___

_

~~

Cat.

_ .'.~.

50 SOC10~ilI3gLllSt1CS ,

MMC 1.9

LMC 2.1

UWC 2.8

MWC 2.9

L W C 3.0

Generally, W C speakers have a front vowel in Norwich English,

while M C speakers have a central vowel, but there are

still, on

average, fi

ne differences of vowel quality which distinguish one

class from another. Many other class differences of the same kind

could be cited from almost any area you care to name. In Leeds,

for example, middle-class speakers tend to have a vowel, of the

[n] type in words such as but, up, fun, wh

ile working-class speakers

have a higher, rounder vowel, [

u]; in London, name, ga

te,. face

are pronounced [neon]

etc., [nsim], or [naeun] depending on

social cl

ass(highest-class form fi

rst); i

ri Chicago the vowel of roof,

tooth, root is most often ~u] but is frequently more centralized

[~t], in the speech of members of higher social-class groups; and

in Boston, upper-class •speakers have [eu]~ in

ago, know, while

other speakers have [ou].

This method of.investigating social-class,dialects and accents -

measuring the

social class of infornnants and then

correlating

linguistic data with that —has proved very useful. There is, how-

ever, another way of doing

it. It is equally possible to group

speakers together on the basis of their linguistic similarity, and

then to see what, i

f any, s

ocial f

eatures characterize these groups.

The technique of cluster analysis' has been employed in

, amongst

other cases, the analysis of Newcastle English, in an attempt to

discover, by clustering speakers together on the basis of measures

of l

inguistic

similarity; what a

re the

varieties of Newcastle

English, and what are their social correlates. In many ways a

technique of this kind appears to be equivalent to the method

developed by Labov. It has an advantage over Labov's method

in that social parameters of hi

therto unsuspected importance may

be revealed. On the -o

ther hand, it

may be much more difficult to

group speakers together on the basis of their l

inguistic r

ather than

sociological characteristics.

~-

._

,~

~~

r~, (~f aA

..~> ~'

B. ~ ~

3. Language and Ethnic Gr up

b @

~

F

o'

- ~ ~~~

~

.

__

~ _

~ ~

i

i ~

Y.

- A

a o P"e

~. i

1

An experiment was carried out in the USA in which a number

r

of people acting as j

udges were asked to listen to tape-recordings

~~ ~.

of two different sets of sp

eakers. Many of the j

udges decided that

Vii;

speakers in the first set were black, and speakers in the second

~C ~:

set white —and they were completely wrong, si

nce it was the fi

rst

4=

set which consisted oFwhize people, and the second of Bl

acks. But ,

they were wrong in a very interesting way. The speakers they

~ 5

had been asked to listen to were exceptional people: the white

'.

speakers were people who had li

ved all t

heir li

ves amongst Blacks,

or had been

raised in areas where black cultural values were

dominant; t

he black speakers were people who had been brought

u~, with litfle contact with other Blacks, i

n predominantly white

`

areas. The fact was that the white speakers sounded like Blacks,

and the black speakers sounded

like Whites —and the judges

listening to the tape-recordings reacted accordingly. This expert-

~*;

meat demonstrates two rather important points. First, there are

j

differences between

the English spoken by many Whites

an,~i

many Blacks in America such that Americans can, and do, as

sign

people with some confidence to one of the. two ethnic groups

'~

solely on the basis of their language —this might happen in a

telephone conversation; for instance —which suggests that black

°~

speech' and white speech' have some kind of social reality for

many Americans. This has been confirmed by other experiments,

carried out in Detroit, which have shown that Detroiters of all

ages and social classes have an approacimately eighty per cent

! ;

success rate in recognizing black or white speakers (from un-

exceptional backgrounds in this test) on the basis of only a few

~

seconds of tape-recorded material. Secondly, the experiment

f ,s

demonstrates rather convincingly that, although the stereotypes

~ j

of black or white speech whj.ch listeners work with provide them

t ~i

j ;:: l

~..-..:~

:. f

52 Sociolinguistics

with a correct identification.most of the. time, the

diagnostic

differences are entirely the result of le

arned behaviour. People do

not speak as they do because they are white or black. What does

happen is that speakers acquire the linguistic characteristics of

those they live in close contact with. Members of th

e two Ameri-

can ethnic

. groups we have been discussing learn the linguistic

varieties a

ssociated with them in exactly the same way that social-

class dialects are acquired, _and in those unusual cases where

Whites li

ve amongst Blacks, or vice versa, the pattern acquired is

that of th

e locally predominant group.

