'do' If iuw/ 'few' /bey/ 'bay' /gow/ 'go' /baj/ 'buy' /baw/ 'bough' /bop Phonological Indices of

Social Dialects in Chicago

Lee Pederson

Previous investigations of Chicago speech, as in

Pederson, The Pronunciation of Fanerlish in Chicw.os Consonants

and Vowels (Diss., University of Chicago, 1964) have suggested

the existence of certain dialect cleavages along racial lines.

Accordingly, for this project to specify such cleavages,

fifty interviews were conducted, thirty with Negroes and twenty

with whites, using an adaptation of the Linguistic Atlas

questionnaire. In each racial group were ten middle-class

informants; there were ten lower-class whites and twenty lower-

class Negroes--half of the latter relatively long term

residents of Chicago, the other half new arrivals.

Fourteen of the thiry Negro records were collected by

John Allis, a graduate student in Anthropology at the

University of Chicago. 'lints, a Negro himself, did a good

job in gaining the confidence of the informants and stimu-

lating the free conversation which perhaps comprises the most

valuable data collected. His lack of experience in the field

led him to the occasional mistake of neglectingan item

because it was hard to elioite The remaining sixteen records

were collected by Lee Pederson. His interviews include a

more nearly complete coverage of the questioumaire items, but the free conversation In these records is usually distinctly interior in richness of form to those collected by Fillis,

This ras mainly because Pedersonwas not alnays able to es- tablieh whrt is call:d rapport.

TheamIPM, Informant: ====u2oWrga.obwm Socio-linsuistie classification, TableI.

The original plan in thissurvey was to select 20 Negro informants, 10 of whom were residents of the city for 20 years or more and 10 who were recent arrivals. Of the 20 twenty-year residents, 10 were to be of the middlesocio- economic class and 10 were to be of the lower socio-economic class. The problem, of course, is to establisha satisfactory classification of informants in order to indicatesociological distribution. Unsatisfactory classification of informants is one of the serious problems of social dialectoloGyin this decade. The prededent set in the New Zngland Atlas,a distinction of three basic types and t1To sub-classesold fashioned and modernwas (rite satisfactory for the regional

surveys in the 30's and 40's. rut the sociological implications of iirs. Franies analysis of the Lowman records in NewYork

in 1919 and David DeCamp's study of San Francisco Speech,

1955, suggest the need for further classifications A readily available scale for this kind of investigationappears in

W. Lloyd 1,:arnerls Social Classes in America. This was used with no great success in The Pmnunciation of 2nalishin

Chicam: Consonants and Vo "els. this classification was

treated there as secondary, and primary attentionwas given instead to educational types. This was simply an analysis of

the tripartite division or the New Zngland Atlas into 10groups in order to distinguish the extent of academic innoculation, a problem of mass college education growinT up with the post

Jorld jar 11 era. These scales of ranking were unsatisfactory for social dialectology for obvious reasons. The Irey Zngland

Atlas did not undertake an analysis of social class and i* Lloyd 1arner did not include linguistic problems in his analyses, A somewhat more suitable scale has been adopted hare: a socio.linguistie classification, contrived for the present inveStigation* Rhe seven categories include those factors which seem linsuistioally significant in the Negro sub- culture. These are: 1) place for birth and years in

Chicago (full weight)--each full weight cem is 10 points and the one half point item is 5 points on a 65 point scale.

.:Aucation, on the 10 point scale is a little more reliable*

1) a graduate of an integrated college, 2) a student at an integrated college, 3) a graduate of a segregated college,

4) a btudent at a segregated college, 5) a graduate of an

integrated high school, 6) a student at an integrated high

school, 7) a graduate of a semregated high school and 8)

a student ai; a se3resated high school, 9) an elementary school

graduate and 10) an elementary school student. For examples

informant 1-1, that is the highest ranhed on the table has

a total of 17 points, he has 5 points for plan o of birth; he

is Lidland borne 20 years in Chicago. Nexte .1;ducationa he

has 3 points; he is a graduate of a segregated college.

His job: he has one point, he is in an integrated profession;

he is a social worker, art on my scale a social worker is especially interms ranked as hirrh as alawyer or adoctors Parents* place ofbirth: hehas of linsuisticsand norality0 born In thei.idland 4 points there;his parents were his father w-asan 3piscopal Parents education: 1 of10 because 1, he was apriest. Housing, priests Parents/ occupation: A. Conversely, infor- 3of 10, So 1-1 isclassified group attending theJohn mant 1-3 whohad a bettereducation in lived as many yearsin Chicago, iiarshall LawSchool and having parents were noteducated in is ranked lowerbecause his 'orofessionals andbecause integrated collegesand were not within the Negro he himselfpractices lawalmost exclusively Is 35. It shouldbe community. Hissocio-linguistic total established from noted that theA to Gclassifications are socio-linguistic groupB) these totals:A) 7-23 highest C) 31-37 High-Lidsocio- 24-30 high socio-linguis tic group socio-linguistic groupE) 47-52 linguistic groupD) 39-45 ii.d F) 53-60 Lotr Low-hid orHigh-Lot sotto -linguistic group socio-linguistic socio-linguistic groupG) 61-65 Lowest

group, morphologicalfeatures Distribution: The phonoloGical.and which in previouslinguistic considered hereinclude those showed a clearpattern of surveys ofmetropolitan Chicago education, age orsocio- distribution on thebasis of race, regionally or economic typeand thosefeatures which are the Lidlandand the socially distributedin the North, structures norsuprasegmentalphonemic South, Zeither syntactic because the mostinteresting evi- patterns areincluded here dente seems to be in the freeconversations; phonetic, phonemic and morphemic itemsare given with their variants.

Ale main concerp,ofcourse, is with the differences between

Negro and Caucasian speech. For that reason in the tables, x or X always indicates the dominant form in thespeech of native Caucasian Chicagoans, highschool graduates of the middle-age group, 30-50years old and the central socio- economic class. the symbol 0 and $ in the tables indicate forms which are not typical of the speechof the Caucasian type mentioned above. Distribution based separatelyon age, region or sex is not always givenhere because these factors too often overlap the criteriaused to establish socio- linguistic types. For example, 9 of 10 recent arrivals are between ages 27 and 45; 6 of theseare of iaiscissioi ancestry and 8 of the 10 recentarrivals are females.

Three allophones of the post vocalic In (often phonetically schwa) are distinguishedhere. 1) strong constriction,

2) weak constriction and 3)no constriction.

Table 2 shows a distinction betweenunrounded and rounded vowels, because roundingversus unrounding seems to affect distribution. A much lower incidence ofconstriction occurs after rounded stressed vowels in the speech ofmembers of all regional, social andage goups. Among members of Group

I, Types A to Cs only two informants, 3and 5, have a high incidence, that ismore than half the occurrences of the weak or unconstricted phoneme after unroundOd vomls. Both infor- mants are over age 55 and neither is closely associatedwith 6 the Caucasian community. The single exception anion; Group II,

Types A to C9 is the young social worker who had been in

Chicago only two years.All members of Type B have lived in

Chicago for 20 years or more and none of these has a high frequency of this recessive feature. Twelve of the seventeen members of Types FJ to G favor the recessive feature, These include 7 of 10 members of Group I, 5 o 7 members of Group

II, From Group I, all three exceptions are within6 socio-

linguistic points of Type D, that is 1-11, 1-13, and1.14,

Both exceptions ta Group II are within 9 pointsof Type D,

2-4 and 2-5, Before rounded vowels, 5 members of Group I

have a high frequency of the recessive feature, these are the

1 -2, 1 -3,1-5, 1 -7 and 1-10. Light of 10 members of Group II

favor the recessive feature. The exceptions again are the

highly ranked 2-2 and 2-4v

sable2, initial members of the AI/ diphthong. Seventeen

allophones occur as initial members of the up-gliding

diphthongs These are distinguished by position--fron to

mid; by duration--unlengthened to extremely lene;thened; and

nasalization--strong nasalization versus weak or none.

These allophones are classified in Table 3 only on the basis

of position. That is the low-mid vowels typical of Chicago

Caucasian speech, the fronted lows -mid vowels or the retracted

low -fron vowels, and the low-front vowels.Both fronted

variants, marlzed o and on the Table, occur most frequently

auong lower ranked 4pes E to G. Of the 20 informants ranked

to G, only 2 have a preponderance of the low-midvowels, Both of these speakers, 1-13 and 1-15, received their full formal educal.lon in Chicago,,

Table 4, Dhones of the mid- centralvowel. The raw phonetic material is given in Table 4. There is one certain feature of distribution. A Ltd-Central monophthong is clearly dom-

inant in Caucasian speech in this city.Among the Yegroes

interviewed, however, diphthongization is common, absent

in only four speakers. All four of these are of Group I,

twenty-year residents of the city, and three of these are

locally educated. However insignificant from a phonemic

standpoint, this diphthong is an unmistakenly foreign sound

to native Chicago Caucasians and is one of the features

mentioned by informant 1-1 who talked for some time about

the Chicago Negro and his southern accent.

Table 1, Consonant Loss. Eighteen consonant phonemes are

charted here. Each of these is lost in the speech of some

informants and none of these is usually lost in Caucasian

speech except in the very old or uneducated members of low

socio-economic groups. Two composite types of phonemes have

social significance here. These are certain phonemes which

include phonic members characterized by voicing and stoppage

of the air stream which occur in syllable initial position.

2he /d/ phoneme in hundred, the /d/ phoneme in candle and

the /d/ alternating with /t/ in yemetable and the /b/ phoneme

in umbrella. All of these occur in the second syllable of the

word and are retained by all members of Group I, Types A to

D, with 2 exceptions. 7oth of these informants, 1-5 and 1-6, are over ase 55 and neither Js a native of Chicago. Similar incidences are loss of the syllable initial /h/in forehead and /j/ In z2aAL. Three members of Group I, Types A to D, lose these consonants and like 1-5 and 1-6,informant 1-9 is also over age 55 and nota native of Chicago. among other forms in this table the incidence isas =noted. members of Groups I and II, of lower socio-linguistictypes, have a higher frequency of consonant loss than do the higher ranked

Informants. It should be noted in passing that the item

S in this table, the /w/ in Louisiana, is obviouslya syllable loss. The evidence of the four syllable utterance rather than the usual five syllableis quite atypical in Chicago Caucasian speech.

Table 6, Incidence of consonant phonemes. Four groups of consonant phonemes are classified in this table. The

occurrence of the voiced spirant inmass and mas . alternation of the stop with thefricative in--this year/ dis mar,-this way/Ells wax, and thealternation of the labiodental fricative with the interdental fricative in--with/wif-- without/wifout--mouth/mouf,etc. The incidence of relic and assimilated form appears in rinses/rinohes--chimnev/hialx and Animtam4Bloiscital. In creasy there is clearly a higher incidence of /z/ among native ChicagoNegroes than among midland or Southern born immigrants. Here indeed seems to be the first clear feature of the up-south regro dialect. The current investigation shows Chicago bornNegroes having 7 /z/ and 5 /s/, iiidland 10 /z/ and 8 /s/, Southern 9 born 14 /z/ and 11 /so/. The factor to be considered here is that all informants were to be over age 30 ft,i the current survey. In a previous investigation, the high school age native Negroes were introduced and this powerfully influential group shored 17 instances of /z/ to 7 /s/. All of those were natives of Chicago.

The incidence of dental stops for interdental fricatives appearmuch less frequently in the Tables6 However, it must be remembered that the questionnaire responses are perhaps more careful than free conversation where there seems to be a higher frequency in the tapes.Almost every informant,

Type i to G, has at least one occurrence of the dental stop for dental fricative. The alternation of labiodental fricative /f/ for usual interdental voiceless or voiced fricatives must also be analyzed in free conversation. But it seems tc be less frequent in Chicago iregro speech than in

.Ashington, D.C.9 speech as reported by Stewart.The fourth group of forms (hi, N, 0, in the Table) have the highest frequency among older informants of all types and tosome-

:That lesser extent among lower socio-linguistic types. This combination of factors--older age and lower socio-linguistic typesaccounts for the higher frequency of these recessive forms among members of Group I. Lleven members of that Group have at least 2 of 3 instances and nine of theseare over age

4o. Seven of eleven, however, are Types 13 to G. moth in-

formants under age 40 are of Type D, the bottomon the non-

low section with 44 point% loth members of Group II with two 10 or more occurrences of these forms are Types G, with a maximum total of 63 socio-linguistic points.

Table 7, Systematic alternation of stressed vowels. The incidence of Trowels charted in this Table are of three types: 1) Those alternating the vowels of bet and bat before heterosyllabic /r/--items A to D. 2) Those alternating the vowels of low and law before tautosyllabie /r/--items

',;; to F. 3) Those alternating the-vowels of cot and law through the development of iiiddle English vowels -- items

G to Po

The phonemic distribution of the vowels of low and lay in items 3 and F is a recessive feature in Caucasian speech in northeastern Illinois with the highest incidence shaied by well-educated urban and suburban informants and old-rural informants living in the out-counties. The /aV/ diphthong; 0 was not recorded in items N, 0, P in Caucasian speech.

Items A to F are best distributed on the basis of regional dialect. Items G to J when restricted to a large number of

Negro speakers show a development which parallels incidence among Caucasians ilisofar as the more highly educated infor- mants have the unrounded vowel.

Table 8,i =on- systematic alternation of vowels. The vowels

in this table are distinguished as stressed and weak'.y stressed because the distribution within each set is somewhat different.

Among the stressed vowels, the occurrence of /i/ in deaf

agrees with the observation of .wrath and ileDavid concerning

this alternation in the Atlantic states. Incidence of the 11 recessive form is highest among the lower social classes, but the feature is also found among natives of the deep

South and South Lidland areas. Informants 1, 4, 7 and 10 have parents from these areas. Informants 1, 18 and 20 are ranked F and G. Group II, informants 4, 9 and 10 are all natives of the deep South In Caucasian Chicago speech, this form occurs only among members of the lowest socio- economic group. The incidence of the vowel of cut in ruther occurs in 7 of 8 instances among members of-Type F to G, five of whom are of Group I. The occurrence of the vowel of bet in rether corresponds roughly with the Xurath- ileDavid observations that it is restricted to the speech of the folk and middle groups. £he most clearly distinctive feature in Chicago Negro speech is the occurrence of the

"broad a° in aunt. The "flat a° occurred only 17 times in these contexts and never among members of Types A and 3.

The remaining items D to G are pretty well restricted to Types

J to G of both Groups with the highest frequency anion; Types

F and G. Similar distribution is found among the recessive forms of the weakly stressed vowels in this Table. The notable exceptions occur under items to 0 among members of

Group I, Types A to D who have a rather high frequency of recessive forms, 19 of 49. Conversely, among the top three members of Group II, there is but 1 of 15 instances*

Lexical differences. The paucity of lexical variants which have sociological distribution is simple to explains the findings in Table 9 include the first data of the Chicago 12

lexicon to have been analyzed. This is not to suggest that important information is not to be foundin Chicago studies done so far, but this brief reviewdoes suggest that a more productive set of items should be obtained. Two areas of lexicon which should certainlybe explored, are: 1) Southern!. iSMS vs. Northern urbanisms, 2)la-group Negro Slango

The recessive items in Table 9are predominately relics of Southern speech. items G and J 4itomp" and

"skaire have the highestfrequency of occurrence in these forms and along wit: /anti/are the only recessive items which are not clearly old-- fashioned, The over-all pattern. of dis- tribution shows all informants underase 40 with a high LI eidence of recessive forms; thoseinformants are .rypes D to G, 1-8, 1-10, 2..8 and 2-10. All others having this high ocmrrence of recessive features are older and of Types to

G. These include 1-11, 1-142 1-16, 1-17, 1-18,1-i9 and I-20v and 2-9, seven of whomare Types F and G; Concerning specific items several observationscan be made. Although the incidence of kerosene is about thesame in both groups, the incidence of coal oil is higher in Group II,occurring in 8 of 10 instances, in the speech of all Southern informants,Types

to .0. Amonz the five members of Group I, Types C and having coal oil, four are over age 5$. Perhaps the best social indicator in the table is Item H with variantssstand- out, stick out and buffle out, occurring onlyin the speech of informants Types F and G.

Table 10, Verb forms. Standard verb forms in Americaare 13

more importantsocial indicators than standardpronunciation, contrary to the apparent situationin England. The items in Table 10 corroborate this. In six items, that is Item 3,

Item Cs Item G, Item J and Item 741'and Item 0, there is not a single instance ofthe standard verb form amongGroup I menbers, Types F and Go That is 36 of36 instances of non- standard verb forms with the exceptftonof A and F; all other verb forms on the table show apreponderance of non--standard

forms in the speech of these seveninformants. Among the new arrivalsp theincidence of standard forms ismuch higher

among Types F to G, thatis informants 2, 5 to 10than the

members of Group I. This is probably explainedby the fact

that the median grade level ofeducation in Types F to Gof

Group I, is about 7th grade,7.49 and of Group II, it is

10.6. The other factor, of course,is the system of ranking

which penalizes outlanders.:. Aconclusion here mightsugGest

that general education seemsto be doing pretty muchthe same

job in the segregated North andthe segregated South. 14

Table 1

TABLE OF INFORLANTS 20-Year Residents of Chicam Q1 2 No.S1AN3 E4Place of Lother'sFather'sOccupation Y5Type6 Mirth P033 P033

1.k 39 69 38 Lawrence- VirginiaVirginia Social 20 A17 Virginia Worker

2. L 31 68 BS Chicago, ArkansasLouisianaSocial 31 :330 Illinois (rural) (rural) Worker

3e h 5740 0 Humboldt, TennesseeTennesseeLawyer 21 C32 Tennessee

4. F 3142 3A Omaha, Alabama Alabama Restaurant28 C33 ilebraska hanager

5s IP 67 68 13 Little Hock, Unknown Unknown Iiinister 35 C33 Arkansas

6. h 5738 12 Harrisburg, Illinois Illinois Electri- kO D39 flhinois (rural) (rural) cian

7. h 6039 10 Chicago, LouisianaTennesseeClerk 6o Dia Illinois

8® F 3030 10 Chicago LouisianaKentuckyClerk 30 D44 Illinois

9.ii 55 67 12 Sherman, OklahomaTexas Cook 28 D44 Texas io. ii 31 44 12 Chicago, hissie. Lissis. Janitor 22 D44 Illinois sippi sippi

11. F4669 10 Charleston, TennesseeTennesseeHouseleXe25L47 Tennessee

4Education 2 Age 5Yeersin CnIcago

3NeighborhoodCommunity 6Socio-LinguisticType 15

TABU; X (Continued)

NoSit NEPlace o: liother's Father'sOccupation Y Type Birth FOB

120 F 4242 9 Chicago, Louisiana Louisiana Housewife 42 L47 Illinois

13. F 42 68 10 Chicago, Jamaica Jamaica Hbusewife 37 E49 Illinois

14. h 6742 8Atlanta, Georgia Georgia Porter 44 F53 Georgia

15. F 2742 10 hissis- hissis- bissism Housewife21 F54 sippi sippi sippi

16. F 4667 8 harvell, Unknown Unknown Housewife20 F54 Arkansas

170 F 50 67 7 Karvell, Unknown Unknown Housewife24 F55 Arkansas

18.II 56 54 4hemphis, TennesseeTennesseeLaborer 20 F56 Tennessee

19. h40 IMOD 6 Tuscaloosa, Alabama Alabama Laborer 23 F60 Alabama

20, h 47 39 9 Baton Rouge,LouisianaLouisianaWatchman 25 G61 Louisiana

RLCaT ARRIVALS

1. F 48 73 PA Jackson- Florida Florida Housewife 12 A21 ville, Fl rida

2. F 43 49LkLos Angeles, Dallas, Pittsburgh housewife 11 B25 California Texas Pennsylvania

3. k 32 35 38 West, hisais- Lissis- Social 2 C35 hississippi sippi sippi Worker

4.ii 45 42 11 kemphis, nssis- 'Assts.* Janitor 17 252 Tennessee sippi sippi

5. F 4229 12 MarigoldT Ilissis- :Cassis- Clerk 1 F56 hississippi sippi sippi

6. F 35 9 Hattiesburg, Liss's- Dissis- Housewife 1 F57 Lississippi sippi sippi 1 (Continued)

A 11 LI Place of Lother's Father'sOccupation Y Type Birth P0:3

3542 10 Lontgomry, Alabama Alabama Housewife4F58 Alabama

8. F 3642 10 Lexington, Lissis. Uaitress 8 F59 Lississippi sippi sippi

90 F 45 40 5LaGrange, Georgia Georgia Housewife 7 G65. Georgia

10. F 2742 7 Lawn, Liss's. 'Assts. Housewife 7G65 Lississippi sippi sippi 17

TABLE 2

TAUTOSYLLALIC In AFTER MESSED VOWELS

x is strong constriction

is weak constriction

o is no oonstriotion

- is no response

Unrounded 7owels Rounded Vowels

A. beard G.four B. careless fourth Co chair morn_ (in goad morning) D. thirteen X.mourninT B. furniture L.horse F. FLEE41122. EFFFie

