Language Variation And. Identity
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
LanguageVariation and.Identity in Sunderland (Volume 1) LourdesBurbano-Elizondo Doctor of Philosophy National Centre for English Cultural Tradition (School of English Literature, Language and Linguistics) The University of Sheffield September2008 Acknowledgments First and foremost I would like to expressmy gratitude to the National Centre for English Cultural Tradition for financially supporting this PhD and thus making possiblethe conductof this project. I would also like to thank Joan Beal (NATCECT, School of English Literature, Languageand Linguistics) and Emma Moore (School of English Literature, Language and Linguistics) for supervisingmy study and providing me with invaluable advice and supportthroughout the whole process.Tbanks also to the Departmentof English at EdgeHill University for their supportand facilitation. Thanks must go to the NECTE team for granting me accessto recordings and transcriptions when they were still in the process of completing the corpus. I am indebted to Carmen Llamas, Dom Watt, Paul Foulkes and Warren Maguire who at different stagesin my dataanalysis offered their guidanceand help. I am very grateful to Elizabeth Wiredu (Leaming Support Adviser from the Learning ServicesDepartment of Edge Hill University) for her assistancewith some of the statisticsconducted in the dataanalysis. My thanks are due to Lorenzo and Robin for providing me accommodationevery time I went up to Sunderlandto do my fieldwork. I must also gratefully acknowledgeall the Sunderlandpeople who volunteeredto participatein my study. This study would not havebeen possible without their help. Special thanks go to Anna, Natalia, Heike, Alice, John, Esther and Damien for innumerablefavours, support and encouragement.I must also thank Damien for his patienceand understanding,and his invaluablehelp proof-readingthis work. And last but not least, my greatestthanks must go to my parentsfor their support and encouragementthroughout the completionof this work. ii Contents Acknowledgements Contents List of figures Vill List of tables xi List of maps xill List of pictures XIII Abbreviations x1v Transcription conventions XIV Abstract XVI CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION CHAPTER 2: THEORETICALBACK. GROUND AND APPROACH EMPLOYEDIN THE SUNDERLANDSTUDY 8 2.1 SOCIOLINGUISTICS:APPROACHES TO LANGUAGE AND SOCIETY 9 2.1.1 First wave of variation studies 10 2.1.2 Second wave of variation studies 14 2.1.3 Third-wave studies 17 2.2 LANGUAGE AND IDENTITY: AN IDEOLOGICALMODEL FORTHE STUDY OF THE INDEXICALITY OF LANGUAGE 23 2.3 THE SUNDERLAND STUDY 36 CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY 41 3.1 THE SURVEYOF REGIONAL ENGLISH: AIMS AND METHODOLOGY 41 3.1.1 Background 41 3.1.2 SuRE: A new dialect corpus to bridge gaps 42 3.2 THE SURE METHODOLOGY 45 3.2.1 The SuRE questionnaire 45 3.2.1.1 Instructions sheet 47 3.2.1.2 Biographical Information sheet: About You 49 III 3.2.1.3 Confidentiality and Consentform 50 3.2.1.4 SenseRelation Networks 52 3.2.2 Additions madeto the SuREquestionnaire in Sunderland 58 3.2.2.1Identity questionnaire 59 3.2.2.2Identification scoreindex 60 3.2.3 The SuREadministration technique: the