Re: Learning a language
From: Eugene Holman (holman_at_elo.helsinki.fi)
Date: 06/14/04
- Next message: Michael West: "Re: Is "is" a verb?"
- Previous message: Peter T. Daniels: "Re: Relationship between Dravidian and Sumerian languages ?"
- In reply to: AlexB: "Re: Learning a language"
- Next in thread: Peter T. Daniels: "Re: Learning a language"
- Reply: Peter T. Daniels: "Re: Learning a language"
- Reply: John Atkinson: "Re: Learning a language"
- Reply: alexB: "Re: Learning a language"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 01:19:09 +0300
In article <N8OdneN3beX3Z1DdRVn-tw@comcast.com>, "AlexB"
<alexB@comcast.net> wrote:
> "Eugene Holman" <holman@elo.helsinki.fi> wrote in message news:holman->
> > Elaborating their own norms for English would also have given the slaves
> > the elements of a new social identity.
>
> What do you mean by that? Could you rephrase it in a plain English.
The pioneering works in sociolinguistics, specifically Labov's studies of
the centralization of the ay and aw variables in Martha's Vineyard and the
reintroduction of post-vocalic-r in New York City during WW II, indicate
that elaborating and adhering to a specific speech norm, often originally
regarded as an idiosyncracy of pronunciation or usage, often suffices to
distinguish "us" from "them". Similarly, the issue of why certain socially
defined communities of English speakers insist on using stigmatized forms
such as "I goes", "you goes", but "he go" is, once again, to be understood
as a matter of in-group solidarity reinforced by vernacular norms.
Expressing in-group solidarity by making certain selections as concerns
vernacular norms is regarded as more important than speaking "properly"
and thus weakening the repertoire of features that distinguish "us" from
"them".
> What
> does it mean "elaborating their own norms for English?" What norms?
> Grammatical norms of their previous language? How could they be elaborated
> for English?
Norms that make it easy to distinguish "slaves' speech" from "masters'
speech". These can come from a previous language, from foreigner's speech,
or from universal language simplifying strategies. What is most important
is not where they come from, but rather the fact that the innovations
arising from any of these sources can and do establish themselves as
alternative norms, actual linguistic changes that oust alternative norms.
Due to the very different educational and social backgrounds of slaves and
masters, there would have been numerous features of pronunciation,
grammar, lexicon, and pragmatics which would have distinguished the norms
of speech, grammar, and usage used by the two groups and reinforcing their
specific linguistic identities and social distance.
> I am beginning to get a feeling that making vague statements is
> a norm in your profession.
No, I am working on the assumption that most readers of sci.lang are
familiar with basic linguistic terminology and thus do not need to have
everything explained in minute detail.
> Or perhaps it is an idiom of sorts? Don't bother
> answering if you are making a sarcastic remark in here. Then it "makes
> sense."
No, I am not making sarcastic remarks. Slave societies are typically
extremely hierarchical, and hierarchical social organization is typically
reflected in and reinforced by different norms of usage. Read some of the
early work in pre-Labovian sociolinguistics (or sociology of language, if
you will) by J. J. Gumperz, such as his important 1958 article "Dialect
Differences and Social Stratification in a North Indian Village".
Regards,
Eugene Holman
- Next message: Michael West: "Re: Is "is" a verb?"
- Previous message: Peter T. Daniels: "Re: Relationship between Dravidian and Sumerian languages ?"
- In reply to: AlexB: "Re: Learning a language"
- Next in thread: Peter T. Daniels: "Re: Learning a language"
- Reply: Peter T. Daniels: "Re: Learning a language"
- Reply: John Atkinson: "Re: Learning a language"
- Reply: alexB: "Re: Learning a language"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|