No. A. B. C. D. E. F. G. H. 3. K. L. 2.xxixx$1.xxxxxx oogf000xox0xx 3o$00$ o o o 0 o . i o Li. x x X x o x X X X 0 XX 5. 0 0 $ X 0 a. $ 0 X C X 0 6. x x X X X X X X o 0 x x 8.XXXX07. X 0 4.2C 0 $X xxxoxxX 0 0 0 0 0 9. x $ x x 0 x x oxxx o 11010.xxxxxi xxxxxx 000000xoxxxx i2.ssiV-ii0 o i o 0 o 14. XX 2;o XX 0 0 0 X o x 10 XX 0 XXXii 0 0 Xli 150 x o 0 4 0 If o co o o - o 16.0xx00 x 00000$ 18.X0iiii17.xooio 4. 000000o 0 o o o o 196X0XmOX AI o - o $ 20. x o x o o x coo JP 0 0 PA 0 co .N3 cm.A..P-%,A) Iv Ii0901104DO 0 po Oa 0I 00 SOS\0 0 IS\ N 0 NM 1604 ISkk, ASk,1,4 IS% al4r oCat%)tzi O 19.e o 0Ia.() N N [e.4 S. N N Vt. N N N1 U0 ...,P4Ztact0 St, 0 0 IN 0 0.419.19053104 N N N Pci 1.4 N 0 N k.4 L'71 O000000NONO 1"S 0 0 0 1,4 0 ill 0 tx:t.f O >010 0 0 0 04 0 M 0 etite.-1 OO 0 0P4i 0 00019.0 151, 0 0 °MONO014 t VO0 0 00.4 e175 19

TABLZ 3

PHOWLS OF THI FIRST katIOZAR OF THE /aI/ DIPHTHONG

x is low-central

is advanced low-oentral or retracted low-front

o is low-front

* le an alternate phoneme

- is no response

IL five G. wife

B. nine U. Lilt, (in Elelt ear Co twice tired D. dining (in dining d. climbed L. China (dishes or the 12221212.112,02110 L. might Fo allar. (in alittE92)

, No A. B. C. D. Z. F. Ge H. J. 1. L.

1. x x X x i x x X X X X

2. x x x 0 $ x X X x X X

3. i i 0 x i x x x x x x

4. o x x of $ $ 0' x x .. i

5. $ X x x X x x X se

6. o of 0 of of of - 7 0 z x A

8. x x x x of x x x x x x

9. 0 (6 o of o ci x $ x of x

lo. o of of 0 of of ce * $ fi x *10 is the vowel oflathu 20

1'A3L3 3 (Continued)

No. A. ,i C. De E. F. G. Ho J. K. L.

- 11. i i 0' i o 0 i 0' I i . 12. o o i 1 i $ i i e 0'

13e x x x x x 0' x x - x x

- * 14. o o 0 o 0 $ 0' $ 0'

15. 1 0 ir. x x x x x x * .

16. o 0 0 0' o i c 0 o * o

17. o i o x $ 0 0 0 0 * o

18. o o $ 1 o 0' i . $ o $ 19. - - o . i i i i i 0 $ 20e i o 1 - o i i 0 i - 1

*14 is the vowel of out; *15, *16,*17 is the vowel of cat

le $ x 0' x $ x - x x x x

2. 1 i x 0' x 1 1 x x -

3. $ gf x gf o 9' i x x x x

4. 6( qf c4' 4 x 4 x l X 7 X

5. 0 i 0' 0' o 0 0 0 0' o -

6. 1 1 cf 1 1 x x 1 1 1 1 . 7. 1 1 st o $ ce ce o x ce

8. o GC i 4 itt x 1 1 1 o fif

931 ii x x x 0' x x .3! 1

1 0 .,. . 1 1 - 1 0 0 1 0 ,.. 9C

*9 is the vowel of father. 21

2ABLS4

PHONLS OFTHEvoaa OF CUT INCLUDING ALTZRNATE VOL OF pio AND SIOEIWOUS r-COLORING

X is lax central or mid-back unrounded vov'el x is tense central vowel Lis the vowel of bet

0 is centering offglide Z is highbadk vowel

is highfront offglide R is constricted vowel

0 is highback offglide - is no response

A. but (in shut the door) G. ;judge (noun)

B. brush (noun) H. psis

C. touch (in don't touch) J. nothing (response to What:s new?)

D. onions (stressed vowel) A somethin(response to Betuse

E. husband istressed vowel) L. hundred (stressed vowel)

F. son h. once (in at once)

No. A. C. D. F. G. He 30 A. L.

r 10 X 11 dc. Lb .6;.

2. a. . 49'.5

4.x x Ab a. r .5..116 0 .g. 6.// V V - 0 7 x a. x i 9 - .!" T 8. a.'- 4. sb .1

94 0 , did 9C io. " / o 0 11. . R 0 0 0 12. .0 x ..?. .4 A ; r -r - 17 13$ .1 41 41. ..1. A . 1 41. A A 140 X 0 4/. 0 11 sb X 1: alk 46 0 se 150 A A 4'1 44 .4 -

.14 .a. .4 16, / R 0 4)(6 t0 . 17. / / 0 0 10 al X 44 .s7 18. 0 H eu 0 0 . $ i 0 -., 19. 0 x A. A Xas - 204 / x x 0 4)i X X X X 0 0'61141A * C\I ' I 's1 O 0 04 0 `61 4 019. ; `6,. ' 4 ' O y I a m 1-4 0 `st WI 1 'C Isto-loNstmooNee,", Nil%' 0 MVOS! N1 0t Ij N ,`Y re r.:1 Si OSNSIISt 1.4 OISA NISL 0 0 I 1'19.! 4 4.)selQ) sc, 0 ' ; MN% N '149. %re10 <411 -4.6 0 I- 4 0VA C4 '' 1 ' 4 t`ININS4 a t. it sA I 49, 0 "*.so:Va. F-4<4r i rI:v. sM0 a-4 CV C11 V`10 LOGO O\ 1.4CD 23

TABU 5 CONSONANT IOW

x is consonant retained

o is consonant lost

is alternate consonant ( /t/ in ninth)

- is no response

in bela K. /0/ in fifth Bo it d/ in vegetables L. /0/ in ninth C. /h/ in forehead id. /t/ in joints, Do t/ in ERTir N, id in 1.21.1 . /d/ in FOrriorning) 0. /j/ in yeast F. /b/ in urn Tella P. /t/ in yeaLt, G. /b/ in Ene Q. /t/in saWIL H. /t/ in Ma A. /d/ in candles Jo /t/ in IRT7overs S. /u/ in rarrana

No. A. B. C. D. 2. F. G. H. J. 11. LoLe N. O. P. Q. R. S.

1. x x xxxxxxxX X X X X X X X X

2.xxxxxxxoxX X X X X X X X X

3. X X X X X X X0 O X X0 X00 X0 4, xxxxoxooxX X X X X X X X X

5. oxxxxxo O 0X X 0 X 00

6. x x x xx o o xx 6 o O o x o 7. xx x xxx x oxooxx x o 8. x x xx xx x xx x X X X 0X X X

9. x xo xx xo O X X X0 X X 0 10* .xxxxxxxooxxoxooxx 11.x-xxxoxo-oxoxxxoxx 12e 4,xxxooxxxooxooxxoo 24

TABLX5 (Continued)

No.A. B. C. D. 21.FG. H.S. Z. Lo No N O.P. Q. R. S. 13.ox x x xox xoox x xoox o 14. x x x ox o x xox o -oo 15.x x x x x X o0oX X X O o 17.16.o x-0xxxoxwoxxoox00 x o xo x o xoo 18. -000xxxx00xxoxx000 19.ox x x oxoo ooox o0o 20.000ox ox o00 x x 0

1.x x ox x xooo x x o 2.x x x x x x xo0o "x xo0x x 3.x x x x x x x x xx x x x x x x xo .. oX X X x x ox x oo- 5.oox x x x xooo xo x o oo 6. x xox x o0ox x0 xo a x 7. X X X X X X0X 0X X X X X X 00 8.ox x x x x x ooo xx oX xo oo 9.oox x x x oxoo x xo o -o 10.00 X X 000 -- 000000X 00 (:),Vc-IWONWitJOUtP.0 towbs-1-61.A8.41-61-61.al-A0+ C3003.10A11.4-%.0Wpah Oso02.N1 ONVc t1.a N Pa O %C) CO ,%1 COW% .M.8) e0 I-6 0 ci.00JK WWMM O Nt4O04H04 1 HN 04)O HOHOtIHNHM*MHNHOHHHH O ***0001*0 * 0 0 * * ' : H O *:00gooN*oomo tLi O HNOHOMHOO 04 0040014004000:4004040004 NH 0 trt /10H00000HN O 000010H0000QOOHOHOHM U 8 H MMhbIHMHMHHHHH 8 O HHNHHHHWM N NHHMHNHHMHHHHHHHHHH Li mmmmmmmmmmmcomm m_0000000mcon/mmV0'0 IMI1OHIOIM 0111*10**1*100**0*OM \ \ \ \\ \'..\ \ `\ pJ O CHHH I M;IMMM H O NH 1 110HM 1 MOH 11 HHHH ri ht h3 0' 100404040404IkNH 0HH0404 1 MMMNHHHNNMMFIM 141. O 0000000000000 161.0HM14HHMHH OMM046.1MHHHHHI9.MHH04 4OIN 414 mmmommmmmcommmm O

H 1 OHNMNHHH HHMMOHOHNNOHNNMMXHMH 1-1024-etK1431410414xmtsiolA

O 00H04040404HH ONNMNMMNHHHHO HOHMMHM XVO., * O 004HHHMO1i4M 0 MWM HH0OOMMOMO0MON00t404O04I 03 CD MOCOMMOOOH I:6 Pa 0 0 0 ON0007,100000MOHOOOMMN t%4 '0 0 o00303 O 0HH84H04HN4 00MOHMHMO HHHO HMI HHHH 0 ett-t 0 03 00 02 mm 0303

O 1 -"MUUMUU 4X XXoXXW-4:4oNs..XoX40oX I o oXse.s.IXo o o`sto t XXXXXX o oXo too 1 oX 1 oXXX 0 oWe. iNa o54 ol4XoX o o ooX oX 000 o XoeX000000o oX'bskoNsk0000Xoo oX1,-4 ova toX IX I 0 cxx 1-1 XXXXXXXXXXXb4XXM oX I oXoXXXoXXXXX oXXooXX o o XXXXXXXXX4XM00000004 o oXo XXe.61. o Ort4 c.; xxxxxm000XXXXXXXXXoX oXXX oxxxxxxxxxvo4 oX oXXX OoXXXX tXXXoXX XXX oXXXXXX oo oX oXNX rx: 00000moxoxx0000x00000000XXXX0oXXX0 >4 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 4 00XX0X000001 XXMXo oo oXX000000X1 oo 000000 too P MV.IXoMXXX0000000000X:We.00l :X oXX t 00 1040 1 NtXXXo X000 o' 1 0 0 0 0 }4 t o O Xv-i oaX t VW.`, LN-CO CA 0 I-4 CV CY%-* WINO E%-(30 ONO t4:4:4 r4 r4 r4 r-1 I-1 r-1 §-1 tr4 r4 CV`f4 Mr4oXo:IXe r-1 CV frul- 1210 240 0%0 oNX > o We. o 27

TAME 8

NONSYSTEMATIC ALTERNATION OF VOWELS A.deaf X =Vo* beto = Vo beat le is both B.Fariar X =vo beiro = Voear = Vo bet C. at= X_Vo sr Vo rather is bow D. "ihifi X=Vo arr o= Vo = Vo E. B-Frsh (nom) X=Vo out o=Voef F. off" X =vo 101.:* o Vo Fit G.MT X rAVo = vosFt

11. window(2ndsyllable) X = Vo low o = Vo out J. w(=1 (2ndsyllable) X= Vo Tutsw o = vo out K.=f-iw (2ndsyllable) X = Vo row o = vo = Vo boot L.YoTio±arow(3rdsyllable) x = vo Ow o = Vo = Vo boot M. tomato(3rdsyllable) X= Vo Tim o = Voauk = Vo N. gt-(2ndsyllable) X = Vo Burti o = vo 0.feeriarisit (3rdsyllable) X = Vo o = Do" zt

Stressed Vowels lregikly Stressed Vowels No. A. B C.D. E, P.G. R.3.K.L. ILN.0.

1. X of X X X X X x X X 0 O 2. X X o X X X X X 0 3. :4C X o X X X O 0 0 4. X o x X X X X x X X 0 5. X X o x X X X X O 0 O X 6. X X o 0 0 X X X X 0 X 0 X 0 7. o X o X X X X 0 X 0 X 8. X ift o X X X X X X X X X 0 9. X o X 0 X X X O 0 X 0 0 10. 0 0 0 0 o X O 0 O 0 X X no X X X X X X 0 0 X tf 0 0 12, X 95 X o X X O X O X 0 13. X X o x X o X X X 14. X ;if o X x X X X 0 X O 0 0 15. X X X o X X X 0 X O O 16. x o o 0 X 0 0 0 0 0 X 17. X o 0 0 0 o 0 0 O 0 O 0 X X 18. o o X X X o 0 0 0 O 0 X O 19. Z. 0 X X X o X 0 X 0 O O X 0 20. o o 0 X 0 0 C O 0

1. X X X X X X X 2. X o x 0 X x I X X Z. X X X 0 0 X f 4: I x X x x X O ft X 0 5, X X o O O X X O O O X O 6. A o X X X 0 X O O 0 0 0 X *Vo is vowel of * Do is diphthong of 28

TABLE 8 (continued)

No. A. B. C. D. E. P. G. N. J. K. L. M. N. 0. 7. XX0X00X ANs. X 0 0 0 0 0 8. X X 0 $ X 0 X 000000X 9. $00X000 0 0 0 0 . X 0 10. 0..X0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0M c-.1 0MO kOtzAV00:- 0 0 C:201-s CO 'NI ONkrt 4P16At COiN) pm& 11.14 1.1 PA so 1.1.1 t,,n! NMCO1..B. CO 14. NNNMNN F.A.02 1.J. E4 CO CO 02 CO i.00 sp. so. su N N tt; NNNN t4 N t2 t-s S \O CO-1 ONVt .M.a.) N iA 0 NI) 0313 CAA .V1,4 fV 5. 7,1 et 01 0a ,7). /9,01909101909.N0N O 0NONNONNNNNONNNNNNN 0 03co A)la- 02 cl 0 1 M"o--ctouH#10 0-. I-Doagr,g 1 0 0 0 (Dt2o .1 ct0 O 1909.0NINN019.NNIks.woHN W 9: gror 0 Ift'' O NONHNNNNN O 00NNoNNOotooNoNNNN 0 1.4a0ct I-0,N.....,..0VI0 0 0 02 Cc) talpiS0 o s. 0. II0 0 WctCD O OHNNHNoNN O 04 ON00 0NN0NNNN0 mm34 0 011N 1.-I ...... M1-9,to .13 H o oNNHNNNNN O 014H14H0 mm14 0 Nm14 m0 mt4 14 m 0 0 pAlmh).0.1 Hhl ON 00moo000NeiN001MON 04000000M0O ONHMM1ONOHOO1 0M0000140000 ik1 NOHN 0 03 0003 CO 0000000 0 030Pi' PsSD 0ctMMMMMM Pi 02Cr CD02 .#10VD PA gi O 0 1 NNNHNNN 00NOMOHNNMHM54NNN6 MHM M ra19%. lc"V% c.Octolg t. 0 c10 0I.-.1t-scri ID14) l' Ct as0 4-- 0 1'6 3-1%.0i-s ci-0 000m0w190400 04 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 H 0 0 0 0 0 0 H 0 0 H H C-1 la'03 031..k IVgt.F.', 0..., IDill 0PA 0 0. CD r.... 0 oNNNNKNNNIk oNISINNoNNeNNNNs.NNNNNN ra,CDg.,..,,, r), 0 I ..o0'Z00 VA, %....,110 Ci'l0 0 90.1 ...op...0,mc2 Crtl 0101-s/Cri Ct/4.0 T, oli K 0 NNII19t1sx16t 0:119. N 1 'v. 1 1st.45C4Ex16t I

r'c'ti...A,Ai `454! 4l'IMIVIAONSt0',Va0*19.01S11 V) CO W .9-4 r-1 .4.-1 Ni4N0001s0aNse~a14 14 I%aststNWV. Vt IS% 1St

' NNNW449.:INNIN14NINa16ZZS2 0NrIs.