This means — and it

may perhaps st

ill be necessary to emphasize

this —that th

ere is no racial or physiological basis of any kind for

linguistic differences of this type. In the past, of course, it

was

quite widely believed that th

ere was or might be some connection

between language and race. For example, during the nineteenth

century, th

e originally linguistic t

erm Indo-European came also tb

have racial connotations. The tern Indo-European was coined to

cover those languages of Europe, the Middle East, and India

which, li

nguists had discovered, were historically related to each

other. Subsequently, however, a myth grew up of an imaginary

Indo-European or Aryan race who had not only spoken the

parentlndo-European language but who were also the ancestors

of the Germans, Romans, Slays and of others who now -speak

Indo-European languages. Unfortunately for adherents bf this

view, any human being can learn any human language, and we

know of many well -attested cases of whole ethnic groups.switch-

i ing language through time —one has only to think, for example,

of the Large numbers of people of African origir. who now speak

j originally European l

anguages. There

can, therefore, be no

guarantee whatsoever —indeed, it is exceptionally unlikely —that

I groups of people are

racially related' because they speak related

languages. We cannot say that Slays and Germans are racially

~ related' simply because they speak related Indo-European lan-

guages_ Ideas about languages and race die hard, however. The

German language, fo

i-instance, was an important component of

the Nazis' th

eories about the Germanic master race'; and false

ideas about the

possibility and d

esirability of preserving

`lin-

guistic purity' (

i.e. defending a language against

contamination'

Language and Ethnic Group 53

by loan words from other languages) may often, go hand in hand

with equally false ideas about racial _purity. (This is one_ of the

reasons for the replacement of German words li

ke Geographie by .

the supposedly purer Erdkunde during the Nazi period.) Perhaps

less harmful, but probably much more persistent, are references

to, for example, the Rumanians as a L

atin' p

eople (with all kinds

of implications about national character') for no other reason

than that they speak a Romance language. It is true, of course,

that Rumanian represents a hi

storical development of Latin (with

a considerable admixture from Slavic and other languages), but

it simply does not f

ollow

that Rumanians are

genetically

descendants bf the Romans. It is

, after all, much more likely that

they are more closely

related

genetically

to their

Russian,

Bulgarian and Hungarian neighbours, wi

th whom they have been

mixing for

centuries, than to the

`Latin'

Spaniards

and

Portuguese.

There is, then, no inherent or necessary link between language

and race. It remains true, however, that in many cases language

ma3~ be an important or even essential concomitant of ethnic-

groug membership. This is a social fact, though, and it is im-

portant to be clear about what so

rt of pr

ocesses may be involved.

In some cases, for example, and particularly where languages

rather than varieties of a language. are involved, l

inguisticcharac-

teristics may be the most important defining criteria for ethnic-

group membership. For instance, it is less accurate to say that

Greeks speak Greek than to state that people who are native

speakers of Greek (i

.e. who have Greek as their mother tongue)

are generally considered to be Greek (at least_ by other Greek;}

whatever their a

ctual

nafionality: In

other

cases, particularly

where different varieties of th

e same language are concerned, th

e

connection between language and ethnic group may be a simple

one of ha

bitual association, r

einforced by social barriers between

the groups, where language is an important identifying character-

istic. By no means al

l American Blacks speak

black English', but

the overwhelming majority of those who do speak it are Blacks,

and can be identified as such: fzom their speech alone. In these

cases the connection, although not in

evitable, i

s something mem-

bers of the speech community come to expect, and the breaking

~:

'~ ~ i ,, E i -.

54 Sociolinguistics

of the connection may at first appear to result in incongruity: fo

r

this'reason many people find it amusing to hear a white person

with a West Indian accent or a black person with a Yorkshire

accent In any case, et

hnic-group differenriation in a mixed com-

munity is a particular type of so

cial differentiation and, as such,

will often have linguistic differentiation associated with it

.