interview 64 3.2.3.1 Prosand consof completingthe questionnairein advance 64 3.2.3.2The interview 65 3.3 OTHER METHODOLOGICALISSUES: SUNDERLAND POPULATION SANTLE 68 3.3.1 Stratification of the population sample 69 3.3.1.1Age variable 70 3.3.1.2 Social classvariable re-evaluated 71 3.3.2 Size of the population sample 77 3.4 FIELDWORK 78 CHAPTER 4: THE SUNDERLAND COMMUNITY AND ITS IDENTITY: LOCAL ATTITUDES AND IDEOLOGIES 80 4.1 THE SUNDERLAND COMMUNITY: POLITICAL AND IDEOLOGICAL BOUNDARIES 81 4.1.1 Political boundaries 81 4.1.2 Ideological boundaries:The local constructionof meaningin social communities 85 4.1.3 Speechcommunities 87 4.1.4 Self-definitionsof the Sunderlandspeech community 92 4.2 DECONSTRUCTINGTME SUNDERLAND IDENTITY 97 4.2.1 Popularlabels applied to Sunderlandpeople 99 4.2.1.1 The term Mackem 100 4.2.1.2 Labelsused by the informantsto define themselves 105 4.2.2 Attitudes towardsSunderland and Newcastle 109 4.2.3 Reasonsfor the Geordie-Mackemrivalry 113 4.2.4 Social activities: Locally or regionally oriented? 115 4.2.5 Attitudes to the local dialect 118 4.3 IDENTIFICATION SCOREINDEx: ALLEGIANCE TO THE LOCAL COMMUNITY 122 IV 4.4 VARIATION IN THE EXPRESSION OF A SENSE OF BELONGING TO niE SUNDERLAND COMMUNITY 124 4.4.1 Index of Sunderland affiliation: Diversity of membership 126 4.4.1.1 The ISA scores 132 CHAPTERS: PERCEPTION OF LANGUAGE DIFFERENTIATION IN SUNDERLAND 138 5.1 I)iENoRTH-EASTERN DIALECT AREA 143 5.2 FOLK-LINGUISTIC AWARENESS IN SUNDERLAND 146 5.2.1Speakers' definition of their accent 147 5.2.2Perception of variationacross the North-east 149 5.2.3Perception of differencein Sunderland 151 5.2.3.1 VOCALIC DIFFERENCES 153 5.2.3.2 CONSONANTAL DIFFERENCES 158 5.2.3.3 GRAmmATiCAL DIFFERENCES 161 5.2.4Linguistic awarenessin sociolinguistics 164 CHAPTER 6: VARIABLE (H) 169 6.1 INTRODUMON: POPULAR AT-nTUDES TO, AND SCHOLARLY EVIDENCE OF, /h/-DROPPING 169 6.1.1 /h/ in twentieth-century British English: Previous dialect studies 171 6.2 THE DEVELOPMENTOF /h/ IN ENGLISH 181 6.2.1 Loss of /h/ 182 6.2.2A changeof attitudeand the TestoTation.of /h/ in educatedspeech 187 6.2.3 Summary: (h), a variable developedand preservedby attitudes 191 6.3 TuE SUNDERLAND DATA 193 6.4 DATA ANALYSIS 195 6.4.1 (h) in Sunderlandand Tyneside 195 6.4.2 Distribution of variants of (h) by age and gender 197 V 6.4.3 Intragroup variation 205 6.4.3.1 Occupation 207 6.4.3.2 Strength of Affiliation to the local community: ISA 212 6.4.4 Summary 215 CHAPTER 7: VARIABLES (P), (T) AND (K) 217 7.1 T-GLoTrALLTNG IN BRITISH ACCENTS 218 7.2 (PRE-)GLOTTALISATION OR GLOTTAL REINFORCEMENTIN BRITISH ACCENTS 221 7.3 THE SUNDEFLLANDDATA 225 7.4 DATA ANALYSIS 229 7.4.1Overall distribution of the variantsof (p t k) in Sunderland 229 7.4.2Distribution of variantsof (p) 233 7.4.2.1(p) by ageand gender 233 7.4.2.2Word-medial (p) by context 238 7.4.3Distribution of variantsof (t) 243 7.4.3.1(t) by ageand gender 243 7.4.3.2Word-medial (t) by context 250 7.4.4Distribution of variantsof (k) 255 7.4.4.1(k) by ageand gender 255 7.4.4.2Word-medial (k) by context 260 7.4.5Intragroup variation: Effect of occupationon (p), (t) and (k) 265 7.4.6Intragroup variation: Sense of local affiliation 273 7.4.7Summary of findings 279 CHAPTER 8: VARIABLE (00) IN'GOOSE' 