'A 41IS M 104 42 1-4 14 uNEINNa1 t09.N1e.NW(~sc1 *E1. MMMM M viv-im-1.14 .4-1 4 NNIstN0N1sCvaNMISA0KISOWere

ra 14 N t4t4N11 N N >I 01 0 gi INNINI0IIIM r-I 4alq-1b 1 a) 4-14-, V-1 v4 :s: a) .r4 .7.4W Tsmm.sard . 0J 0 144I I4NoN0N ININkoolloi mmmiam CO mm .74.1-ivivig-1 r.t .1-4 .et Ss A S A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C--. 1 t 1i.:1I:4 t4 t4 N IN NNW,110'144 N

1411....41At.A MN 01-41 '11144"411N :1 oNti 110 rd 4 0 t4 0 0 01T)i lig 0 g 1:1 'Ail 5 Fr4. I STOI o Salt4.01410i 4 14 t iI - eh14I N N t4 NoN1 141e.14 I1 140 otlesk>om.-401 8 4-1 TS 01 kkes X 0 H OS h 0 TWO CO ra 1:1 CO .i4 ra 0 0 rd 0 II.rC.CO MMMMM .11W1.4MM WWWWWir-1 W U 14 NININWS0t4t.IN1SN0 000000 .rivn-1,14.1.41-4w4:-.4.(4.14 .r.44-1.2-1.1-4«-V4.1-1 NNt4t-IN IA 11 N N t4 H 4 14 !4 H WistNA 1-1 14 14 t4 Vie. 1-49"60509.N3GtNik

Emo N N 1 No. t4 N 14 t4 14 N t4 14 14 t4 14 N f:4 141SX t4 ,... k -r4 X a) .1.-1 .81 ,i4T,1'CS CO Ca farCil f6D14.,,33.1.9'L. ,Di ft., 0 I-1 cv n.4. tev.0E%-cocr.ov-iiv ceN.I.VN..0 E%..C:0 0% 0 ;74 1-twile-1,4"..1e-te-iegrie4N 4r1C;44 1-214f-4.4:1I 0 Vi l'a C) \O Co 'NI ONkxt -P-LA.) N1-6. 0a CI lk. tfj t4 k- It4 0 >4 >4 P4 t 4 :4 V4 1 1 0i- :4 0 19%*61 1>4 0 >41 19, L. ; ...-... 0C.) 0 1 5 1.0 0 > 4 C 4 1 4.> 4 > 4 : 4 0 c-r i - i -

0 i W S. . 11:4 :4 M t-4 :4 ei CD P.,

:4 0 :4 :---. 79.,M :4 : ; : 4t"--; U-2,

I 0 :4 :4I 0 :=; :--, ;, :4 :: '-4

0 0 :1 :4 :4 0 >4 p4i ,,,1 0

o : 4 :4 fr l P4 :4 :1 :4 :4 i

0 C. 151.1SL 1:4 :4 :4 :4 :4 c-t

r 1 o

0 IS, 1>4 1 :4 '49., :4 1 I 'CI 0

i

t>..I ISLISA. 1t>4 :4 :4 :4 :4 :4 .; It

I-, >4 19.. >41 1 0 S0 i;3 SOCIAL AspEcrs OFPARALANGUAGE William h.Austin

Illinois Instituteof Technology

The term mEalanaalls andthe correspondingadjective mallwalaare less than ten years old but alreadythey loom large inthe study of animal communication. In one sense all non-language communications (kinesics,haptics, as well as "vocalization")is paralinguisticbut this term is now almost exclusively appliedto significant,non- linguistic noisesmade with the vocal tract. Observations of thesephenomenaare of course quite old. Demosthenes undoubtedly studied "delivery" and"tone of voice". There are pre-Christian statementson phonology also,but no sys- tematic study of that subjectant dates thatof Grimm in 1819 andthat was a lucky forerunner. Actual investigation of phonologyas structure, as patterns ina system began with Ferdinand Do Saussure late in thenineteenth and earlyin the twentiethcentury. The firstsystematic studyof para- language was by Henry Lee Smith,jr* in apaper called 'The Communication Situation,"mimeographed forthe Foreign Service Instituteof the Department ofState in 1950. This was later expandedinto "An Outline ofketalinguistic Analy- sis" in the 1952 Georgetown RoundTable Conferenceon Linguistics and Language Study. Smith did notuse the term maganaael,however, but vocalization,subdivided into vocal qualifiers and vocal modifiers. gas9Almilaa became established with the most complete studyto date, the 1958 article by George L. Trager"Paralanguage: A Preliminary

Statement," Other writers in the fieldare Norman, A. HcQuown and Charles F. HockettelThis study is more systematic than that of Smith and less complexthan that of Trager. The infancy of the field, I think, warrantsvarious approaches.

Paralanguage is here definedas significant noises made by the non-articulated vocal tract. By significant I mean that messages occur ina code situation between sender and receiver. The non-articulated vocal tract needssome elabor- ation. Articulations d. occur, but their place andwarner tend to be stylistic variants. The two cerebral clicks of little-old-ladies ("tsk-tsk")are vocal segregates, archaic variants of the more usual, evenspaced,nasal noises "hm-hm", or some such graph. Phonologik,a1 feats are possible on a paralinguistic level thatseem impossible on a linguistic one, as the buccal (for horses) and cerebral clicksin English paralanguage as well as pre-glottalizedstops and nasals in

'Bye [9ba0, 'Kay ["kei], 'Night Pnaet), An Italian has trouble with /h/ in English andGerman but no trouble in paralinguistic laughing "ha ha." /x/ is not part of the phonemic system of Eskimos but it is usedby them in paralinguis- tic dog calls. The point need not be further elaborated.

Mere is no articulation qua articulationin paralanguage, or articulation in the linguisticsense. 3

We now come to the questionof the minimal units of

paraphonology or,more properly, the paraphonology of

American English. There are different paralanguagesand

paralanguage dialects (onebalks at paradialects) but the divergences are probably muchfewer than with language.

The paralanguage ofa European or American film star is pretty well understoodthroughout those areas.

I. Vocal Qualifiers.

This is an arbitrary term;quantifiers would bemore descriptive. There are at least twelve ofthese in six oppositions. The notation is largely Smith's,

Degree Manner

fast > > clipped tempo

411111111111111.

slow < drawled (7\

high I\ sing-song j pitch 1=11115, low flat

loud.A A smooth intensity Jr")

soft VV jerky r-Nik.--1 fThrb

These qualifiers should be notedover and above the phonetic and phonemic strings. Theyare sometimes indicated in the graphics of a languagebut to assign them to phonetics in the ordinary sense would playhavoc with phonemic systems, 1,e,, we would have to admit the glottal stop as ail=.altsh phoneme, not to mention pre-glottalized consonants, A dilemma arises when features paralinguistic in origin result in permissable phonetic and phonemic strings,assaid with drawl is "yeah"4eig/and with clipping "yep" /y e p/o

There is also "mope" A?itfow;4. These forms may as often end. in [9] or in [pl] but the final stop isneveramizalqa. The whole problem of "free variation" must thus be considered in the light of paralinguistic communication, "Helps" with

[1.);] is drawledor stretched ("Somebody hear met") and "Help" with [16-] is clipped or shortened ("The situation is desperate"').

Vocal qualifiers arc employed either to reinforce the linguistic message or to contradict it. For the affect of

67% . drawl Smith has the example of "Yeah, he'sa real nice guy" where the paralinguistic signal contradicts the linguistic one .Good-bye, now," with sing-song, obviausly tries to mitigate the farewell, asignal to have it cancelled or one for future meetings,'"Ireally should be getting on" with over-slo tempo asks foran invitation to stay, "And now that that's settled, let's get on to..." with over-fast tempo says "let's forget it."Baby-talk reinforces with either over-high or over-low pitch the garbled phonemes and syntax or. the linguistic level ("Is 'er daddy's iddle dirl").

When contrary signals are being simultaneously sentone can choose to accspt elle Or the other brolse_submit, with varying degreesof trauma, toa double bind. One thing

is certain, however;paralanguage hasno legal status.

Ii.Vocal hodifiers

UnliVe the precedingvariations in pitch, intensity

and tempo the vocalmodifiers indicate changesIn the vocal

tract only. The vocal tract isthe space between the lips

and nose atone end and the vocal chordsin the larynx at the other. There are at least thefollowing pairs of vocalmodifiers it

nasal na na oral

oral or or

slurred sl sl lingual 111111IMENI111 clear ci ci

open pharyngeal

rasped 1

aspirated h laryngeal

glottal 9 9

The first of thesedistinctions dependsupon the position of the uvula and adjacentregions. If the uvula is lax,i.e., lowered, the speech is nasal. if it is more tense andpulled back the speech isoral. In our culture littleboys tend to be nasal raaee, ma, do we havetOt")and little girls,oral. Nasality is considered "tough" and 6vulgar4 and is somewhat discouraged by elders. 4Gentlemanle little boys tend to be oral alto.

The lingual pair refers to the exactnessor inexactness of tongue placing. Slurring, of course, occurs in an in- fant's speech and in that ofan inebriate. It is an affect- tation among some teen-agers and 'method' actors. Overly clear lingual articulation, especially in informalsituations, sounds pedantic or legalistic.

The pharyngeal distinction, dependsupon whether the oral pharynx is very open or squeezed. Openness is, or was until recently, taught in theological seminaries under the rubric of 6homiletios," or the art of putting unction into the voice. it is also used by many parents, school teachers, undertakers and some politicians. For children it suggests protection; for their elders, insincerity. Rasp signals great emotion, suffering or the suggestion thatone is near the end of one's rope.

The laryngeal pair of aspiration or breathiness and glottalization are made by varying movements of the glottal bands. The former is heard in some radio versions of

'Ihe family that prays to ;ether stays together"when the normally unaspirated st are (et`). It indicates sincerity, oharisma. For obvious reasons it is used sometimes in sexual aggression, or sexual play (in the speech andsinging of a famous crooner of the thirties to the present). Glottalization, or "glottal affect," is less well understood,

It is akin to clipping and littlecan be said about it except that it is indicative of tension.

Lip rounding versus flattening might be significant 2 in some cultures but I doubt if it is in America, Trager has this and some other features but I feelhe has drawn too fine distinctions in this stage ofour investigations,

Trager also uses "slight, noticeable, extremes' for qualifiers and modifiers. Paralinguistic stress would mean less pro- liferation of entities,

III. Vocal Segregates.

This statement of the so-called segregates is radically different from that of my predecessors. 11% qualifiers and modifiers are, for the most part, used concomitantlywith language. The segregates occur independently of language.

They are significant noises that differ fromone another only by the parameter of tone. These are labeled by numbers preceded by Plaralanguage). There are five in American paralanguage for which minimum pairscan be given. They are, with relative musical notation:

P5 very high

24 high

P3 mid

P2 low

P1 very low

Tien language ceases and we wish to signal °Wait, I'm not finished" we use P3, the midparalinguistic tone. This is often called the "hesitation vcffel"although it is nota vowel 92.a vowel at all. In America it tendsto be central, in Lngland and Germany low central,but this islinguistically and paralinguistically irrelevant. P3 is variouslywritten as ah, er, ur, hm. The last is P3nasality. When we say He hemmed and hawed" wemean he resorted toparalanguage. P3 followed by P4 indicates assentand minimallycontrasts with P3 P5 ("I thought so," "Itold you so"). P3 P2 sig- nified negation and contrastswith P3 Pi ("Toobad.' "Sorry you hurt yourself"). The vocal segregatesmay be nasal or oral, aspirated or glottal, at least. Whether length is an added featureis uncertain. IV. Others.

There are other paralinguistic featuresthat do not fall under the above three categories. Two, at least,seem certain: shouting sh sh and whispering wh wh laughing la la crying cr or 3ut howmany others? Coughing, clearingone's throat, yarning, sighing, snickering, gigglingall suggestthemselves. But we must becareful of not ending up withas man r unitsas we have participles in the language, If paralanguageis a dual system, with phoneme andmorphemomlike units,or is oenematic and plerematio in Hockett's terminology,3it would be difficult to imagine the primes ofa more rudimentary system exceeding in number the primes ofa more complex one, languace. If the system is not dual, but a closed, cenematio one, the number of units is certainly a very finite one. imch research remains to be done in thisarea.

The Base Line. When one hears the paralanguage of a speaker-- and one hears much, overt and covert signals,many features of the personality--one first, rapidly and out -of-awareness, established, the base line of the speaker. When one listens to a tone language thatone knows one quickly calibrates a vast range of tones into the required significant number, say, four or five in the case of Chinese.This is easily done by uneducated Chinese morons. Ile similarly set up a paralinGuistic base line, and deviations from that base line alone are noted. The base line of the late Humphrey

Bogart was nasal and slurred. ',Asa versus oral, slurred versus clear are rithin that framework. It a young lady's base line is high and oral, these features need not beevery- where noted, only in the initial calibration. Similarly,

in language a phonetic base line is first noted.After that

a phonetic string in addition to z phonemic one is redundant.

Very little can be said at this time about paremorphology

or a further structuring of paralinguistic units. It is not

certain that they exist but certain signals are hiGillysug

gestive of paramorphology. A "little girl's voice" (innocence, 10

helplessness, regression) iscomposed of high pitch and orality. There is the paralanguage ofcourtship; low and nasal with the male, high,orrl and gigaling with the female.

Only in its final stases is itlow and nasal with both sexes, but with wide pitch and intensityvariation on the part of the female. Then there is derogatory imitation,one of the most infuriating acts ofaggression one person can commiton another. The male may imitate the femalein a high, rapid way ("yes dear, I'll be down ina minute") or the female might try somethin!; similaron the male, everly slow and overly low ("aw, justone more little drink." kiessage: you dumb ox). Still worse is when maleor female imitates a male with derogatory femaleimitation (message: you're ineffective and effeminate). One can think of still others, the thismismamseriousmnatterone, the I'llmtakemcaremofm everything one, andso one

There has been still less formalstudy of the social implications of paralanuage, not thatthey are difficult to discover but that we all %now themonly out -of- awareness.

We are all aware whensomeone is talking in an approved,

"upper class' way. Dore than syntax and vowels is involved.

The paralanguage must be clear,low and oral, in men, clear, oral with a choice of highor low for women. Low pitch has lately become fashionable forwomen but fifty years ago all

"ladies" spoke witha hiGh pitch. The intensity Mould not be loud and any deviation should be towardthe soft. Homy 13. juvenile delinquents, andjuveniles, rebel at this and affect slurring andnasality. in Germany today the approved paralanguage forupper class males is high pitch nasality.

A, sing- -songmanner is a hallmark of the old fashioned :last

Zuropean Jewish merchant. in Japan, where there are marked lin3uistio differences betweenmale and female speech, there are strihing paralingUistloones also. Nile speech is loud and low, in Samuraimovies almost a bark. Female speech is soft and high, almosta squeak.

The dominant middle class whiteculture in the United

States has certain setviews on lower class ilegro speech.

It is "loud," "unclear," "slurred,""lazy."The myth of loudness should be exorcised atonce.Any minority or out - group is characterizedas 'laud," Americans in jurope,

Znglishmen in America, andso on But certain differing 4 features are apparent. In the passage below,which should, of course, be heard ratherthan read, some of theseare marted. There is uneveness in pitch,intensity and tempo

(social insecurity). The first personpronoun is usually

overloud ("This is what I think,others may thin differently").

Love and pride is indicated by theslow spacing of "canary colored house. Racial matters are generallysaid softly and rapidly ("Letts pretend theyare not there"). And there are others, which we have only began tounderstand. 12

A A . < Well, I grew up ins ah, a canary colored house, trimmed AAVV in white, on a corner, a hundred fifty lot, hundred by fifty,

A A 4/ f Trees on each side, rose bushes in front and back, and honey- > A A A A suckle, which I used to have to work, mow the lawn, take care

A \,/ of the flowers, which I never did mind, as a kid. And I lived < < > in a neighborhood where I was the only Negro. I didn't under- stand my people when I come here. Ah, they was different. I AAVVA A\ didn't understand this ridiculing, criticizing one another.

\11\ Because I always thought it was wonderful to be from another A A A4 4 A state besides Illinois...... tNo, I have no brothers or sisters. V V I have an uncle who taught school there, thirty-three years, A A still lives in Harrisburg. And he has four boys and a girl.... < A A We had all colored grammar schools due to the fact Negroes A A wanted a colored grammar school because they wanted their boys A A to grow up to teach. You see, one time my aunt never went to V V V a colored school but I had, The highschool was mixed.Q.... < Only one town, it's called Carey's Mill, Illinois. We fellows A A A A used to go down and play ball and thewas a colored town in

A A I' A?,z,"\A A . itself. They did not 'low foreigner° in that town...... They A A would give them forty-eight hours tomove on, anybody if they

A A V\l/ V was foreigners and they didn't like too much of a dark in color, V V which most of them was kin.00.410It was just a group of, I V V A A couldn't say, Negroes were in that vicinity farming. I never AAP?, A A did learn it, why they was there. You see, my grandfather came

V V ;>4/\/ V out West Virginia into Illinois, great-grandfather. And a lot of lem was kin to him. I had a lot of kinfolks myself, but still, V V they was very the clanniest Negroes, I've ever seen my life. 14

1. The bibliosraphyon paralanguage is:

Smith, Henry Lee,Jr.: "The Communication Situation,n

Department of Statemimeographed paper.

"An Outline ofMetalinguistic Analysis,"

Georgetown Hound TableConference on

Linguistics and LanguageStudy, 1952

and Hobert E.Pittenger: "A. Basis for

some Contributions ofLinguistics to

Psychiatry", klmekAa=,20, 1957, 61.78

11cQuoun,Norman Aos "Linguistics Transcriptionand Speci-

fication of PsychiatricInterview

Materials", Llitelats20, 1957 79.86

Trager, George L.* Paralanguage:AFirst Approximation,"

Studies in Unguisties,13, 1958, 1-12

PitteLser, Robert E.,Hockett, Charles F.,

Donehy, John J.: The First "Rive Minutes, 1960,

especially pp. 285-200. 2* Op, cit. p. 11.

3. Charles F. Hockett;ACourse in MbdernLinguistics, p. 575.

4. From a taped interviewbetween J. Willis,a Negro graduate student in anthropology at the Universityof Chicago and C.O.M. a lower class Negro fromsouthern Illinois,now living in Chicago* Reactions to 1--Tonunciations

Vernon S. Larsen ane. Carolyn H. Larson

The purpose of this study was to obtain reactions of Chicago natives

to various pronunciations of single !lords and to identifywhich pro-

nunciations act as social markers. The instruments used consisted of

tape recordingsof the pronunciation items andrenonse sheets accompanying

the tapes.

Individual -Ironunciations were usedon the ta.Des frith no provision

to test either -laralan7aa-eor .-;rcariatical items. Paralansma7e 1:as

not tested because :?rofessor Lustinfsstucly had sho!:n that the com)10:1t-

of paralanguage makes it difficult,in view of our present knowledge,

to eztract single featuresto -Alich people could respond. Grammatical

items !iere not tested because LeeI'cdersol's s*dy. revealed that in

Chicago, popular assumptionsabout the social status of grammatical

items correspond closely toreality.

.ccordingly,an instrument Iras prepared to test reactionsto

features of pronunciations, using !rords -chose pronunciations inChicago

vary shar..Ay according to therace and social class of the speaker.

... preliminary last-Jac:IA.:;as pretested

in order to develop the finalinstryment. It consisted of a tape

containing 32 pronunciationitans in random order (only30 of which were scored), spol.cen bya middle class -.fate Chicagoan,a middle class

Chicago j!egro, a sodtuthern niddle-olassunite (raised in Greenville,

1..%), andan East Indian speaking English. 7;:thibit 1.3 showthe pronunciation items. The response sheetfor the preliminaryinstrument

(see -2ahibit 1.1 and 1.2) contained Wave scaleson which the respondents 2

marked their attitudes toward the pronunciations. Mr: response sheet is based on Osgood's semantic differential,a technique for raecz-uring

attitudes towardsindividual witsor concepts as a uay of determining

their full meaning. In this case, the response sheet uas used tomeasure reactions to individual nronunciations.It is possible thatthere uas some confounding of reactions to the 'words themselveswith reactions

to the pronunciations, have no positive way to measure this. However, if such confounding exists, it shouldbe relatively equalfor all

pronunciations ofa given cord.

The raterson the preltainary instrument werea mall no2ulation of

middle class uhitesof uhora eight were judged sufficientlyclose in

background to thelhicago middle.class norms to serve asrespondents. Ituas hoped that information from theirresponses would indicate

vhether theinstrument could reveal the prejudicesof such agroup in relation to the four dialectsrepresentedon the tape.

The pretestdata sh>wild that the instrumentuas ;enerally effective for elicitingreactions to pronunciations and thatnot all scales

discrimiaatedamong the nronunciations. Statistical summariesof the raters'responses to the pronunciation items(amhibits 1.4and 1.5 through 1.15)support the following generalizations: 1. Tnicago whitepronunciations uere fairly uelldiscriminated from Chicago Ziecro pronunciationson several scales; 2. ..ast Indianpronunciations =a never clearlyidentified with eitherChicago croup on any of thescales; 3. The Southernwhite pronunciations *sere given anevaluation similar to that of the :Teamspeaker on many of the scales,although the populationon uhich the instrument hadbeen triedwas a class uhich 3

the speaker (urban reared and the mosthi-shly educated speaker on the

tape) had been teachingfor an academic quarter.

intercorrelatio-la of the tuclve scnles (z:hibit 1.16)shored

that there uas overlapamong several of them, which meant that the number

of scales administered couldbe reduced :iithout raarkedkir affecting

the amount of informationobtainable from the instrument.