Cases of the first type, where languagers a defining character-

istic of ethnic -group membership, are very common on a •w

orld

scale. Situations of th

is type are very usual in

multilingual Africa,

for example. In one suburb

outside Accra in Ghana there are

native speakers of more than eighty different la

nguages, including

suchmajor languages as Twi, Hausa, Ewe and Kru. In most ca

ses,

individuals will identify themselves as belonging to a particular

ethnic group o

r tribe on t

he b

asis of which of these many .

languages- is

their mother tongue (although the majority of.the

inhabitants are bi- or tri-lingual). The different ethnic groups

therefore

maintain their

separateness and .identity as much

through language as anything else. This is not only an African

phenomenon, of co

urse. The two main ethnic groups in Canada,

for example, are distinguished mainly by language. For the most

part,

it i

s true, they a

lso have different

religions, d

ifferent

histories, cu

ltures and traditions, but the most important defining

characteristic is whether they are native speakers of English or

French.

It1 c

ases of th

e second type =and these are in many ways more

interesting —the separate identity of ethnic groups is signalled,

not by different languages, -but by different varieties of the same

language. Differences of th

is type may originate in or at least be

perpetuated by the same sorts of mechanisms as are involved in

the 'maintenance of social-class d

ialects: we can suppose that

ethnic group differentiation acts as a barrier #o the com~nuni-

cation of li

nguistic features in the same way as other social bar-

rYers. In the case of ethnic groups, moreover, attitudinal factors

are likely to be of considerable importance. In

dividuals are much

more. likely to be aware of the'fact that they are

Jewish' or to

consider themselves

Black' than they are to recognize that they

are; say,

lower middle c

lass'._ This means t

h"at ethnic -group

membership may be. an important social

-fact- for them. Since,

Language'and Ethnic Group 55

moreover, linguistic differences may be recognized, either con-

sciously or subconsciously, a

s characteristic of su

ch groups,'these

differences may be very persistent. An interesting example of this

comes from Y

ugoslavia_ Yugoslavia i

s a multilingual -nation

where _language may act as a defining characteristic: Slovene,

Macedonian, Albanian and Hungarian a

re spoken by ethnic

groups (`nationalities' is the official Yugoslavian term) who go

under the same name as the language_ In other cases, however,

different

ethnic groups s

peak,- the same language, and here

language may act as an identifying characteristic (

although not,

today, a particularly important one). This is

true of Sa

rajevo, t

he

capital of Bosnia, where the three main ethnic groups in the city,

Serbs, Croats and Moslems, all speak Serbo-Croat,

the.• most

widely used Yugoslavian language. Historically speaking, this

ethnio-group.differentiation in Sarajevo has to do with religion

(Serbs are or were Orthodox, Croats Catholic) and partly to do

with geographical origin (S

erbia~is to the east of Bosnia, Croatia

to the west). Today these factors are of Ap

o very great im

portance,

but individuals are still aware of th

eir ethnic group membership.

Often, moreover, it

is possible to detect ethnic background from

linguistic cl

ues. We cannot say, any more than we can with social-

class d

ialects, th

at members of th

e three groups in Sarajevo speak

distinct varieties. The differences are really only tendencies, and

they appear to be entirely le

xical:different words tend to be used

more often by particular groups.. The following list gives a few

examples of th

e types of di

fference involved:

Moslems

Croats

Serbs

hljeb

kruh

hljeb

`bread'

vox

vlak

vox

`train'

pendier

prozor

prozor

`window'

carsija

grad

varos

`town'

sevdah

ljubav

ljubav

`love'

budiak

kut

cosak

`corner'

It must be emphasized,_ too, that this list does not supply -any

hard and fast rules for usage by different groups, it

merely gives

indications of ge

neral t

rends: In most ca

ses speakers from all th

ree

groups can and do use the other forms on occasions (except that

t?i..,. •

~~!`MY~"=~

y~ :.

: a

.;,,,

.,

..

.s,~

+~~"

'a,•

, l~'(~/.,f~

7t,!

71'g

,,'S

~...

4-~.

.MrJrav~'

_ _

_..

....-,.