283 8.1 T)HEGOOSE VOWEL IN BRITISHACCENTS 283 8.2 MHESUNDERLAND DATA 290 8.3 DATA ANALYSIS 292 8.3.1 The GOOSEvowel in Sunderland and Tyneside 292 vi CHAPTER 9: DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION 295 9.1 LANGUAGE USAGE AND FOLK PERCEPTIONSOF DIFFERENCE13ETWF-EN SuNDE AND TE 295 9.2 THE LOCAL MEANING OF SOCIOLINGUISTIC VARIATION 299 9.3 EVALUATION OF FINDINGS 309 9.4 EVALUATION OF METHODS EMPLOYED 312 9.5 DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH 314 REFERENCES 316 APPENDIX I- Llamas' (2001)original SuRE questionnaire 334 APPENDIX 2- The SunderlandLanguage Questionnaire 340 APPENDIX 3- Letter sent to the SunderlandEcho to recruit informants 347 APPENDIX 4- Population sample 349 APPENDIX 5- Informants' answersto IdQ question9 356 Vil List of figures Figure 2.1: Distribution of the Anl variant by genderand social classin Labov's Philadephiastudy (2001: 265) 12 Figure 3.1: Extract from the SED (Orton and Dieth 1962-1971:Introduction) 46 Figure 3.2: RevisedSuRE Instructions sheet 48 Figure 3.3: RevisedSuRE Biographical Information sheet:About You 49 Figure 3.4: Final version of the 'Confidentiality and Consent'form 51 Figure 3.5: SRN completed by one of Llamas' Middlesbroughinformants in her pilot study (Llamas 1999:114) 53 Figure 3.6: RevisedBeing, Sayingand Doing SRN 55 Figure 3.7: RevisedEveryday Life SRN 56 Figure 3.8: RevisedPeople SRN 57 61 Figure 3.9: Sunderlandidentity questionnaire- page 1 Figure 3.10: Sunderlandidentity questionnaire- page2 62 Figure 3.11: SunderlandIdentification Index Score 63 Figure 4.1: Extract from the SunderlandIdentity Questionnaire:Question 17 93 Figure 4.2: OED entry for the word 'Mackem' 103 Figure 4.3: Extract from the Identity Questionnaire- questions4 to 7 118 Figure 4.4: AverageISI by ageand gender 123 Figure 4.5: Speaker groups placed on a continuum on the basis if their averageISI 123 Figure 4.6: Llamas' levels of local allegiancefor individual speakersas revealed through responsesto IdQ (2001: 221) 125 Figure 4.7: Average ISA by ageand gender 135 Figure 5.1: Extract from the Identity Questionnaire- question2,3 and 8 147 Figure 6.1: Geordie-Mackemmenu. 170 Figure 6.2: Distribution of (h) by class and style in Norwich (Trudgill 1974: 131) 180 Figure 6.3: Average/h/-dropping ratesin the Sunderlandand the Newcastle data 197 Figure 6.4: Distribution of /h/-dropping by ageand gender 199 Vill Figure 6.5: Effect of age on (h) 201 Figure 6.6: Distribution of variants of (h) by gender and age 201 Figure 6.7: Percentageuse of /h/-dropping by individual female speakers 206 Figure 6.8: Percentageuse of /h/-dropping by individual male speakers 206 Figure 6.9: Percentageuse of /h/-dropping by SOC. 211 Figure 6.10: Percentageuse of /h/-dropping by occupational category 211 Figure 6.11:Distribution of /h/-droppingby ageand occupational categories 212 Figure 7.1: Overall percentageuse of variants of (p t k) in SundE 229 Figure 7.2: Overall percentageuse of variants of (p t k) in MbE 230 Figure 7.3: Percentage use of glottalised. variants of (p t k) in Sunderland, Middlesbrough and Tyneside 232 Figure 7.4: Percentageusage of variants of (p) by age 234 Figure 7.5: Percentageuse of variants of (p) by gender 235 Figure 7.6: Percentageuse of variants of (p) in