EiL3.1TnstyARe.4g. ...fter the preliminary instrument hadshown

the feasibility of the technique,a final version was prepared for

administration to larger samples. reducing the number of scales..

including only those that seemedmost relevant and most discriminating--

it became possible to testmore pronunciations in a shorter time.There

trere tuo forms of response sheet. scale-3:

1. Rural-Urban

Weak- tpon:

3. Unpleasant.Pleasant

40

5. Uneducated.2ducated

The other.intended foruse 77ith younger respondents..omittedscales

one and tuo because they tended to confuse the raters andto make it

difficult for them to respond in the tine allotted (Seeachibit 2.1). The final pronunciation tape contained 50items in random order,

representing five pronunciations: .Taicago middle class uhite,Chicago middle class Uegro, Chicagolacer -class :egro,Southern re:zed

class white, anda 7egro using7iicaciomiddle class uhitepronunciations.

The wordstrere chosen to ill strata features that have beenfound to be socially distributedin the Chicago aroa. Tha number of actualcords 4

tested was mazdnized by including lower class :egro%?ronunciations only

where the middle classones you'd havebeenhighly similar to the white

ones. (See 72,thibits 2.2 and 2.30

lez,..)miucjAj.j.kr...S.42..i.abLkika.To set an indication of thereproduci-

bility (or reliability)of judgmentson the five scales, ten of the

pronunciation itemsere administered twice toa small group of college

students of diverse dialect backgrounds rxl2).Immediately after

responding to the fifty pronunciations, thisgroup responded to the last ten a second tt2c. ( `.:"MT!-.7 ere, of course, :givenno opportunity to

refer to theirprevious responses.)

Rau score values for the to sets ofresponses were correlated

separately by scale, yielding r's rangingfraa .5? to .85.In addition, means on each scale -Jere computed separately foreach rater; correlating these means resulted in r's from .66 to.95. (::hibit 2.5). Both sets of correlations suggestthat individual ratersare reasonably consistent in their ratingsand that (consideringthe mall

size of the testretestsample) the instrument is adequatelyreliable..

especially whenused to obtaingroup judgments.

atak,610,914:zay,41. The final instrumentswere administered

to a variety ofrespondents both in and out of theTaicago area The

analyses reported'f ere, houcvar, arc limited to ratersraised and residing in Chicasoand its nearby suburbs. The sample containedwhite and 7egro highschool students, white and :lesroeollege students, and ;graduate students andteachers (a:thibit20 ),

Before theresponses were analyzed, each rater'sresponses were normalizedso that the magnitude of thescores on each scalewould be thesame. This was doneby co: puting the mean andstandard deviation 5 of the rauscores, and then converting each of theresponses to a Z score (-rith a mean of zero and standarddeviation of one).This uas done separately for eachrater on each scale. Descriptive statistics:Tore computed by level of education (high school, college, and graduate)and for high school andcollege groups by race. 2.6 sho-.:s thecomplete set of statistics forthe total college sanple,and m:hibit. 2.7 shamgraphs of the neans for the total high schoolscimple,

The reactions to thedifferent pronunciationscan be compared

simply by noting nodifferences betueen theaverage ratings.The more significant the differences,the more likely it isthat the pro nunciation differencesare noticed as socialmarkers by the largest, populations representedby the semles.Vahibits 2.8 through 2.11 chou there significantdifferences occur bet:reenreactions to the nronunciations.

.1...44.9zspfLroRuRcktItjosts.The folloinggeneralizations can be made about theratings of pronunciations: 1. On scale 1 (urbanversus rural), the Chicagouhite pronunciations were generallz,r consideredto be more urban andthe southern Irhite (so)more rural than the middle class Chicagoi:egro pronunciationsGlii)0 2.On scale 2 (ueak versus strong), the l'egropronunciations uere most often rated strox:er,Though this nighthave been a function of paralinguistic factors in thespeakers s voice (thespeaker has had singing training), :Then thesame speaker gave bothmiddle class uhite pronunciations (: 73) and middle class:.-,esro pronunciations(1E1, the middle class !kite pronunciationuas still ratedas -Jeaker. 30On scale 3 (unpleasant versus pleasant), the:Tegro pronunciations 6 were generally rated less pleasant than the white pronunciations nith

the exce-)tion of the pronunciation of the wordzsgt. The results of

ratin;;;; oftat':-rord j con arisen to ratilts of the nordma''.,ere

confusing and erratic.This is not unexpectedconsiderin.; the I

incidence of variation in the vowels ofse cores throughout the nation.

In the data obtained here, the variation does not seem to be a valid

social marker.

4. On scale 4 (:Tegro versus white), the i'tegro pronunciations swre

al:rays rated as more liegro. This -las also true ::hen the :.'egro speaker

gave both a middle class whitepronunciation (IT.) and a middle class

..T.egro pronunciation (M:1. ....n exception to thisTitsthe Ilegro pronunciation

A atf,rated by the total college sampleas more Ithite. Sit on the

basis of other samples, the reactions differ. -Fe feel this is because the

1:egro pronunciation of the word gaLt is sometimesconfused. T.rith the

:en 7;n:.,land pro-araciation :Flitch Ms in thepast beenconsidered popularly

to be a prestige form.

5. On scale 4 (uneducatedversus educated), the Negro pronunciations -sere more often considered less educated.

6. It is clear that certain va..tationsrepresented by the uords

tested here are social markers3tile others are not.

Slight phonetic variations (asin zigt) are not significant as

raarkers, incidental phonemic variations(tam, na,r99a,ausa,etc.)

are less reliable than systematic variations,though certain features

(as inramazandWag)elicit more intense reactions.

Suprawser,mental variations (asinlata)serve slightly as markers

on some scales but not others, nhile variationsin stress combined with

phonemic differences (as ill. ;Aztt)are definitely markers. 7

Systematic variations in lour vowels and in diphthotIgs (asillustrated

by kw? flyal twa, Daratu, and maw)are the clearest social markers

for both white and 7ero po?ulationsin cAlicago.

7. 2aters appear to react to paralinguistic phenomena::it in a

single -lord as wellas to the phonemic contort in discriminating between

pronunciations (illustrated particularlyby reactions to the D3 versions of Ian= andgm m).

ilsaaWk20-4-we_tialtt=a,. To a certain eztent individual rater

idiosyncracies (e.r.tremismor conservatism in ratings, tendencies touse

only one side of the scale, etc.)uhich affect individualrata scores

till balance out whengroup averages are computed. However, if these

idiosyncracies differ from scaleto scale, it becomesdifficult to

compare even the means on the variousscales. Inspection of rau score

data suggests that theraters were someuhat reluctantto use the

lleAremely :Tegro" cadof the uhite.7e7;roscale, tended to avoid both

e; 'cues on some scales, andmade use of the fullray ;e on others.

This uas Ity the pronunciation comparisonswere based on individually

normalized scores.

In terms of normalized scores, the :megro samples didnot generally react as intensely as the uhite samples,though their reactionswere

usually in thesame direction. This seems to indicatethat though the :egroes accelt the middle class WhiteDronunciation asa more firmly

established standard,they are more tolerant to-Jardvariations from that norm.

Lnalysis ofra'r score differences (Exhibit 2.161 shows thatsome items andgroups of items elicited quite differentpatterns ofresponses

from uhite sar6lesthan fro.1 2e:;ro sanples.Ihites tended to',Tie

1 3

si : ;nificantlhi;,her rc.r score ratin;,so-.1. the :-esro.white scale, and iesroes tended to jivehi:iier ratin:s on. the unAcas,-mt.-.)leasant

scale.This data sus ;gists that furtherrac.3..,,wsis of responsco terms of a detailed con:IL:risen ofreaction of differentsrouy; mi:;ht help clarify attitudestoward several of the ?renunciations.

:211c2.uncos

1...e.;ro cnera-.117: r .tcd ar; iore more unnleasan"., less educated, strons;er, less urban than .f.Thite Twonunciations..hen a sixes both white and :cr.=pronunciations, the ratera tend to favorthe white pronunciation.awn they are confronted :lith ?ronunciationsthat are stailar for both:rhite and ...:ef;ro speakers, they are stillable .:4o clearlydifferentiate betreen whiteand :esro spek:kers. 2. .;ertain words, narticularlythose iiith low vowels anddiohthonss, and g combinations,are quite clear social markers,and are considered -,articularl,y unpleasant,uneducated, andmore rural by the raters. 3. ..e;ro raters generallyagree irith white raters,which would indicate that 77e ,ro rattlers, at :easton some level, implicitlyaccell .;t .idare o2 .23.-0.1.-,nci;.-.tio..1(23 uorc watufale,even tholv;h deficient in strenr,th. 4.The strons.4reak rt.tin:;s areintorestins froma socio.L)sycholo:ical point of Vie-.7.It would seem tiv...t both whitesand itsroes feltthe :.'esro pronunciations to be stronser (evenwhen ratinga :ogre sivinG both .laite and i:esro pronunciations).This l'airjit indicatethat both group accept the prevailing attitude (or prejudice)that ....esroesare more 9

strong than -,yhites. In theretest, the 7egro speakerwas also rated

consisten447 asmore masculine. This may indicate that the instrument

is sensitive to a varietyof m;trthsstemmims Atom the prejudices of both

cultures.

On the basis of theseconclusions, -le feel that therears none very* definite implications forthe Apaching of 2nglish to theloner-class :esro child. Pronunciation is sisnificantin eliciting negative and positive attitudes. Though there are phenomenaother than pronunciation involved in raters' reactions, we believe thatthere should besome effort to enable people to modify dialectical variantsthat particularly disturb their audience. Plr this, we do notmean to place a value judgmenton middle class speech. ilrrever, since the raters,and presumably society, do, place sucha positive value judgment on middle class speech,ire feel that the lat =er-class child mightbe givensome systematic practice in using the middle-class pronunciations ina middle class situation. The middle class child mustalsobetaught to bemore tolerant of differences. It -Jould probably be:lost valuable todeal only :.ith the systematic dialecticalvariants that elicit thestrongestreactic4.,s, rather than uith isolated itemsor variants thatare notsignificant markers. REACTIONS TO PRONUCIATIONS--LIST OF EXHIBITS

limirx.IIstrument,

1.1 The Instructions 1.2 The Scales 1.3 The Items 1.4 Response Summary 1.5 On 1,6 Harried 1.7 Water 1.8 Rinse 1.9 Blom 1.10 Syrup 1.11Aunt 1.12 Four 1.13 Greasy 1.14 Poor 1.15 Wheelbarrow 1.16Intercorrelatioric of Scales

FinalInstruments

2.1 Tbe Instructions and Scales 2.2 The Questions for Items 2.3 The Items 2.4 The Raters 2.5 Reproducibility of Ratings 2.6 Descriptive Statistics on Total CollegeSample 2.7 Ratings by 116 High School Studints 2.8 Differences Between Ratings: 'OH vs. MN 2.9 Differences Between Ratings:WB vu. LN, and WHvs.NE 2.10 Differences Between Ratings: SO vs. MN 2.11Differences Between Ratings: SO vs. Ms SO vs.NE, ane. NE vs. NN 2.12Significant Raw Score Differences Between Whiteand Negro Raters nxhibit 1.1- .PreliminaryInstrument THE IP.STRUCTIONS

We want to learn what yo, think about the way certainwords are pronounced by several different people who live in Chicago. We willplay a tape recording ofthese pronun- ciations, andyou are to mark your own opinions in the spaceson the following pages. Each pronunciationitem has been numbered, so you can easily find where tomark. One voice tril.. read the item number andthen read a questicaor part of a sentence, so that you will know what word is beingpronounced, Then anotherperson uill pronounce his answer. You should judge onlythe pronunciationof the gmuer. Each be repeated several answer will times. It will work thisway:

"Item Nog 10To see if you're right about somethingyou might say: "Pm right- -.'" [Answer] fiAINIT I?...AINfT I?" Under each item number you will find some pairs ofwords ark anged like this:

ITEM NO.1 UNPIE.LANT . .91111111C2: : : PLEASANT EDUCATED OVIVIIMIP ~MO 001IMIVIP : : : : : UNEDUCATED ...and so forth.

While you listen to thepronunciation of the answer, decide which word ofeach pair describes that pronunciation,best and mark an X in the space that showsyour opinion. If you feel that thepronunciation is.

..gAIrmaxone wayor eztszat the otherway, mark like this:

UirPlEASANT X : PLEASANT UITPLEASAM :31: PIEASANT

r.ggikt one wayor sulk the otherways mark like this:

UNPLEASANT : X : PLEASANT

UNPIEASANT : : : : X. : i1011114101/ ~Wm* 081110PlEASANT ..slightly one way or slightly the otherway, mark like this:

UNPILASIT : : X : PIEASANT UNPLEASANTamemovecopaielpimouweiiam: P1EAS IT

DARK .01.4.1-`114.4.0010FOR EACH PAIR OF WORDS; otherwiseyour opinion won't count!

There are no rightanswers and there are no worng answers.Your own opinion is all that matters. Don't worry ifsome of the word pairs are not exact opposites, anddonft be disturbed if theydon't seem to fit the ptonunciation.Just decide which most applicabl-:. and one is how applicable itis. Even if itseems hard, hiumetagliut afaaaCklitill

(Now turn the page and get ready foritem number one.) E;-: Irolt 1 -re'

TAE SCALES

On the response sheets, therewere twelve scales for each item, arranged as follows, with the high scoring sides randomly assigned: TEE :0. (A) MIPLEAS AFT PLEASANT

(B) EDUCATED I 0 UiEDUCATED

(C) ANBITIOUS . LAZY

(D) MIER-CLASS . : UPPER.-CLASS (L) WARN COLD (F) URBAN RURAL

IEGRO : : : : (G) areersem amposow eftwelgo atimem eruotre. emaremeMUTE (H) MASCULINE

(J) BOSS 111.0.111110 Plo SolWOPPIDifoirort,

(K) STRONG FLAK

( L IMES PONS IBIS : : : 111 wigwam 11110,1: sioreAll11111MIN FO:ISIBLE (II) SAFE DANGEROUS

In the reports of the analyses, the scaleswere all arranged in the same scoring direction,withthe order and scoring values as follous:

xtremel Rat sli htl sli: ht c u to e:

4 (D) Upper-class 0 1 2 3 4 5Lower-class

(B) Educated0 1 2 3 4 5 Uneducated

(a) White 0 1 2 3 If 5 Negro

(F) Urban 0 1 2 3 4 5 Rural

(A) Pleasant 0 1 2 3 If 5 Unpleasant

(C) Jmbitious0 1 2 3 4 5 Lazy

(J) Boss 0 1 2 3 If 5 TIorker

(L) Responsible 0 1 2 3 4 5 Irresponsible

(A) Safe0 1 2 3 4 5 Dangerous

(E) farm0 1 2 3 4 5 Cold

(H) Masculine 0 1 2 3 If 5 Feminine

(K) Strong0 1 2 3 If 5 Weak 1.3... reliaiaaryI:lstrItaeut,

THE ITEMS

Introduction atLalt2111 s ea1.2.491LE PmattaLLE When it is dark, you turn the 25. Dm] 16.[on] Ar light.9.

She is engaged to be 20. ('merid) 12. ['mar rid] MM

If you're thirsty, you get a drink 13. ['mote 23. pw-,tel of...

What does awoman do 90 to get soapsuds riveltvineetP1 151; rrvnial off the dishes? 14, prineez?, (F)

I openedthe door and walked into 5.[rum] 28. [ rum] the 7. [rum](F)

What do youpour over waffles? 27. [fsirsp] 9.[lsalirop] 22. ['sirtep](F)

What do you call your uncle's 31. [aent] 26. [ant] wife? 3. [Fint] (s)

Two plustwo is 11. [for] 6, [foe] 17. (fee) (S)

If you spill the butter, the 8. 21. Efgrizi) table feels 30. [Igrizi] (s)

If a man is not rich, hemay 15.[Pm] 2. [pue] be.9, 24.[poo) (S)

The workman carried his load in a 10. (lwiliberc] 4. r'hyillbmre] 19. ['hwillbere] (S) P31 sia 2.5 1.2 1:8 1.0 2.1 0.6 2.9 0.6 2.0 0.8 2.0 0.9 2.2 1.0 1.4 1.1 3.8 1.0 Lig 1.8 1.0 1.0 0.8 1.4 0.7 1.1 1.0 0.9 0.8 1.8 1.3 1.4 1.1 0.9 0.8 3.6 0.9 except raters. 3.2 1.3 2.6 1.3 3.0 1.7 4.0 1.1 2.6 1.1 2.2 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.7 raters, fc's ligDI 2.2 0.7 2.0 0.8 2.2 1.0 3.2 1.0 1.8 1.0 1.6 0.9 1.6 101 2.114 1.1 2,03.8 0.9 onseven 41) based 2.2 0.9 2.1 0.8 2.0 0.5 3.1 o.6 1.6 0.7 2.0 0.8 1.5 0.9 2.1 1.1 2.5 0.9 Midwestern are Instrument 2.8 1.2 3.1 1.1 2.4 0.9 14 1.1 2.2 1.3 2.5 0.9 2.0 1.1 2.0 1.1 3.2 0.7 eight which SUNIARY SCALES 1.6 0.9 2.9 1.1 1.6 0.9 3.1 1.6 1.2 0.9 2.1 1.5 2.0 1.1 1.8 1.3 2.5 1.2 of 2.8 1.0 3.2 1.7 2.6 1.4 45 0.8 1.5 1.4 2.5 1.5 1.7* 1.0* 2,2 1.8 2.9 1.0 responses astericks, RESPOIZE 1.4-.Preliminary 1.1 0.8 2.9 1.6 1.0 Oc,9 1.8 1.7 0.9 0.4 3.1 1.2 1.0 1.1 1.4 1.1 2.1 1.0 the on with Exhibit 0.8 1.5 1.4 1.0 1.4 1.6 1.7 0.5 0.5 2.0 1.7 1.2 1.7 1.9 1.7 101 14 based marked 01 i2.0 1.3 2.9 1.2 1.6 1.2 2.9 1.6 1.1 0.4 290 1.5 1.2 0.9 1.1 0.8 1.6 1.4 are values 10.3 data 1111NnimaniUMW VI 44io 83 2.1 0.8 2.9 1.2 2.0 1.1 2.8 1.7 1.5 0.5 2.5 1.2 1.9 1.0 2.0 0.9 2.4 1.2 the 41 14 SD 14 SD ed M SD M SD it. SD H SD 14 SD 14 SD M SD These for ITEMS On W.25 N.16 Mar W.20 . N.12 Water W-13 N-23 Mae W.29 11-18 F-14 Note: Mthibit 1.4 (Continued)

SCALES

.1 ® ITEM 4111 I t § +i jr4 tzb 18.4 r :4 ? 0A to 2 if kA vi aamA4 seq. ip,1, AI Lai la la AI Ewa 111-5 N 2.5 2.1 0.9 1.2 2.4 2.5 2.9 1.8 1.8 2.0 1.4 2.4 SD -),5 1.0 0.8 0,,5 0.7 1.1 1.0 0.7 0.7 0.9 1.3 1.2 H.28 M 3.2 2.8 3.2 2.9 3.1 2.9 3.2 2.2 2.5 2.4 1.1 2.2 SD 1.0 1.3 1.5 1.4 1.5 1.1 1.0 1.4 0.9 1.1 1.0 1.7

F-7 M 2.9 3.1 1.5 1.8 3.2 2.4 3.1 2.9 2.0 3.6 3.1 3.6 SD 0.8 0.8 0.8 1.0 0.9 1.2 1.0 0.8 1.4 0.5 0.8 1.1 =Ea W-27 1.4 0.8 0.9 2.2 1.2 2.2 1.8 1.9 2.41.51.5 SD 0.8 1.3 1.0 0.8 1.7 0.7 1.0 0.7 1.2 1.2 1.2 0.8

N-9 M 3.1 3.6 2.4 3.1*2.6 3.0* 3.1 2.0 2.5 2.5 1.1 2.1 SD102 0.7 1.5 1.1*0.7 0.6* 0.6 1.1 0.9 1.1 0.6 1.2

F-22 m 2.5 2.1 2.4 2.5 2.2 2.1 1.2, 2.1 2.1 2.52.93.0 SD1.5 1.0 1.8 1.1 1,2 1.0 0.7 0.6 0.4 0.9 0.8 0.9

W.31X 2.9 3.1 1.4 2.2 3.5 2.5 3.1 2.1 2.2 2.6 1 ©6 3,1 SD 1,2 1.5 1.4 1.3 0,i9 1.4 1.2 1.0 1.2 1.3 O,9 0.8 N.26 M 2.4 2.0 2.6 1.5 1.5 1.2 2.8 1.1 1.2 1.5 1.0 1.1 SD145 1.4 1.3 1.5 1.4 0.7 1.7 0.6 0.7 1.3 0.8 0.8 S.3 M 3.9 44 1.4 28 3.5 3.2 3.6 2.5 2.8 3.1 1.9 3.5 SD1.0 1.4 1,5 1.3 1.7 1.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.6 0.8 0.8

W..11 M 2.2 2.1 0.8 2.0 1.8 2.5 2.8 1.9 1.6 2.6 1.5 SD 1.2 1.1 3.0 0.7 1.3 0.5 0.5 0.7 0.4 1.0 0.70.9 0.8 11.6 M 2.9 2.9 3.5 44 2.0 2.4 300 1.9 1.9 1.6 0.8 1.8 SD 0.8 1.0 1,4 1.2 1.3 1.2 1.4 1.4 1.2 1.2 0.7 1.3

S.17M 3.6*3.3* 2.1* 4.1* 3.6*2.9* 3.4* 201*2.7*2.7*1.7*2.3* SD1.3*2.0*1.9* 0.9* 1.7* 1.7*1.3*i.i*1.0*1,6*1.3* 1.3* 1-prctrcra t i (paputouo0)

41111111111WOINKIINNONIIMMININIONIPO smog allGraiirgilullOPM.