~ ,-,s -.^w~sui~.~o . .. . .......... ss

56 Soc

ioli

ngui

stic

s

Serbs and Cro

ats ar

e un

like

ly to us

e the Moslem wor

ds for Cove

or w

indo

w): The linguistic differences be

twee

n th

e Serbs and

Croa

ts are largely geographical in origin in

tha

t the words the

yus

e te

nd to be

those employed in Serbia and Croatia respectively.

The typ

ical

ly Moslem wor

ds, on the other hand, te

nd to be loa

nwords from Tur

kish

, due to th

e in

flue

nce of

Islam and centuries

of Turkish rul

e: In Sa

raje

vo i

tsel

f, however, these differences,

what

ever

their o

rigi

n, ar

e today e

thni

c -gr

oup differences. They are

~ perpetuated (in so far

as th

ey are

maintained to

day)

thr

ough

members of each gro

up associating mor

e. freq

uent

ly wit

h- ea

chother th

an with other groups, and perhaps- more. i

mportantly,

thro

ugh the gr

oup -

identification function th

at li

nguistic features

ofte

n ha

ve.

In other cas

es of thi

s sort, et

hnic-group differences may be

correlated wit

h phonological or gr

amma

tica

l fe

atur

es, as

well as

or ins

tead

of wit

h le

acic

al dif

fere

nces

.' One of th

e in

tere

stin

g facts

to emerge from Lab

ov's

New York stu

dyi for ex

ampl

e, was tha

tth

ere we

re slight but ap

pare

ntly

significant differences . in the

English pronunciation of speakers from Jewish, Ital

ian and bla

ckI

I ba

ckgr

ound

s. The

se differences, once again, ar

e st

atis

tica

l .t

en-

denc

ies rather tha

n clear-cut, rel

iabl

e si

gnal

s of eth

nic -gr

oup

diff

eren

ces,

but they ar

e cl

earl

y due to th

e fact. tha

t th

e di

ffer

ent

races te

nd to form sep

arat

e gr

oups

within the city_ In

origin they

appe

ar to be

due

, at

least fo a cer

tain

ext

ent,

to th

e continuing

effect of what ar

e oft

en ca

lled sub

stra

tum va

riet

ies—

the la

ngua

ges

o'r varieties spoken by the

se gro

ups or their forbeaxs before they

became speakers of

New York Cit

y English -Yiddish, It

alia

nand southern -states Eng

lish

. In the case of

Yiddish and Ita

lian

the

inte

rfer

ence

of

the.

old language on the new (a Yi

ddis

haccent' in En

glis

h, say) in the fir

st generation ha

s le

d to

hyp

er-

conection • of foreign features by the sec

ond

generation. For

'~ ex

ampl

e, one

of the

characteristics of New York Eng

lish

, as

we

~ saw in the previous cha

pter

(p_ 49

), has bee

n the de

velo

pmen

t of

high

beard

-like vowels in

words of the ty

pe bad, b

ag. I

t see

ms th

at.

this

dev

elop

ment

has been accelerated by the des

ire,

presumably

subc

onsc

ious

, of

sec

ond -ge

nera

tion

dtalians to

avo

id spe

akin

gEnglish wi

th an Italian accent:' Nat

ive speakers of Ita

lian

tend

I! ~

to use

an [a]-type vowel, more open th

an the

English sou

nd; in

Language and Eth

nic Group 57

English wo

rds of

this

typ

e, and their chi

ldre

n, in wishing to av

oid

this

pro

nunc

iati

on, may hav

e selected the highest var

iant

s of

this

vowel av

aila

ble to

them, i.

e. the one

s most unl

ike the typically

Ital

ian vo

wel:

Certainly, It

alia

ns now show a notably greater

tendency to us

e th

e hi

gher

vow

els th

an do Jew

s, and thi

s may

eventually lead to

a sit

uati

on where hig

h vo

wels

in bad, bag

become a symbol of id

enti

fica

tion

for New Yorkers from Ita

lian

back

grou

nds.