SMIll

x rav z oz i itt* i 6* oz oz 52 i as z1 let 5' 9 9z lei iez ct t 60 6410 L*1 6*0 t 1* i 1* eo 6o triti H *1C 9C I. Lii as *CI 11 zC 6z VC 6z 11 6'z 1 *C 0 e 1 4tC*1 i I/ 0 bo 0 1 ir Z1 9*0 9 0C-is N 63 C 5 9°1 t4? 6z 6z 5C 2'2 6'0 as C*1 t e t2 5 6'0 9'2 1 9 I 47* 6so o 9'0 60 9'0 5'0 WI 51.-14 w 02 5 11 *0 as 6 tz 1/2 0z 0Z fez 1 9°0 1 le 5 *9o t 1* 90 6 64o 11 Z1 1 r z1 810 rt H 6z zeC zC fez lez 9z O'C 02 1z as z 4i'1 2't z 01 VI. 5't 9 6'o 9 Ceti 1 C*1 47 1 firs x t£ E 6*2 t*C 92 tyZ as 11 z 03 6 6t 9 zz 5 9°1 5 91 1 r 01 50 0'1 51 11 o =wpm tlii 0 N 6 iiZ 1 91 92 9't 0Z 9*1 9 ZZ as 21 9% 91 8'0 02 5 £t 21 z L*o 6°0 1 60 1 z trs N tC ZC 1°Z Zat 6*i ii*Z as - eiC 6 0z 91 0 91 9°0 L40 t j. Cc irt L0 6*0 9°0 ro t 9°0 01 t-s 6 N 1C 9C t z I/ z° Cz as 2'1 0 1C iz 0z 92 11 *z t 16 0'1 t e 6'0 0 6o 9.0 t 0 9o Exhibit 1,5...=PreliminaryInstrument

,

pittamiliglitsslightly,stiotw 22a!Extreek I)) Upper-eines W N 0 e Lower-class

i M.) Ilducated W vaii; . . Uneducated .1.1...... C) Whits A.- N N. * ...... 0 Negro

. ..::: ... Urban .W Rural

A) Pleasant W 14.1 Unpleasant ./1 C) Ambitious N. Lazy

J) Boss Worker

L) Responsible .9 .1110 0 0 Irresponsible I ill M) Safe $ W e 0 *%: Dangerous "k.:.., ...., It) Wan .4.. fi .... 0Cold woo' 11) Masculine N *...:..... Feminine

C) Strong Weak

Means for Midwestern Raters W a 25. Can) N ig 16. [on] throit instrumant

MARRIED

pxtremelz wt!,slightlySlightly 91111 Extresely D).Upper -class Lower-class

B) Educated W Uneducated

G) white W n.11'''''' .11 Negro

1 F) Urban W N ...... Rural.

,, pleasant ttttt tttttt A) , ttttttt:N. Unpleasant

C)Ambitious .....0°...% at aN Lezy

'... J)Boss :... W. . Worker sfP ./..: L)Responsible W . .N / e * 9 Irresponsible . T: 1\ 140 Safe \ e e o W N Dangerous

E) Warm w ... el1%1W.$ Cold ttttt ..tttttttttttttt ...... ,....x..4aggv. H) Masculine ..... 4:4 Feminine

K) Strong N. n Weak

10101:1111111111. 411111NimmorimMilalIll.<71111=iminum. WO MI inI IM M MI I NO IN IM el 17 III IN I I ft p Means for Midwestern Raters

W = 20. [tmerid]

N = 12. [Immrid] Exhibit 1.7- .PreliminaryInstrument

WATER

1 2 ,Extremely, %el slightly,mesa zat .Extremely U)Upper-class N .Lower-class .4/ .4," B) Educated N b Uneducated il it G) White 10,,,4,4,,, Negro

.44...... 4..... F) Urban .4.4.1,.. AP Rural

A) Pleasant de Unpleasant .ry

...... C) Ambitious .... fp W" ., IN. . Lass? ti s:-% J) Bose 0 . 4 N Worker A., / ..9. L) Responsible i .w n e 0 Irresponsible

..*:

.&:.. NO Safe .N W 0 e Dangerous Nk,

N6,.. E) Warm il 0 Cold

H) Masculine . W O. Feminine V=. vt K) Strom! I Weak

Kemp- for Midwestern Raters

13. W r ['mt.] N 33. Punte3 althibitI.8..- Preliminary Instrument

RINSE

---r------2-- r...... 4....t INIOSIMIL1101111811M Extreateli,9.21a!lightly,slightly. cite Extremely,

D) Upper-class. 6 P'. Lower-class

B) Educated .1..4 4 . * .Uneducated .:..,x 0 ..

4* Negro G) White ...."

I, ,,, ..... P / P) Urban TirN. al Rural .t..%.:8..:.%

)1 f. 4 aUnpleasant A) Pleasant \q, .,... Lazy C)Ambitious v iw 1

'444441,.. J) Boss X e Worker //7-11 L) Responsible 9 V .N P' Irresponsible

4 % ..,i, M) Safe Xi rri2,,,, Dangerous ,,,,,, ,,,",", .1:1,,.F..

fi ,,,,,,,, I I..1',,J._ E) Warm W N. gf Cold

.s:..

N_ W 0 V Feminine H) Masculine ..:. .4. 1. i.Z Si K) Strong.. . 14. 9 9 F 0 Weak

../...... straiiMan,Warawliallealoillenawdeamomilo..=1111.1 .1111111116- Means for Midwestern Raters

w 12 29,['rInsez]

=18, [rens]

F ClEnsez)

11111.111.111.1.0.1.1.10%,,,,,linewn Exhibit 19...PreliminaryInstrument

ROCM

ONOMIIIIImIl7111010111m/OMINImmi 1 2 3 4 5 BILEMIE guile Slightly plightly, Quite Brae:01x

El) Upper-class0 W F. -4% lower-class

I: .. B) Educated WW.SW Lrrl Uneducated

00i0-% GO White in " Negro F%V.

F) Urban W N. t es Rural Phinionfit....4hilsohogotNioit NN

A) Pleasant 0 is 0 ,14F Unpleasant

)kr C) Ambitious es eLazy :1.'t%.

s,tt ist1/2"IN 3) Bose Es O & csitAl Worker

::::::;".....

ti L) Responsible . n F Irresponsible Ao" %%

I4) Safe . WF N 0 Dangerous infm, sii444,4 nu ii iF E) Warm c W %*V F Cold # II) Masculine .F Feminine

Ih 4 K) Strong OF Weak

Means for Midwestern Raters

W= 5. [rum]

N m 28. (r.m]

F = 7. [rum] Lxhibit 1.10.0-PreliminaryInstrument

SYRUP

410 0 1 .0 Extremes Quite Slight waltz 2cite Extremely, 10) Upper-class F .N .Lower-class $ 4:... '..7:.., <4.. ...Z... B) Educated F . 0 . Uneducated

, , ....-e.0' , .., ,

...... -'.fr 1.:-...- G) White ..z., 4. X. w..,, Negro

"..".,%;....

, 4r. 4... F) Urban 0 0 F *10 ; gettal .i ..,..e

Al Pleamt o z . Unpleasant

C) Ambitious W P . . . , Lazy

J) Boss . . .NIF . . . Worker ,002'

...... ,,::.A .p.-. M Responpible. . . tea * . . . . Irresponsible .1% ...... = .... 14) Safe . , * 1.1.P N 4, Dangerous

B) Warm . 0 0 0 0 * Cold

-. M) Masculine . at . F. . .Feminine

K) Strong a W al F , , , . Weak

NieamJ for 'Midwestern Raters

27. [fs:ITO

N = 9. rfsjAriyA

F = 22. Cts:rfep) 1.11..PreliminaryInstrument

AUNT 9

....1, 0 1 2 3 4 ., Extremely Quite Slightly EilttlZap Extremely D) Upper-class 144 W. /.a,S. 6Lower-class B) Educated . N S Uneducated ..:

G) White A Negro ......

...:::.*:..e. ..:7 F) Urban 0Rural

A) Pleasant N .Unpleasant rr

C) Ambitious 41, N . Lazy e4,74:14:. 4:1144._ Bone

L)Responsible SW a rrr 14) Safe W S

IIII B) Warm 0 W .5 9 Cold lllll 00_000' H) Masculine 000 Feminine it U. K) Strong a Weak

Means for Midwestern Raters = 31. Imre_ ti ft 26,Cct.ntl S i3. Cant' Exhibit I.12.Prelimina.ryInstrument

FOUR

anammoommumnommINEW 0 1 1M

Means for Midwestern Raters *IfIFFI = 11.[for] N= 6.Efooj S = 17.[fee] Exhibit1013.-Preitminary Instrument

GREASY

1 2 3 5 Itctremelz Quite Eatittl Slightly 911a Extremely

11) Masculine a_fat* 4`"" Feminine ""t. 10 Strong Weak

ANHOMIWIRMIN Means for Midwestern Raters

IOWsg !I ['grist]

N 21. Efgrizl

S = 30. Exhibit 1.14--PreliminaryInstriment

O 1 2 El...EsLeEmei 22111 Slightly pasLziti

D) Upper-class 4 . W N.8 Lover -class

$...... 1 .4- / : B) Educated . W . .sp. . . Uneducated

.:.:- t! .: i: - :, - :. 1 ..:- G) White W. S..1.1 . . , Negro A :,-% . .4....:..:... P) Urban W N. .0 Rural :

A) Pleasant !: P. p . Unpleasant %ve S ...;...% C) Ambitious s.21. Lazy

%:..

. s, ..::. .7) Boss 4 0.N . . . .Worker

0!"... L) Responsible . . Irresponsible

. : 14) Safe .Dangerous t .:14.1

_ ./.. ..,. E) Wank S ...... Cold

......

R) Masculine Feminine

K) Strong 4 Weak

PaillE111111111111111111 Means for Midwaetern Ba.ters

If = 15. [ pur] awe

N a2. (NO

$ = 24 [boo) Exhibit WS...Preliminary Instrument

WREE1.13ARRCIO

0 1 2 3 5 Extremely Vitet Slightly Slightly 22111 Extremely

D) Upper-class V. .1c Lower-class

. % 8) Educated e .N § A Uneducated

G) White ."::::::?: Negro 44 IIIIIIIIII lllllllll F) Urban N u. p .Rural

...... ,,,,,,,,, A) Pleasant ... .1 N-, 6 Unpleasant ....

...... ? C) Ambitious . Hg . Lazy °JP

J) Bose 9 14 Worker

mo06' .0%.;,.

: ...... L) Responsible. p . 0 aIrresponsible /

MI) Safe e Dangerous

E) Warm . S Cold

0 ,wwow 0,...- ...... ,

% 0000

10 Masculine it 0Feminine

10 Strong Weak

11.011WAI EVENNW11...MagiffiraMillr 41IMONBEIS~

Means fOrMidwestern Raters gni w = 10,Putitbero]

If=4. bEsr^i

S st 19. [ t huillimre] 1111. Exhibit1,16Preliminary Utz trument

INTERCORRELATIONS OF SCALES

11=

to 14 co 0 0 ,15 w 0 v0 u 1.414 W W 0 0 A0 emir-offOu uce 0 4,140 0 0.4.. a. 0 .0. Ia

2$1 fal IstN 0,it 0 0gi0 Fi .0 714F.. HIa LI o w 44 0 .4gtotN48.14 :t gfmc: DI II: tt $54 134 Cd 14 u3 twa 104 or Z AI A 02 Va 0 0: t) Z . ...

(D) (8) (G) (F) (A) (C) (J) (L) (20 (E) (H) (K)

I

75 51 39 20 44 63 25 05 -24 01 14

46 42 28 53 68 19 19 12 1-03 18

-12 -12 18 42 -06 00 -24 -20 -16

05 29 35 13 15 -09 -04 07

20 19 40 42 49 21 26

42 29 24 15 06 34

17 17 10 00 26

34 36 31 34

49 04 17

40 33

42

NOTE: These data are based on an N of 180 (30 responses for each of qix raters). Decimal points are not reported in this table. Exhibit 2,1-1inal Instruments

THE INSTRUCTIONS AND SCALES

The instructions for both the five -scale form and the three-scale form of the final instruments were nearly identical to those for the preliminary instrument (Exhibit 1,1) There were, however, two changes worth mention. One--to broaden the applicability of the instruments--was to eliminate the notion of Chicago residence from the first sentence by merely stating: "We want to learn what you think about theway different people pronounce certain words." The other changewas intended to acquaint raters with the scales as soon as possible by presenting all the scales in the instructions, rather than just the first two.

The scales were presented for each itemin the two forms in the order shown here.Data analysis for the raw scoresis reported according to the raw score values shown in the spaces of thescales. In the analysis of (levier tion scores, the positive numbers referto the end of the scale with the higher raw scores.

Ikelfal:Fcalo form

RURAL 1 : 2 : 3 : 4: 5 : 6 : URBAN

WEAK t : 2 :3 : 4 : 5 : 6.: STRONG

PLEASANT 6 : .1.:4 : 3 : 2 : 1 : UNPLEASANT

WHITE6 : 5 : 4 : 3 : 2 : 1 NEGRO

UNEDUCATED1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : EDUCATED

Thethree -scale farm:

EDUCATED6 : 5 : 4 : 3 : 2 : 1 : UNEDUCATED

NEGRO1 : 2 : 3 4 5 6 : WHITE

PLEASNAT6 : 5 : 4 : 3 : 2 : UNPLEASANT

For ,tonsistency, the data reported here shows the scales reordered and numbered the same way for both the three-scale and the five-scale forms:

Scale 1:Rural 4 Urban Scale 2: Weak 4 Strong Scale 3: Unpleasant 4 Pleasant Scale 4: Negro 4 White Scale 5: Uneducated < Educated Exhibit 2.2uPina1 Instiments

THE QUEST;0.;'.FOR ITEM

Word Item Numbers Natkaa

Aunt 3, 6, 20, 45 Your mother's sister is your99.

Borrow 8, 36, 47 When you don't have something, you may have to ...

Coffee 32,43 At breakfast she puts cream and sugar in her .9.

Five 4, 12, 19 Two plus three is

Four 2, 42, 44 Two plus two is9.4

Genuine 10, 16, 30 If something is not fake, it is

Greasy 15, 25, 35 When you spill the butter, the table feels

Hotel 7, 18, 33 When you're out of town, you might stay in a..0

Judge 5, 22, 39 He was caught for speeding and had to see the

Man 21, 24, 34 A boy grows up into a...

Married 14, 28, 37,38 The boy and the girl got engaged to be.406

Push 29, 41, 49 The car wouldn't start, so he had to get a9..

Rinses 13, 17, 50 To get the soapsuds off the dishes, what does the housewife do?

Roof 9, 27, 40 He went up the ladder and walked onto theell.

Room 11, 31, 40 He opened the door and walked into the..9

Tired 23, 26, 48 After a bard day at works you getq69 Exhibit 2,3--Final Instruments

THE ITEMS

LN MN NE SO Wli \morrarrramar ik Ain't I (This was a practiceitem tointroduce ratersto the scates.)

Aunt ... 3. [ant] 20. Cent] 5.['Int] 6. Ea Int] Borrow .. "...... 8. ['bozo] --- 36. Chore 47 ]A Coffee ... 43. ek041.3

Five --- 12. [4160 . Efaav3 19. (far id Your 44. EfO3 ------5. - -- 2. (foe] 2.[for) Genuine 30 .tt 3anvala 1 a -."' 6. t len: ltn)10.[ ' Jen' TNn Greasy ... 25. [1-0141 35. Cgri3i 5.[16rizLi ... Hotel ... 7. Choltel] .... 18. (hottel) holtel)...... Judge 5.[, t5T3] . --- ...... 22. (/11 34( , Man ... 21. Coen) ... 1-- 24. Cron] dr..-65n) Married - -- 14. [irrztvd]37. ['Ingrid)28 ftreri'd)38 ['mead]

Push .. 49. (pfri) ..- 41. 49453 29. (.1i3 Rinses .. 17i trensez3 ...ft.. 3C' in vntsezi50 C ' ri nstz] Roof ... 46. [rut] ... 9.(rut] 27. (ruf)

Room ... 31. (rum] .. 40. [rum) 11. [ rvr3 ... Tired 23. (etesed) 26.Ciltvied48. r't" ;'"d)

IAN 0 Lower-Class Chicago Negro Pronunciation MN 0 Middle-Class Chicago Negro Pronunciation NE is Negro Giving Middle-Class Chicago White Pronunciation SO 0Southern white (Greenville;S.C.) Pronunciation WU White Middle-Class Chicago Pronunciation

LN, MN and NE items were pronunced by the same Negro speaker. All speakers were middle-class, college educated Chicago residents. Exhibit 2.4--Final Instruments

THE RATERS

The following sampleswere drawn ftom approximately 350 raters to whom the final instrumentswere administered in the Cbicago area.

N Sa le

12 Reproducibility Study-- University of Chicago seniors and graduate students; diverst dialect backgrounds;no Negroes

242 Chicago and Illinois ResidentsWhiteand Negro, high school fresh- men through Ph.D; raised and residing in Chicago and nearby suburbs

21 Total Graduate Sample- -Whiteand Negro, educated beyond bachelors degree, raised and residing In Chicago and nearby suburbs, primarily concerned with education

105 Total College ZempleMhite andNegro, college freshmen through bachelorga degree, raised and residing in Chicago and nearby suburbs, primarily students of University of Chicago and Illinois Teachers College, Chicago (South)

27 Negro College Sample-- Students from I21inois Teachers College, Chicago (South), raised and residing in Chicago and nearby suburbs

78 White College SampleStudents from Illinois TeachersCollege, Chicago (South), and University of Chicago,plus a few college graduates working in the field ofeduca- tion

116 Total High School Sample- -White and Negro,from Thornton Fractional Fractional Township High School, North, and Hyde Park High School, raised in Chicago and nearby suburbs

54 Negro High School SamplePrimarily frost Hyde ParkHigh School, raised in Chicago and nearby suburbs; generally working class "r lower middle class origin

61 White High School Sample- -From Thornton Fractional Township High School North, and Hyde Park High School; raised in Chicago and nearby suburbs; generally working class or lower middle class origins Exhibit 2.4w-Final Instruments (Concluded)

-Na. stakt

165 Raw Scete College SariapleWhite (N - 131) and Negro (N as 36), educated beyond high school graduation, residing in Chicago and nearby suburbs

144 Raw Score High School gamplew-White (N 79) end Negro (N s 65), stueents from Thornton Fractional Township, High School, North, and Hyde Park High School Exhibit 2.5--Pinal Instruments

REPRODUCIBILITY OF RATINGS

Test-Retest Correlations ofIndividual Responses SRaw Scores)

N 41, 120 (12 rates x 10 items)

First Responses Second Responses Scales Mean S .D. S4.4 D

1. Rural 4 Urban 3.81 1,43 3.78 1.36 .71

2. Weak < Strong 3.78 1.04 3.88 1.08 .63

3. Unpleasant < Pleasant 3.10 1./1 . 2.97 1.16 .57

4. Negro4White 3.47 1;47 3.45 1.45 .85

5. Uneducated < Educated 4.07 1.03 3.98 1.03 .70

Leivt-Ibtest Correlations of Individual RaterMeans lag Scores,

N - 12 (12 =east based on 10 items each)

First Set Second Set Scales WP. L.D. Mean S D.s r

1. Rural .< Urban 3.81 .56 3.78 .45 .66

2, Weak4 Strong 3.78 .48 3.88 .47 .69

3. Unpleasant .4 Pleasant 3.10 .68 2,97 .68 .84

4. Negro < White 3.47 .54 3.45 .59 .95

5. Uneducated < Educated 4.07 .52 3.98 .43 .74 DESCRIPTIVELARSENS STATISTICS t ;\ TrIAL A.DEVIATI0N '14mP0t A00 t0uATFO FUR ALL S(J4JI:CTS Exhibit 2.6--Ifinal Instritunt PAGE VARIABLE NAME Mt-AN 00404. ty (AVIATION 1-RKOW SKEW KORTUSIS MIN .MAX 1 AIKT I PR 1 -0.150 0.101 104 64532 5412 -0.6/7-0.149 0.4290.005 0.0950.127).094'.111 1051u41351u5 0.9620.9721.3u01.1361.030 0.0600.0580.1750.0720.046 -0.178-1.389-0.545-0.238 0.039 -0.491-0.440-0.324-1.160 5.625 -1.91-6.92-3034-3.08-2.23 2.782.111.342.331.85 10 98 7 AUKT MN 1 542 3 -0.211 0.20'40.0400.0800.200 0.1040.1100.11214105 105134105 i.0621.0751.1191.147 0.0580.0600.0570.065 -0.400-0.025-0.187-0.408 -0.754-0.735-0.922-0.642 -2.55-2.84-2.43-2.29 2.332.113..32 14131211 MAT NE 4213 -1.21)-0.016 0.0/4 0.0744.9800.104).(191 1051341u51L4 /1.111rl./570.8120.933 0.0480.0490.064 -.0.015-0.310-0.406-0.297 -0.300-0.482-0.854-0.620 -2.25-1.95-1.93-2.35 1.772.371.53L.76 18171615 UKT SO 1 32S -0./171-0.044-0.733-0.551 J.0810.0711.08u:J.081 103105104 '0.817 .81?).7i4 .8 0.0610.0500.0460.052 -0.171 0.1160.6450.328 -0.471-0.291-0.270 0.200 -3.62-2,14-2.59-1.95 1.331.521.398.52 212019 541 -0.641-0.698 0.411 0.0840.070v.083 105 0.8570.716 850 0.0510.069 -0.476-0.363 0.119 -0.540 0.1070.757 -2.91-1.52-3042 1.292.111.14 232422 AUAT wH 5432 -0.156 0.7550.2070.315 0.061J.0910.09110.494 105135104 0.6220.9300.9551.008 0.0520.0650.0660.083 -1.044-0.199-0.164-1.134 i'0.066-0.222 0.9901.129 -1.16-2.68-3.07-2.98 2.621.762.332.14 282726 8ORR0w Mk 1 ?> -0.219 0,f650.2580.357 u.0.e98j.0910.09C c86 105104 0.9960.9300.920 0.0670.0540.060 -0.557-0.146-0.258 -0.127-0.616-0.231 -2.82-2.86-1.94 2.102.411.71 313C29 8CRROW SO S41 -0.304-0.565 0.193 0.0781.0943.080 105105 0.9630.8150.883 0.0590.0520.057 -0.036 0.0990.375 -0."99-0.263-0.219 -2.91-2.68 1.901.321.57 333432 4523 -0.302 0.5060.336 4..0813.078 ^61).nm2 104105103 0.6250.8310.7980.8240.80 000490.0550.0510.043 -0.493-0.529-0.524 0.024 -0.j21-00448-0.919 0.581 -1.34-1.83-2.45-2.31 2.1L1.861.571.39 373638 MORROW WH I 42 1 -0.256 0.23?0.3910.223 00091C.0730.084 105104105 0.9430.7500.8.64 0.0490.056040590.053 -0.173-3.131-0.C51-0.506 -0.464-0.539-0.309 0.586 -2.63-1.90-2.31-1.94 2.35ik.941.711.85 414039 COFFEE MN 251 0.4840.3150.070 0.061f:.0760.082 1041J4105 0.6180.773C.6139 0.0620.0450.046 -0.872-0.863-0.149 -0.747 0.2220.676 -1.16-2.38-1.96 2.111.471.79 4544"342 45 3 . -1.410 0.4060.557 0.087v.08u0.067 1L5105 0.8950.8240.684 0.0440.0510.043 -0.381-0.525 1..481 -0.971-0.365-0.360 -1.41-2.25-1.13 2.441..431.93 484746 COFFEE WM 1 c1 -4.653 0.1090.4160.35e 0.07/0.0940.071(1.078 105104134 0,7410.9(13t0.791 .723 0.0520.055C.0570.095 -0.342-0.784-1.580 0.455 -0.541 0.5773.908 -2.37-1.65-3011 1./31.861450 SO49 SAMPLE SHE - 4') 105 0.3170.230 3.0710.070 SKEW STO. 104105 LRAOR z 0.236 0.7250.719 0.0570.044 -0.371 KUKTUS1i STO. IRROA -0.231-0.440 0.591 -1.18-1.61-1.94 - 2.201.851470 02SCRIPTIVE;LARSICNS DATA,DEV/A7134 STATISTICS ONSCORES, TOTAL REORDEKF0 COLLGE SAMPLE AND EQUATED FOR fi.l. SUUJECTS Ilzhibit 2.6--*anal Instruments PAGE 2 VARIABLE 51 FIVE NAME MN I 040IsMEAN. ERROR 104 N DEVIATION ERROR a SKEW KUKTUSIS MIN MAX S$5453S2 452i -1.045 0.0970.521 0.08,0.0633.0770.090 10105 :-.8380.8550,7940.917 0.074::::10.045 -0.687-0.290-0.228 1.Od3 -0.524-0.398-0.492 -2.11-1.68 1.85i...iiii 595857S6 FIVE SC I 432 -0.144-0.221 0.2450.4030.004 0.0910.0850.0950.1030.098 104105103LOS 0.9300.8740.9601.0511.005 0.0500.0560.0550.0710.059 -0.411-0.040-0.124-0.164-0.155 -0.62S-0.786-3.298-0.6?3 0.116 -1.96-1.56-2.53:::::-3.14 2.11iiii2.37 6463625160 FIVE MN 1 4235 0.1470.3080.1730.141 0.086J00870.0730.090 10105106104105 C.81370.749').882 0.0490.0520.0740.054 -0.325-0.622-0.580-0.163 -0.700-0.591 0.J350.931 -1.97-2.10-2.8C-2.3S 10731.702.502.14 676665 FOLR LN 1 25 -0.675 0.2710.1750.411 0.09S0.0770.064 It 105104s Ci.e.(;9i 0.0480.0490.146 -0.369-3.739 0.294 -0.983-0.387 0.048 -1.76-1.34 1.521.691.83 69687170 SO 1 543 -1.124-1.408-0.715 0.0710.0490.0990.089 105luS 0.7190.9141.015 0.0530.0750.0820,0S4 -0.637 0.40?0.8861348 -3.552 a.azt1.:.;:?93.744 -2.43-2.62-2.84:::n 2:::11..;: 747372 MR 423 -0.278-0.067-0.466 0.168 0.0960.0930.0843.105 1051u4 0.95301.1]9185920.861 0.3520.0560.0540.052 - --...i21C.(IC6 ,',.4s4 0.056 -04.631-0.344-10328-0.730 -2.35-2.531:837 1.671.651.70 .11 7978777675 FOLR WH 1 4i15 -0.251-0.115-0.279 0.277 J.I160.1090.1040.091 105104 1..1421:1):(511.013 0.0610.0670.0560.053 -0.0j4-J.252-:.,.074-3.573 -3.8o9-0.4/6-0.:70-0.356 -2.68-2.43-2.83-2-,64 2.292.331.851.63 82Si60 GENUINE LN 1 25 -0.897-0.027 0.083 0.0960.rld0.094).:184 105 0.4851.0091.003 0.0610.0550.053 -..).764-0.314-0.118 3.831 -0.3/4-0.77S-0.806 -2.54:1::: it'..;:2.092.t8 858483 453 -1.149-1.056-0.044 0.469 J.0850.0914).081 1,5105luS 0.8740.8960.4360.864 0.0820.0750.059 :!.98.31.458 -1.011 0./041.b4J1.490 :23..:46-2.81 2.321.077: 69888786 GEtUINE SO X 5423 0.5750.4510.1440.360 0.:)5,2q.071).r.V$.f411 1051C41)5 , 0.571.1.8..:4.?..830V.79S 0.0410.0580.0520.0540.091 -6.31-.6--1/4;.343:., ....:477v.444 -0.3/3--(.:)96 0.199 -0.99-2.34:1:1: 2:::1.52 929190 GENUINE WH 1 2 1 -0.468 001890.552 v.0960.08iJ.67) 1J4luS1C4 11.9v9u.4f420.7(.9 C.047G.0630.054 --0.80 .1.336 0.419 -0.31e.-0.b91 0.45J3.181 :1::1 !..g. 959493 4g J 0.1900.160 u.Odu0.094 lui.105 1.87r1.0-2 0.0480.045 -..*.U31-).?84 -0.tal-1._54 -1.62-1.61-2.2 2.ikt;11.72 989796 GREASY MN 1 I3 -0.185 0.3210.202 0..185j.1174J0901.093 1.::5134105 1.791.t.)..46,g 0.0500.0460.059 --,:.5f.,8 ".0J6 -3034::-t-.413-3.411 :::8)11-2.44 2.36 ()32 100 99 SAMPLE SIZE 2 54 105 -0.284-1.210-0.369 0.074).nts, SteFw SID. FAiKqii 1105 :))2/7bZ0.1:41 0.236 0.1230.060U.356 :::::: J:111::,3,9 K0iTOS1S Sli. .K404 = ).4sr -').111-0.276 4,-11 -2.3J-5.44-2.J5 20.50J.13 ..:t . LARSCNS DA1A.OEVIAI19N St01FS, 10:0ROF0111 AND L00A1E0 FOR ALL 1111JECIS Eithibit PAGE . VARIABLEDESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS 0% 1074L C(JLLtiati DAME MEAN tRRO4:)AMPLE N UEVIAT11N. ERROR SKEA2.6-Final. Instruments KuRTJSIS KIN 30 MAX 107101 SREASY NE 231 0.4590.438 0.070J.1174 103103 0.7110.750 0.3580.062 -0.766-1.016 3.7500.656 ...1.99-1.48 1.751.71 105104103 4t. -0.431 0.4060.265 0.0610.069}.C81 /04105 0.13240.01/ .i.$1 0.0510.052 -(.321 0.535 -0.707-0.146 -1.94-2.12 1.88 108107106 GREASY SO 1 4I 5 -0.121-0.266 0.072 0.09i0.0663.101 /G51C4105 3.4740.4771.037 0.0580.0530.0500.056 -0.153-0.141-0.046-0.671 -0.501-1.u3?-0.092-0.505 -2.50-1.91-2.51-1.95 '2.37'1.52 2oL51.68 112111110109 HOTEL MN 1 235 -0.451 0.1400.0090.377 0.00100(1920.106400145 104105134 0.8211.9190.8741.078 0.0440.0520.0680.066 -0.414-0.256-0.855 5.355 -0.510-0.717-0.347 0.367 -1.93-2.36-2.89-2.44 2.4420.11.911.67 116115114113 HOTEL SO 1 h4 -0.042-0.522 0.0170.321 .."..105U.0621.06/0.077 105105 0.8470.8880.7851.076 0.0540.0500.0450.061 -0.323-0.510 0.5670.025 -0.328-0.928 0.578 -2.89-2.40-1.96-1.93 1.771.621.362.92 121120119118117 WH 1 5423 0.4000.4970.6750,5210.261 0.0791.075J.061.0743.074 105104 0.8110.7620.6280.7550.795 0.0630.0580.0550.0530.062 -0.691-0.892-0.447-0.293 0.949 0.8161.2420.0930.530 -1.93-1.47-2.10-2.03 2.142.112.022.43 126125124123122 JUCGEMOM LN 1 5423 -0.920 0.7060.1610.5480.343 0.1070.0570.0710.0810.067 105105104 0.5690.7250.8320.6851.101 0.0360.0440.0630.054 -0.211-0.380-0.664-0.313-0.717 -0.458-0.477 0.(030.5860.112 -0.62-1.88-1.95-1.46-1.81 2.462.432.321.991.6t 130129128127 5432 ...1.125-1.158-0.705 0.242 0.089030790.0910.108 105104 0.9090.8120.9311.100 0.0790.0810.0540.0624.074 -0.525 0.9200.2010.5281.387 -0.599-0.689-0.112 2.1411.177 -2.59-3039-2.68-2.16-3.91 1.601.852A01.551.64 134135133132131 JUCGE SO 1 4523 0.8300.8780.0530.665 0.7650.0720.087 105105104 0.6610.7420.8930.730 0.0580.0700.0530.063 -1.093-0.862-0.202-1.199 -0.541 1.2271.7391.131 -1.44-1.78-2.53-1.66 1.962.651.981.91 139138137136 JUCGE WH 1 425 -0.312-0.385-0.071 0.63.70.927 o.0900.0910.096v.062 105104 0.9220.9340.9680.630 0.0590.0570.0510.058 -0.279-0.95250.3690.210 -0.297-0.430-0.876 1.564 -2.53-2.86-2.48-1.34 1.751.831.2.09 6 143142141140 MAN MN 1 235 ..--.0.362-0.241 0.301 u.0900.08/0.0920.061 104105 0.9150.9430.8960.628 0.0570.0430.0640.066 -0.478-0.526-3.067-0.800 -0.408-0.090-1.024 2.673 -1.93-2.49-2.89-1.96 2.461.782.411.44 147146145144 MAN SO 1 204% -0.283-0.495-0.820-0.640 0.0800.0040.0680.0730083 103105104105 0.8610.8490.6940.744 0.0500.0480.043 -3.230-0.047 0.3420.592 -0.558-0.693-.40.109-0.361 -2.65-2.46-1.99-2.38 1.241.201.031.41 ----SAMPLE SIZEISO149146 543 = 105 -00425-0.7000.364 0.267 0.0800.0720.093 , SKEW S10. EftOR = 0.236 104105 0.8150.7350.950 0.0510.0460.074 ---0.405-0.025 KURTOSIS0.0590.153 ST4. :AIWA '-0.382--0.32'a-0.t68 3.572 -2.10-1.59..3.36-2.52 a 0.467 1.601.872.401.50 LARSENS OEVIATIGN SCORES, REOROFRED ANO EQUATED F0.4 ALL SUBJECTS Exhibit 2.6--Fina1 Instruments PAGE VARIABLEOISCRIPTIv 4110 NAMtiSTATISTICS UN TOTAL COLLEGE SAMPLE MEAN EfUtEe2 ULVIMION 1-KKOK skIim KURTUS1S MIN MAX 153152151 MA% WH ?31 -0.478 0.0921.109 u.076Q 4.08A.nr; 101051uh J.4)8,.r51 G.U460.073 -1.160 0.011 -0.882 2.86 1.29 136155154 451 -0.179 0.021 u.r;900.067;.079 10510 9$::1171(';0.7/9 (4.0480.0380.C42 -0.538-0.029 0.172 -0.518-0.143-0.75/ -2.131...ici 1.411.451.881.24 159158157 MARRTE0 MN 5423 -1.275-0.757-0.911 0.227 u.08h0.0703.091 105 !!):If:0.9710.91* C.096J.0610.060 3.652 3.6230o6951.670 3.422-0.232 ":e.;::: -2.38-2.33-2:66 2.381.96k.74L.37 142161160 MARRIED NE 2:I -1.150-0.295-1.181 u.1240.077u.085 104103105 C.0.871 0.2560.0470.081 -0.350 0.901 -0.5J615.J17 1.639 :1:1: 6.921.121.75 I:::1 163 0.432 0.084 105 ;..241.:71 0.052 '.581 -0.618 -3.11-2.22-2.25 167166165 64 MARRIED SC 2451 -0393-0.412-0.409 0.091 0.071(rerrl:9.071 1051041y4 f:.7230,720a.725).0.)5 0.0530.0540,051 -0.609-J.19m ..)..,:g: -0.148 3.2590,Z,41 -1.96-2.84- 1.401.41 169168 543 0.351 ..4.064 NI, 105 0.6100.660 4())..(°X1i0.0400.045 -0.158-f..264 -0.596-3.4510.17a -1.41:::0: 11".::1.24 ill173171170 MARRIED Mn 3?&' 0.8180.643;.1:72 0.(81J..)0054 %66 105104 1..826..tv:0 0.0530.078 --(j..:r1:-1.814-C..2116 -0.414 5.3153.6J3 7-1...;-1.39-1.95 I:::1.87 174 4 0.7060.735 0.n703.084 105 1;..;77,7: 0.06q 0.111 -2.04 2.44 178177176175 PUSH 00N L 325 0.8500.4570.953 3.061 luS104105 r.61i'.711 .4(...450.3550.0700.067 t6 -1.076-1.375 3.2662.883I.25u1.649 -2..)31.1e;:1..;4; 2.322.491.821.691.70 /81/110179 PUSH Sc 451 -0.044 0.6200.0290.585 iiJ.r14).057 1051j5104 v.d:1r2)..;t7); 0.439C.U47ki.:.35 -0.261-%,.652-u.225-:710 -3.6434)...ifii -1.33::::: 1.431.801.38 /82 23 -0.264 ..070 1.15104 0.71u= 0.049 -0.17.7 J.v.12 -2..42 1.51 183 4 0.448 u.r,66 0.b/1 C.045 i.0t$8 -0.130 -3.93 2.41 186185184 PUSH MH 251 0.5700.2640.449 0.06.50.0543.064 1:-J41041u4105 0.654 0.0820.0330.0146 -1.41?-:.112-0.1J4 -0.173 4,216C0056 -3.95 1.34 1.561.76 189188187 s4j 0.2240.4710.178 0.06.L...)90:1)7;1 1351:,5 O.o940.6951.7244 000610.050 -a.511 -19.635 0,9413.173 ::1.2j1i 2.351.141.60 193192191190 RIKSES MN 321. 0.8090.7420.43Q J.ng60.0770.051 1(.5104105i%), 13).78';U.,M9 0.073(1.3740.0400.031 -,..I86:::::g -0.131 c..,s31.743 -1.741 1.94 2.321.321.36 195194 41.. . 0.6280.5240.258 r.!1Y40.081o.114 1".51o5 0.d301.017I.15S 0.0650.0600.36P ----1::!:1:4-..U.d . ,-.6 -0..ps$ o.112 -1.76-2.6n .2.60 1..rt ...!!1 1.-.5 2.50 198196 97 4IKSES SO 4.3 -0.386 0.33S'9.460 )).,,T: 105 0.975$ ..741 iley620.J57 - v.tie7 ...07? -J.310-;.43 '....J1 -3.:;4:t.:514; 200199 SAMPLE S1/E 4s = 105 0.3250.714 j.r7;i....C.51 Sk W Si1041:)51J5 ST)* i'Ke:::740,0%6 0.'147 0.7671.%/4 U.(6.058 56 --..n..)-..744 :443 .(u4T9sIN -!= o.44o ST,,. :1440:-!",3.45/ -2.."Jo 1.15 1.18 4.74:. OUSCRIPTIVEL1NSg4S D STAT!SIICS UN ICIAL COLLGE WWLE DEVIAT104,1 SCfl 8F0RD100 Ault) EQUATE() FUR ALL SUBJECTS Othitttt, 2.6- -Final Inetrusants PAGE VARIABLE 201 RINSES NAME WH 1 2 0.733MEAN 0.053ERROR 105 N DEVIAIION 0.545 0.050ERROR -0.775 SKEW KURTJS15 1.556 .1.1TMIN MAX 2+1S 204203202 ,403 . -0.209 0.6910.574 0.0710.0950.1063 155LO51J4 0.7e?0.9650.697 0.0720.0520.064 -1.-,361-0.556-r).350 -0.176 2.4920.128 -1.961.44-2:84 1.881.991. r3 208207206205 ROCF MN 1 23 0.5350.3220.573 J.C720.0610.060 135145105 0.7330.6470.618 0.0790.0590.056 -1.278-0.882-0.755 2.8251.5031.471 -2.54-2001-1.60 2.39t.841.64 212211210209 ROOF SO 1 245 -0.347-0.298-0.409 0.3430.234 0.0450.0443.0733.064J.079 105105104 0.9730.9670.6550.7940.751 0.0500.0650.0530.0430.051 -0.073-3.800'.0.299 0.003J.337 -0.134-0.891-0.794- 0.092 0.723 -2.91-2.72-1.99-1.83-1.85 1.621.521.591.69 216215214213 ROCF MN 1 5'43 -0.263-0.278 0.3980.572 0.08C0.090J.0630.087 105104 0.8110.9180.6940.692 0.0550.0510.069 -3.032-'-0.795 0.560 -0.489 0.2800.531 -2.16-1.34-1.95 2.302.942.031.83 220219218217 4532 -0.080 0.2790.1110.204 0.0720.0760.088o.014 1US105105 0.7353.7750.9u01.b08 0.0450.041U.0490.0520.068 -0.149-0.381-0.177-0.900 0.184 -.:4402-0.808-0.753-0.158 0.892 1.35-1.84-1.45-1.89-2.36 2.151.901.521.97,.96 223222221 AOCM MN 1 42 ' 3 -0.274 0.3760.110 0.0833.0811.073 105104 0.8540.8280.746 0.0490.0460.048 -0.423-0.729 0.1bi -0.614-0.694-0.254 .-2.04-1.72-1.85 1.711.571.36 227226225224 ROOM .SO 21 53 -0.230-0.116 0.0080.113 0.0850.1670.0880.078 104105 0.8630.9040.7950.690 0.0420.0600.0500.038 -0.259-0.334-0.438-0.320 -1.109-0.328-0.706 0.025 -2.82-1.93-1.95-1.39 1.351.451.801.41 232231230229228 ROOM MN 1 24S -1.476-0.273-0.104 0.0080.574 U.C8d0.0780.('810.0710.080 105104LOS 0.9ko3007940.8300.7210.817 5.0720.0490.0570.0580.051 -0.171-0.241-3.889 0.629r,.284 -0.429-0.070-0.393 0.6440.703 -3.2J-2.29-2.43-1.59-166 1.222.181.501.801.87 236235234233 TIRED MN 1 6 4 3 -0.506-0.644-0.267-0.766 .J.0930.07):J.0710.083 Iti5IJ4105135 0.1.7130.652 TbS,.451 0.0410.052L.054 0.0960.3024.2950.525 -1.23S-0.194-0.589-0.336 -2.14-2.43-2.34-1.96 1.381.421.291.40 241240239237 T1RE0 SO 1 4253 -1.221-0576-1.1t7-0.311 0.172 0.0780.08?0.167.1.074.n82 10513413510513S 0.7990.80.6310.8390.811 3S 0.0660.0480.0650.0510.053 -U.STS 1.330:_4420.1791.286 -0.646-0.436-0.226 0.8742.518 -3.59-7:old-2055-2.25-1.51 3.041.291.141.73 246245244243242 TINED wm 1 425.7 -0.00-0N466-0.874-0.643 0.789 0.6840.0940.(85').078 104105155 0.8649.4650.81)00.615 0.0710.0580.0436.0580.050 -0.033-1.411 3.6530.6480.174 -0.555-0.131-1.1t05 2.8610.116 -2.43-1.86-2.01-2.58 1.2S1.461+961.73 248247 49d2 0.7650.442 0.!16S0.059,$.011.064 105 0.7061,.784.656 0.0450.058 -0.758 ').267 -0.596 0.n04 -1.24-2.06-1.46 2.391.1S1.75 250249 SAMPLE S1. 5 . z 105 0.8280.69') 4.e6i SKE% STU. CRRIM = 105 e.562..635 ).236 0.0480.046 -0.281-v4.6:18 KURTOSIS SI). :2404 = 1.46/ 0.e430.2J6 -0.85-1.18 2.341.97 Melt 2.7e-P1sra1 Instouticeute