Jewish speakers, on the

oth

er hand, tend to

hav

e

high

er vow

els th

an dtalians in wor

ds of the ty

pe off

, lo

st; do

g,

end a sim

ilar

pat

tern

of hy

perc

orre

ctio

n may be responsible for

this: many native Yi

ddis

h sp

eake

rs who hav

e learnt English as a

foreign language do not

distinguish the /~/ in coffee from the /n/

in cup, so

tha

t coffee cup may be /kofi ko

p/. Second

-generation

speakers may therefore hav

e ex

agge

rate

d the difference bet

ween

the two vow

els,

in ord

er to st

ress

the fact th

at the

y do make the

dist

inct

ion,

with the

res

ult t

hat hi

gher

vow

els occur in coffee, dog

[du'

g]. These hi

gh vow

els ar

e no

t the re

sult

. of pressures of

thi

s

sort, si

nce hi

gh vow

els are by no means confined to

Jew

ish

speakers, buX the

y may well ha

ve bee

n encouraged by thi

s et

hnic-

grou

p su

bstr

atum

effect

A sim

ilar

kind of

subs

trat

um eff

ect can be found in the

English

of Sco

tlan

d. Most Scots today tend to

thi

nk of themselves as

simply, Sc

otti

sh',

but

hist

oric

ally

speaking th

ey represent des

cen-

dant

s of

two dis

tinc

t eth

nic gr

oups

. To simplify th

ings

somewhat,

we can say

that. Hi

ghland Scots wer

e Gaels, and spoke Gae

lic

(as many of them s

till

do in th

e West Highlands and on the

isla

nds of

the H

ebrides), while Lowland S

cots wer

e English

speakers. Now t

hat En

glis

h is

spoken by

nea

rly ev

eryo

ne in

Scotland, th

is difference

stil

l survives in the type of English one

can hear in di

ffer

ent parts of

the cou

ntry

. Lowland Scots spe

ak

either a loc

al dialect or st

anda

rd Eng

lish

with a local ace

ent'

(or

some

thin

g in

bet

ween

). Highlanders on the other hand, speak

either sta

ndar

d Scots En

glis

h (which the gr

oup as

a whole in

itia

lly

lear

nt as a foreign lan

guag

e) or so

meth

ing no

t to

o far removed

from thi

s —not nearly so

far from

it as the Lowland dialects,

in any case..(Highlanders do nod normally .s

ay 1 dinna ken

, fo

r

exam

ple,

but rather I don't kno

w.) Th

ere

is oft

en, ho

weve

r,_ a

I~ ce

rtai

n .amount of su

bstr

atum

inf

luen

ce from Gaelic i

n th

e

_T _

_ -

.

, .

- ~,~:

a ;.~

~I p`< ~i

f ~` r 58 S

ociolinguistics

~~ '` English spoken by

Highlanders which may identify them a

sG ',

~ coming from the Highlands. N

ative speakers of Gaelic, of co

urse,

will often have a Gaelic accent in English; but one can detect

lexical and grammatical differences even in the speech of High-

landers who -

have never spoken Gaelic in their lives. Examples

include differences such as the following:

'" West Highland English

Standard Scots English

Take that whisky here.

Bring that whisky here.

I'm seeing you!

I ca

n see you!

It s not that that I'm wanting

I do

n't want that. ,

In the English-speaking world as a whole one of the most

striking examples of li

nguistic ethnic -group differentiation -and

one where the postulated role of some kind of substratum effect i

s

a controversial subject - is

the difference we have already noeed

between the. sp

eech of black and white Americans. These. d

iffer-

ences are by no means manifest in the speech of al

l Americans,

but They are sufficiently widespread to be of considerable interest

and importance. It was recognized a long time ago that black

Americans spoke English differently from the Wtutes. A British .

visitor writing in 1746. said of the American colonists, One thing

they aze very- faulty in, with regard to their children .. _ is that

when_ young, they- suffer them too much to prowl among the

young

Blacks, which

insensibly c

auses them t

o imbibe t

heir

manners and broken speech.' Differences; then, were noted, and

were generally held to be the result of i

nherent mental or physical

differences between the two ethnic groups. Since the English

which black people spoke was fe

lt, as the above quotation shows,

to be debased or corrupt, the difference was also considered to

be the result -and indeed proof - of the inherent inferiority of

black people (a fashionable belief at the time). Blacks, it was

Thought, could n

ot speak

English

properly' since

-.they were

simply not capable of

it. This view has no basis in fact, but it

cannot be altogether ig

nored, even :

today: it was at one time so

widely held that it

has affected.the history of the study of black

American English. Many developments in this field have- fo-be

-- ---~~:~~... 4,,-V,~.