MATINGS BY 116 HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS Page 1

AUNT -1 0 +1 3) s Zi N ..... = 3 g E 4 .-- = I 4) 14 0) I ,,...... A ...... --,i,, ,

....,...00' t, 3 '.N14 I

BIRROU -1 +1 3)

4) I

5)

COFFEE +1 3) w m I 4, ..... %0 00,00 . 4) g fl

. .. 5) ,,

1

.1.

FIVE 0- 0 +1 3) w s I Y I 4) S w

[ I 5) I f b

a, Scale 3: Unpleasantoc Pleasant Scale 4t Neve4Whits Scale 5: Uneducated 4Educated Ethilat 2,7 (Coned.)

FOUR 3)

4)

5)

GENUINE -1 3)

4) W S

5) S

GREASY O 3) S ti H

...... or 4) 11.. ots , ...... 5)

Scale 3: Unpleasant Pleasant Scale 4: Negro White Scale 5: Uneducated 1< Educated Exhibit 2,7(Cont Id) 0 Page 3

JUDGE 3 L u $

I 4) t $ " 1

5) L I.! S

MAN 1 +1 3)

I 4)

5)

MARRIED 3) S

1 4) i

5) C,

PUSH +1 3) ill 4)

5) I

Scale 3: Unpleasant .< Pleasant Seals 4:Negro < White Scale 5: Uneducated .< Educated Exhibit 2.7 (Concluded) Page 4

RINSES -1 3)

...... I 4)

3) O.

ROOF -I 3)

4)

5)

!LOOM -1 +1 3)

4)

5)

TIRED 0 +1 3) X eft... * ...... I...... "...... 4) .ii ...... 5) g it

Scale 3:Unpleasant .4Pleasant Scale 4:Negro.White Scale 5:Uneducated4 Educated Exhibit 2.8--Final Instruments

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN RATINGS: VS. 19;

SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES (WH-MN)

WORD SAMPLE SCALE 1 SCALE 2 SCALE 3 SCALE 4 SCALE 5

Aunt Ill. Total .91 Col. Total .75 H.S. Total 1.02 H.S. White .78 H.S. Negro 1.26

Borrow Ill. Total .64 - .46 .54 .60 .43 Col. Total .61 - .51 .57 .57 .62 H.S. Total .51 .52 (.25) U.S. White (.30) (.62) (.00) H.S. Negro .75 (.37) (.50)

Coffee Ill. Total -1.14 .52 Col. Total -1.20 .54 H.S. Total (.41) H.S. White (.40) K.S. Negro (.42)

Five Total 1.38 Col. Total 1.46 H.S. Total 1.26 U.S. White 1.64 H.S. Negro .86

Hotel Ill. Total .86 .72 .49 Col. Total .85 .68 .69 H.S. Total .67 (.32) H.S. Mate .76 (.48) H.S. Negro (.57) (.13)

111. Total .47 - .57 .65 .60 .62 Col. Total (.47) - .68 .73 .64 .52 H.S. Total .52 .54 ,69 U.S White (.66) .74 (.61) H.S. Negro (.36) (.31) .76)

Married Ill. Total 1.72 1.50 1.78 2.03 Col. Total 1.73 1.49 1.98 2.14

H.S. Total 1.58 1.54 1.94 i H.S. White 1:44 1.86 1.71 H.S. Negro X1,70 147 2 21 Exhibit 2.8-Final Instruments (Concluded)

SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCEW (WH-gW)

WORD SAMPLE SCALE 1 SCALE 2 SCALE 3 [ SCALE 4 SCALE 5

Push Ill. Total -.44 Col. Total ( -.47) H.S. Total H.S. White U.S. Negro

Rinses Ill. Total -1.05 Col. Total -1.02 H.S. Total LS. White H.S. Negro

Roof Ill. Total - .57 Col. Total - .51 H.S. Total H.S. White H.S. Negro

Room Ill. Total -1.52 -.43 -.46 -.51 Col. Total -1.55 (.49) (-.38) -.65 H.S. Total (-.37) -.51 H.S. White (-.46) (-.36) (-.40) H.S Negro (-.25) (-.66) (-.29)

Tired Iii. Total 1.29 1.21 1.68 1.46 Col. Total 1.30 1.08 1.86 1.40 H.S. Total 1.36 1.42 1.50 Ubite 1.40 1.63 1.55 H.S. Negro 1.28 .98 1.45

NOTES: Scales 1 and 2 were not used by the high schcll raters.

Ill. Total,N = 242; significant difference (.01 level) is approx. .40. Col. Total, N = 105; significant difference (101 level) isapprox. .50. HA. Total,N = 116; significant difference (.01 level) isapprox. .50. White, N (1; significant difference (.01 level) isapprox. .70. H.S. Negro,N =34; significant difference (.01 level) isapprox. .70.

Values shown in parentheses are not significant.They are given only for comparison. Exhibit 2.9--Final Instrumentt

DIFFERENCESBarrio;RATINGS:TIH VS. LN, AND WH VS. NE

Ill. Total 1.11 1.20 Col. Total 1.49 1.10 H.S. Total .62 1.22 White 1* Genuine Ill. Total -.86 .96 1.14 1.20 Col. Total -.94 1.00 1.25 1.35 H.S. Total .78 1.07 .89 H.S. White .87 1.61 1.10 ro Judge Ill. Total 1.48 .76 ColeTotal 1,76 .92 H.S. Total 1.13 .61 H.S. White 1.19 (.50)

SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES (WH-NE)

Ill. Total Col. Total H.S. Total H.S. White H.S. Negro Ill. Total ColeTotal H.S. Total H.S. White H S N ro

NOTES: Scales 1 and 2 were not used by high school caters. Pronunciations WH and NE are phonetically identical.

Ill. Total, NII242; significant difference (.01 level)isapprox. .40 Col. Total,N is 105; significant difference (.01 level)isapprox..50 P.S. Total, N = 116; significant difference (.01 level)isapprox. .50 H.S. White, N = 61; significant difference (.01 level)is approx. .70 U.S Negro,N = 54; significant difference (.01 level)is approx..70

Values in parentheses arenot significant, but are shown for comparison. 3xhibit 2,104.-FinalInstruments

DIFMRENCMS EMI= RATINGS: 80 VS. MN

SIMNIMINI"alialigligall

SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE NO-EN WORD SAMPLE SCALE 1 SCALE 2 SCALE 3 SCALE 4 SCALE 5 Aunt Col. Total -.93 -.93 -.85 LS, Total ( -.43)

Borrow Col. Total -.56 .70 1.17 .53 H.S. Total .59 .92 (.33)

Five Col, Total -.66 4 ion H.S. Total 1.15

Greasy Col. Total (.25) 1.59 N.S. Total .59 1,28

Hotel Col, Total 1,20

B.S. Total .88 . i *Men . Col. Total -.68 1.09 M. Total .74

Married Col. Total 1.00 -,64 1.11 1.41 1.32 H.S. Total 1,34 1.27 1.56

Push Col. Total -.50 -.91 H.S. Total

Rinses Col. Total 4,20 H.S. Total

sia Col, Total -.73 -.85 -.51 .87 -.61 H.S. Total ...... ". (-.47) (.45) -.67 *Roos Col TotaL H.S. Total

Tired Col. Total -.71 -.84 1.15, H.S. Total ,62

MOTES: Scales 1 and 2 were not used by high school raters. Asterisk indicates that SO and MN pronunciationsare similar,

Cot. Total, N 105. U.S Total, N n 116. Significant difference (001 level) is approximately .50.

Values shown in parentheses are nt. cl5nificant0 Theyare given ()Div iv; comparLson. 3xhibit 2.11--Fine Instruments

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN RATINGS: SO VS. LN, SO VS, NE, AND NE VS. MN

mormrmewa...... 2.wwwww...ry. umumnowun.usa.1

SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES (SO-LN .....1 WORD SAMPLE SCALE 1 SCALE 2 SCALE 3 SCALE 4 SCALE 5 * Four Col. Total 1.58 .84 H.S. Total .76 .61

Genuine Col. Total 1,26 1,30 1.63 1.70 'U.S.Total 1.10 1,27 1.16 Judge Col. Total 1.58 1.58 1.96 2.08 H.S. Total 1.58 1.56 1.73

uelhrreasysls.

SWNIFICANT.DIFFERENCES (SO-NE)

woo SAMPLE SCALE 1 SCALE 2 SCALE 3 SCALE 4 SCALE 5

Aunt Col. Total -.72 I -.96 .96 -.56 H.S. Total (.22) ( -.32)

Greasy Col. Total on .81 H.S. Total .73

Married Col. Total .74 .78 .55 .54

H.S. 'Total 1 1 (.49) .76 (.37)

wwwwripircw SIOIFICANT DIFFERENCES (NE-MN)

WORD SCALE 1 SCALE 2 SCALE 3 SCALE 4 SCALE 5

Aunt Col. Total -.59 H.S. Total (.24)

Col. Total .63 .78 .69 H.S. Total .71 .54 .67

Col. Total .62 -1.38 Mania (.32) .87 . .79 B.S. Total .84 .51 1.19

NOTES: Scales 1 and 2 were not used by high school raters.

Cole Total,N 105. H.S. Total, N 116. Significant difference (.01 level) is approxisately 0500 Values shown in parentheses are not significant.They are given only for comparison. 7Nhibit 2.12 -- Final Instruments

SIGNIFICANT RAU SCORE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN WHITE AND NEGRO RATERS Pron IS Pron MN Pros NE Pron SO Pron WH

Nord Sample Scale Stale , Scale Scale Scale 23 1 2 3 4 12 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4

Aunt Col. A a A a A a .A a A H.S...... Aa - A a ...... Mr. IMO

Borrow Col. i A H.S. . . A -- a - -bAB

Coffee Col. b SD SA leI. OD B b a H.S. - -BaB - -BAB

Five Col. is - - - - a . ., - OD DO a

U.S. - - es - - - . g OD ED DID OD

Four" Col. A A A b b A H.S, ...aa .... . - - b B - - B B

GenuineCol. OD VD CD OD op A a A H.S. -- - - b -- A

Gteas; Col. b b b H.S. . . a -- L. - - B Hotel Colo ----- b B BbBAB H.S. - -BAB - - B b - -BAB

Judge Col. GS ilID IMP A H.S. -- a - - B -- P

Man Col. - - - -- b B ------b b A U.S...... : . . g -- -- A b WINIUNKIN Married Col. - - - - b A B A u H.S. - . - - B B - r. B - - a b

Push Col. A b A A H.S. - - b A - - B B . . A IMINIIIMMOF

Rinses Col. - - - - B A b b A A . H.S. -----.--BA ..... - - B B -- A

Roof Col. a A maim ail" A A H.S. - -bAb - -BBB - - A ...... Room Col. A . .... a a b H.S. - - B B - - B B - b A ...... Tired Col. a . . . . . A b a A H.S. . - - - B . . A b ...... A = Rated significantly higher by white raters at .01 level; a = .05 level. B = Rated significantly higher by Negro raters at .01 level; b = .05 level.. = Not included in instrument. Snglish and theCulturally Deprived

A AbliovaphyCompiled by Navin Hoffman

Amertoanization andBilingualism

Arsenian, Seth,Bili alias and hentalDevelopments A alult of the Into ante andEU-Mail Ininmas 3so. routeoT en in raltal71422., sae ers College, um a difiraini,1 3ailey, 1Z.B., "%other Tongues in America,"in the In12as.dent,, vol. 77, Jan.19, 1914,pp. 102-3. Barkert GeorgeCarpenter, "Functions Among American of ti tit AncestralLanguage 67,no. 1, 1943.Immigrants andTheir Daseendantstbvol.

Soois otions gtLancataAe ina Iliexican-American Commun targ 2arnea Z., "Language as a Factor inAmericanization," in vol 21, Jul. 27,1918,pp. 954m?, Barrie, WilfxbidDavid, TheCultural ! &trim BasedUpon Prone ..t-A.Lon a i rants. Havanar 1956. rigs or unesooConferencen Coale, Willis Branson, Sucoessf ctices in theTeachim. * mew en .11 wea. 030 0 ans Otice, Finocchiarot hary,Tea hit: a ,SecondSecond asaia4itaxet. o s.7-.77expe.9-a59.t 7/absent Joshua, e Lo 3 vol.(its) awe United,Statest Gill,B.,",everything 11/11 Class tihere Be Okay;an Adventure inan itinglish German RefugeesLearn liuch Lorethan a New Lamina'. inpahaill...stic, vol. 36,Feb. 12, 1940,pp. 21-2. Goldberger, Has, "Teaching Zdnglishto the ForeignBorn," in Mel agakito vol. 80,1919, pp. 14e464, Gray, 3af9 "Teaching of Enslish tothe FbreiGn Born,"in Schzol and gapakt, vol. 13,Jan.15, 1921,pp. 6741. Green, Amy Blanche,and Frederick A.Gould, 1111÷aniztym LibliosrsahE, CouncilofUonertfor Home ss one, Jones, "Children Unableto Speak Lnglishon i.;ntering School,' in U.S.Bureau of Zducation 1929, =Ma, vol. 3,

Leopolad,anarnnueirsteiF.saeSrordeol: 01710.1Develo miainent piffnraveraili frual9397Childs ileriam, JuniusLathrop, e i Zuda f Bilinsual en, Dep o e erior, U.S.-Govt. PrintingOffice, 1938. horelandt Lilian,ASe,lect Bib.1.,..alsa Capetown, 1948. 911Z11111.0

Powers, Francis Fountain,Successful,Alethda TsalAsai Zninaish to BilinalleCtEildrenin Seattle Pdaii-S6 Dept.of-rheInterior, Govt. ifigUirOfTE7479 Runeberg, Arne,Some ObservationsonLi P.Ittep. a Bilingual Society, wantons91951-53.

School Lama ofAids and Devicesfor Teachinsc alljmuja Children. WITaso 1946. Sinclair, A., "Helpdns the Foreign Bornin the United States to Learn l: in sqlool Era, vol.37, June 1955, P. 139

Smith, iiadorah 2lizabeth, Some on theProblemsof Bili lism as FountrffomTC3tF7 of arEarlii-so eroarikusester HawgirProvinIFEa=m,Lass., TErniala ess, 1337- Talbit, Wo, Teaching lish to Aliens:Biblio ra of Textbooks and G Bureau o MiteailaciM.ossar es and Aidso orar es,"T.S. Tiremin, Lloyd Spencer, Teaching SNmaish-s akiry? Children, rev, ed., U. of New hex loo ess, 9 flood, FrancisJerome, CulturalValues of Americanahnic 1216Lts, Harper,roc-- lbodward, Z.A., "OneYear's aperienoeinOa.State with Classes for NonmSnglish Speaking Uomen" inUs:4A. n(29221Leal and Addresses,1920, pp. 345-8. Language of and for the Negro andOther Culturally Deprived

1 Anonymous, °Objecting to theigegro Dialect," in the 141.1ersta Digest,, vol. 53, Nov. 11, 1916,p. 1253. This article containsone of the earliest public recognitions of the extremely negativereactions of whites to Negro dialects.

2 Arnold, Re, °Why Juan Can'tRead," in Co.olisnweal, vol. 76, Apr. 27, 1962,pp. 110-12, Reply wi h rejoinder, P.J. O'Grady, June 1, 1962.

Cultural conflicts are dismisseduhioh exist between the teacher and the worldshe prosentsinthe classroom and the slum child and the worldwith which he is faced out of school.

3 3ernadete, Dolores, "anise, c:in American Speech, vol. 7. June 1932, pp. 349-64.

This is a discussion and recordingof excerpts of interviews with a Negrowoman of 40.

4 Calitri, C.J., "Language and theDignity of 'Youth," in The Saturday, Review, vol. 46, Jul. 20, 1963,pp. 415m7,.

The cultural conflict betwean theteacher and the. deprived child is discussed. Calitri stresses the pant that illusion must be dropped. The teacher is advised to recognize different cultural values and toresign himself or herself to the existence of taese differentvalues.

5 Chappell, iaomi Co, "Negro Names,"in American SA2191,vol. 4, Apr. 1929, pp. 272-5.

Insights are provided intoreasons why Fegroes choose particular names or groups ofnames,

6 Cohn, Uerner, "On the Language of Lower-ClessChildren," in School Review, vol. 67, :sinter 1959,pp. 435-40.

Cohn considers the lanmase of the lowerclass as a separate dialect which involves in teachingmore than the problems of method. He discusses the raationship of the lower class language to social status. 7 Conference Report, 'The1ementary School in the City,"in School Life, June 1963.Curriculum Section.

This section containsthe language arts portionof the report of a conferenceof elementary schoolsupervisors from 64 largocities. Common educational problemsare discussed.

8 Cutts, Warren G.,"Reading Unreadiness inthe Underpriveliged," in the EAAL JournalU.S. Dept. of H.E. & Wog Office of Educat ion, April 1963.

Cutts contends thatlibglish language instruction for the underpriveligedmust take the approach ofteaching a foreign language. He feels that the emphasisin language teaching shouldmove to the kindergarten and thefirst grade.

9 liason, Ls., "SomeNegro rerms," in: hmericanSala, vol. 13, Apr. 1938,pp. 151-2.

A short list ofNegro student terms of theperiod is given.

10 "Zarly Language Studyfor Slum Children,"in School and allta, vol. 92, Nov. 28, 1964,p. 348.

The article recommendspre-school and extra-school language training forthese children to helpclose the ed- ucational gap.

11 Fisher, tiary, LanguagePatterns of Pre-SchoolChildren, N.Y., :Teaohers College, 9.

The chief interest inthis study is thedevelopment of objective analysistechniques for children'sspeech. Social and personalimplications are taken intoaccount.

12 Havighurst, Robert J., "PoorHeading and Delinquencyhay Go Hand in Heine in hations'sSchools, vol. 64,pp. 55-8.

Havighurst recommends thatchildren from deprivedhomes be located in kindergartenand kept with theirpeers until they learn to read.

13 Jewett, Arno, Joseph Lersandand Doris Gunderson,Im rovi Aslish Skills of Cultural Different Youth In Large Cities. 0471.--15ept. ofH. Es w 777gurerae orMucation MINTIn No.5, 1964. This bulletinconsists of excerptsfrom talks at a conference concernedwith the title problem. The emphasis is on successfulexperiences in classon an individual, school-wide, and city--.7idebasis.

14 Kelly. W.M., "If You'reWoke You Dig Itswith Phrases and Words," in N.Y.Times hamazine, hay 20, 1962,pp. 45-6.

This article isa discussion and listingof common words and phrasesheard in largeNegro communities suchas Harlem.

15 Khater, iahmoudRoushdi, he Influenceof Social Classon the Language Patternsof xindergarterNITdren, U.of Chicago Thesis, 1951.

ithater seeks to determinewhether children ofdifferent classes use languagefor differentpurposes, in what respect the patterns andfunctions differ, andwhat implications these differenceshold for educators.

16 Labov, William, "PhonologicalCorrelates of Social Strat- ification," in theAmerican Anthropologist,vol. 66, special supplement on the ethnography ofcommunication, Dec. 64, pp. 164-76.

Labov believes,on the 'oasis of his results,that . linguistic data can be used to establishobjective distribu- tion of linguistic features and todelineate classnorms. This data can thenbe used tomeasure individual and class oscillation inuse of features, which inturn can be correlated with social mobilityand insecurity.

17 LaBrant, Lou Le Vanche, A Stitscl ofCertain, ;..a are Develo- meats of Childrenin Graes Vour toTue ve a usive, Uorcester agikUniversity, 11547-

The factors effectinglanvage developmentin children are discussed. Social factorsare included in the data.

18 Ladd, Dargaret Rhoads, TheRelation of Social,Icommic. and Personal Characteristicsto Rigai 77xuallt 1T.Y. TiTimmrigohersCollege, ColumbaUniversity. 1933.

This study includesresults of investigationinto such factors as socio-economic and foreign languagebackground. Reading ability tests givento members ofan interest group as well as of a socialgroup are also discussed. 19 R0A., "Relation of ReadingCharacteristics to Social Indexes, in the American Journalof Socislaa, vol. 41, hay 19361pp. 738-56.

This study compares thereading characteristics as compared to the socialcharacteristics of two small urban areas in Chicago,

20 i.artin, Walter G., arattlasChildren qho hove with thera. Fresno County Cal/for-Al:Kg-Be

This report contains therecommendation of the Fresno County Project, an educationalprogram for migrant children,

21 McDavid, Raven I., Jr., and ilaavid, Virginia, "TheRelation- ship of the Speech ofAmerican Negroes to the Speech of Attest° in Americanwee h, vol. 26, 1951,pp. 347. Also reprinted in theDobbs-Eerrill series of Linauistie Reprints,

A summary of researchto date and of the problems confronting investigators.

22 hencken, H.L., The Americankmatat, abre, ed. Raven I. NoDavid *E.Y., Alfred A, Nmpf, 1963,pp.475-8. Part of the generaldiscussion of dialects includesa discussion of the Negrovariants of -Znglish. &ensive bibliographical footnotes.

23 Newton, &nice S., "VerbalDestitution: The Pivotal Barrier to Learningo" in theJournal of Negro, Zducation,vo1, 29, PP. 497-9

Conclusions drawn :romcase studies include these points, Instructions should be freeof derision and deprecia- tion, learning experiencemust be concrete andmeaningful, students should be exposedas often as possible to correct usage, the teacher should notappear depressed, students should be made aware of growth,opportunities to exercise their skills should be given,and the teacher shoulduse synonymity whenever poasiblein defining difficultterms. 24 Ozmon, Howard A., Jr., °A RealisticApproach to the Writing of Children's Textbooks forDeprived Areas," in ZatnwrIz fish, vol. 382 Dec. 1960,pp. 534.5. Ozmon contends that textbook writers andpublishers must use a realistic approach tothe problem of textbooks for the underpriveliged. He states, that teaching deprived children is difficult enou3hwithout complicating the problem with books thatare uninteresting to the child and unrelated to his life.

25 Rice, J.P. Jr., "Education ofSubcultural Groups," in Sc_ hool and Societz, vol. 92,Nov. 28, 19649 pp. 360-2.

The author maintains that moststandardized I.Q. tests are loaded linguistically and culturally.They do not, therefore, act as a legitimateindicator of ability when applied to cultural subgroups. }e stressed the heed to de- velop culture-free tests.

26 Riessman, F. and A. Hannah, "Teachers of the Poor"in 11P.T.A., vol. 59, Nov. 1964,pp. 12-14.

Riessman claims that, to teach childrenof low income families effectively, theirculture must be taken into account including the language of theculture itself.

27 Segalla, F.L., "Uriting Vocabulariesof Negro and Uhite Child- ren," in. School Review, vol. 42,Dec. 1934, pp. 772-9.

The written vocabularies ofNegro and white students showed no sgnificantdifference when the studentswere drawn from similar backgrounds.

28 Sanders, 1.80, Some Phasesof Negro, ..7;aallat Thesis, U.of Chicago, -WM

Pronunciation of consonants and vowelsas well as modes of speech, tendencies,and miscellaneous pronunciationsare discussed.

29 Templin, Mildred C., Relations ofSpeech and lama= Devele opment to Intelligence andSocio-Zeonomic Status., vol. 30, Nov. 19 3,pp. lb.237

Findings of this study showedthat the children ofupper so to--economic statusgroups scored consistently higherthan the lower groups at eachaye level for all languagemeasures. 8

30 Tomlinson, ''Language its Skills Needed byLower Class Childrentu inatnezaoa...1....ish, vol. 33,pp. 297-830

The author relatesthat certain skillswell developed in the middleclasschild are developedbefore enterins school, but theseskills are not presentin the lower-class child upon enterins. She sussests thatthe school provide a program for developingthese skills beforethe children start school work, Unnotated Works Under PreviousHeading

Burch, Charles 2., "Advanceof Enslish Speechamong Negroes in the United States,"in 2pgfish Journal, vol. 10, April 1921,pp. 222-5.

Carrow, nary Arthur, AComparative -att.= of the Linvistic Functioning of 3ilinaualLanal.sh-American Children at the Third Grade Level,Thesis, "Aorthwesnilin, 1955.

Clubb, D., Jr., "Standard iLnglishas a Foreign Lansuage," in iloaltam 3n7lish, vol. 33,Nov. 1961, pp. 497-501.

Golden, Ruth I., kparovinzPatterns of panguapm, Usage, Jayneayne State University Press, 1960.

Hale, U.S., The Votcabu of Nero awl School Pupils, Thesis, Nashville, PeabodyCollege, 1931.

Johnson, lAwin Do, ti' heSpeech of the American Negro Folk," in Opportunity, vol. 5,:To. 7, July 1927.

Sheldon, alliam Do, andLawrence Carrilo, "Relation of Parents, Home, and. Certain DevelopmentalCharacteristics to Children's Reading Ability,"in 21ementary School Journal, vol. 52, Jan. 1952,pp. 262-70.

Yandell, Maurine D., and 11.V.Zints, "Some Difficulties "Mich Indian ChildrenSncounter with Idioms in Reading," in Ileadina Teacher, vol. 14,Lar. 1961, pp. 256-63. 10 ort References to Related katerials

Ammour4 Charles D., St=of Discrimination in zaktucation, U.N. Sub- commission on preirention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities,N.Y. Aug. 1957.

Baldwin, James, "A Talkto teachers," in the Saturday Review, Deo. 21, 1963,pp. 42-4, 60.

Becker, Howard S., "SoolalClass Variations in the Teacher Pupil Relationship," inJournal of Educational Sociologr, vol. 25, Apr. 1952,PP. 47:337

Bernert, Eleanor H., andCharles B. Nam, "Demographic Fac- tors Affecting AmericanEducation," inSo_cial Forces Influencing American Education, 60th.Yearbook NSW', part II., University ofChicago, 1961.

Bossard, James HeS.t "Familybodes of Expression," in American Sociol.ogical Review, April 1945.

andEleanor S. Bell,The Sociolom of child DeveloP- Sent, Ma.,Harper, 1958.

and Winogene Sanger, "Some Neglected Areasin amily Life Study," in Annals of theAmerican Academy, of Political and SocialScience, Nov. 1950.

Brofenbrenner, Utie, "Socializationand Social Class through Time and Space, L. Laccoby et al., Readinas in Social Pa.4cholora, N.Y., Holt, 1958.

Brookover, 0.B., "The SocialRoles of Teachers and Pupil Achievement," in the AnsticanSociological Re, view, Aug. 1943.

Centers, Richard, The pasholjay of SocialClasses, Princeton, N.J., University Press, 1949.

Chicago Community Renewal Program, AnAtlas of.chlaaa41 Peole, Jobs, and Ho, mes, 1963.

Coleman, Hubert A.09 "The Relationshipof Socio-Economic Statusto the Performance of Jr. High SchoolStudents," in Journal of Exeri,ental 2ducation,vol. 9, Sep. 190757761:).

Conant, James Bryant, Slums and Suburbs,N.Y., hograw-Hill, 1961. 11

Davidson, Helen H. Judith W. Greenberg,and Joan iii. Gerver, "Personality Patternsof Good andPoor School Achievers from Deprived Znvironments,6 inTeacher Education, News and Notes,Jan.-Feb. 1962. Davis, Alliron, Social ClassInfluences MponLearning, Cambridge, ilass., HarvardUniversity Press,1955. Dodson, DanW., "The Changing Neighborhood," inzducational idadershkR, vol. 18,hay 1961,pp. 497-501.

Drudings, Aleda,"Stirrings in theBig Cities: in N,E.A. Philadelphia," Journal, vol. 51,Feb, 1962,pp. 48-510 "Last SideStory," in Times Educational Supplement,Na. 2331, Jan. 22, 1960,pp, 116=17. Education and the DisadvantasEd American,Educational Pol- icies Commission,Washili§tonD.C., N.E.A., 1962. Ford, Donald, The DeprivedChild and theCommunity, London, Constable, 1955.

Goodman, LaryEllen, Race Awarenessin Mas Childress, Cambridge, Nasi7rIddison-UesleyPress, 195

Haggard, .Ernest A.,"Social Statusand Intelligence," in Genetic Psychology honograph,No. 49, 1954.

Havighurst, RobertJ., "hetropolitanDevelopment and the Educational System,"in School Review,vol. 69, Autumn 1961,pp. 251-67.

, "Poor Readingand DelinquencyLay Go Hand in Hand," in Nation's Schools, vol. 64,Nov. 1959,pp. 55-8. , ''Social -Classinfluence on American in Social Forces Education," Influencing AmericanEducation, 60th Yearbook of theNational Societyfor the Education, Universityof Chicago Press, 1961,pp. 120.43. Hechinger F.U., "Preferential Treatmentfor Negroes?" in Ile Aurar, vol.31, Deo, 31, 1964,p. 6.

Hyman, Herbert H., The Value Systemsof Different A Social Classes: Psychological Contributionto the Analysis of Stratification," inClass, Status, andPowers A Reader ln SocialStratification, Noriand Lipset eds., Glencoe, ITY.77.175="

Arugman, iiorris, "TheCulturally DeprivedChild in School, in the N04.A. Journal,vol. 50, pp. 23-4. Lee, Ralph, "Stirrings!Ln the Big CitiessDetroit," in 112,144, Journal, vol.51, Lair. 1962,pp. 34-7. Lieberson, Stanley,ethnic Patterns in N.Y., Free PreTriirGIT.6,2"American Cities,

Lloyd, .Donald J., and Harry R. Varfel,Auer± canImmoand Its Cultural pettinpi,N.Y.; =opt, 1956.

Lohman, Joseph, atpolice and pincraxgrc_mitiks Chicago Park District, A manualprepared for use in theChicago Park District PoliceTraining School.

Dazurkiewios, AlbertJ., "Social-CulturalInfluences and Read- ing," in Journal Summer 190=of DevelopmentalReadtm, No. 3, kioClelland, DavidC., et al., TheAchievement yotivel N.Y., Appleton-Century-Crofts, 7;0=-----' hiller, V.30, "LowerClass Cultureas a Generating Eilieu of Gang Delinquency,"in Journal of SocialIasues, No. 3, 1958.

Lurray, Florence, Theaim Handbook,iiaomillian Company, N.Y., 1942-47

Parsons, Taloott, "TheSchool Class asa Social Systems Some of Its Functionsin American Society,"in Harvard 2ducational Review,vol. 29, Fall 1959,pp. 291.7577"'

Reid, Ira DeAusustine, AdultEducation among Yezroes, Washington D.C., TErMOSTAITTlaNegro 2dmation, 1936. Rich, John Lartin, "How Social-Class Values AffectTeacher Pupil Relations," inThe Journal ofZdmational ,sociology,, vol. 33, Lay 1960, p57535-

Riessman, Frank, The t.j...1t...j12taCuresLDived Child,Na., Harper, 19677

Reisman, David, etal., The ;mat.Crowd, Yale University Press, 1950.

Robinson. Helenlie, laa Pupils Failin Reading, University of Chicago Press,1946.

Rosen, Bernard C., "TheAchievement SyndromesA Psycho- cultural Dimensionof Social Stratification,"in American 8.90...ssiaa.L.Aealta, Apr. 1956. 13

Russell David ile, mensi f Chi a Leanings 88 = ve. University o a-Pu ea ions in matIon,vole11, No. 5t. University of California Press, 1954.

Sarvis, isar Alice, Orie taton to guriurALayszatt, Speech reproduo mNlaons OffEji;-San Fran- cisco Unified School District, 1964.

Shaw, Albert, "Constructive Problemsof Population and Citizenship, with Questions of Race, Language, and Status," in Political ble saAmur tm pevelo ment, haomillan, 1904, pp.

Silberman, Charles Sot "Give Slum Childrena Chances A Radioal Proposal" in .1s vol. 228, Egy 1964, rte. 37-42, excerpts: from r sis 1/11WENN1 White.

"The City and the Negns" in Fortunebalagal, var. 1964.

Sims, 11.11., 'Social Class Affiliations ofa Group of Public School Teachers," in gesslialm vol. 5,Sep. 1951, PP 33140

Smith, Richard Ceg 'this School SolvesIts Own Problems," in dement 7,Sohoolpurnall vol. 59, iov. 1958, PP* *

"Some Bases for ReexaginingOur Primary Program," Talent 12=2.022tit =act Bulletin, NO. 1, Columburnrro, Center for School Sxperimentation, College ofSoluoation, Ohio State University, Sept. 1961.

Sctuiae, James Ho, "Lulti-Level Researchin English, Impera- tive for the Sixties," N.C.ToE. mimeograph.

Stablein, John E., D.S. Wiley, and C.W. Thossont "An 3valuation of the Davis-Eels (Culture Fair)Test using Spanish and Amelo-American Children," in Journal of Zduoational Soololozat, her. 1957.

Stendler, Celia 3. "Social Class Differencesin Parental Attitudes toward School at Grade 1 Levelpin Child aradagent, vol. 22, iiar. 1951,pp. 37-46.

Ulibarri, Lildred C. °Teaoher Awareness ofSooio-Cultural Differences in hulti-Caltural Classrooms, Albuquerque, University of New hexioo, 1960, Digest 1960. Ilattenber, tlilliam et al., "Social Originof Teachers-- A Northern Indust 4.1a1 City," in The TeacherosRole, in American Society, Lindley J. Stiles ed. LY., Ha.rpet, 1957. Witty, Paul, "Reading Retardation in the Secondary School," 1947=.in Journal of Expesimental Education, vol. 15, June, WorkConference,on Curriculum and Teaching in Depressed urban Areas, C76Tuml=aM.77962.Education inDepressed eas lare,pers) A. Harry Passow, Ed., N.Y. Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1963. 15

Compiler's Note

This bibliography was compiled for the most part in 19630,64. Those rho wish to update their references are referred to the biblioTraphies in

WIguage Pro mrams for the Disadvantaged, ZIeport of the N.00T.E. Task Force on teaching English

to the disadvantaged, Champaign, Illinois,

National Council of Teachers of English, 1965,

pp. 281-92.