~-.--,--rte- .

. -~ .

- _

Language and Ethnic Group 59

viewed against this historical background, and the subject as a

whole

is in any case fraught with various social and

political

implications.

The influence of tivs earlier view lingered on in the following

way: si

nce differences i

n black speech had formerly been ascribed

to racial inferiority, the recognition that there was in fact no

inferiority seemed to unply to linguists who might have thought

of studying black English that black speech was not (and could

not be) d

ifferent. This meant th

at no one could study black speech

as such without appearing to be

racialist, and the subject was

therefore neglected f

or many years. Eventually, however, linguists

realized that this attitude was the ethnic-group counterpart to

the .view, recognized as false, that differences between social

dialects implied li

nguistic su

periority of one va

riety over another.

If Blacks and Whites spoke

differently, this simply meant that

there were different (linguistically equally good) ethnic-group

language v

arieties. Today, therefore, linguists are agreed that

there are differences between black speech and white speech and,

'

since there as no way in which one. variety can be linguistically

superior to anotYher, t

hat it is

not ra

cialist t

o say so. The political

and social climate is now such that this linguistic problem can

be extensively studied and discussed. In fact, sucfi a store of

interesting data has been uncovered in the past several years that

the study

• of

Black Vernacular English (B V E)

' is now one of

the major preoccupations of many American linguists. This term

is generally used to refer to the non-standard English spoken by

lower-class Blacks in the urban ghettoes of the northern USA

`

and elsewhere. Black English, as a linguistic term, has the dis-

advantage that it

suggests that all Blacks speak this one variety

of English -which is not the case. B V E, on the other hand,_

I

distinguishes those Blacks who do not speak standard American

English from those who do, although

it still suggests that only

one non-standard variety; homogeneous throughout the whole

of the USA, is

involved, which is hardly likely, in

spite of a

surprising degree of si

milarity between geographically separated

i

varieties. Some of the more typical grammatical characteristics

-

of B V Eare exemplified in the following passages:

I ~~

_,_

~

-

_ _

S ''

TWELVE-YEAR-OLD BOY, DETROIT: Sometimes we thi

nk she's abso-

lute

ly cr

azy. She

come in

the

classroom she

be ni

ce and

happy ..

.the

nex

tmi

nute

she be hollering at

us fo

r no rea

son,

she never ha

ve a smile, s

he'd

be giving us

a lecture on som

ethi

ng tha

t happened twenty years ago.'

~~` (From the

sur

vey of De

troi

t speech led

by Ro

ger Sh

uy.)

FIFTEEN-YEAR-QLD HARLEM BOY: Y011 ICIlOW, li

ke som

e pe

ople

say

if

you'

re good yo

ur sp

irit goin' Yheaven ..

. 'a'

if you bad

, yo

ur sp

irit goin'

to hel

l. Wel

l, bu

llshit! Your sp

irit goi

n' to

hel

l an

yway

. I'

ll te

ll you why

.'Cause, you se

e, do

esn' nobo

dy re

ally know tha

t iYs

a God. An' when th

eyI

be say

in' i

f you goo

d, you goin' t'

heav

en, t

ha's

bullshit, 'c

ause

you ain

'tgoin' t

o no heaven, 'cau

se if a

in't

no hea

ven fo

r you to go to

.' (From a

surv

ey of New Yor

k speech led by Will

iam Labov.)

In any cas

e, although B V E is now rec

ogni

zed in academic

ling

uist

ic cizcles as a nor

mal,

val

id and int

eres

ting

variety (or

vari

etie

s) of English, co

ntro

vers

y. st

ill r

emai

ns_.

While it is

, rec

og-

nized th

at there are differences between B V E and oth

er va

rieties,

there is dis

agre

emen

t as 'to the nature of these dif

fere

nces

and,

in particular, to their or

igin

: One vie

w is that al

l fe

atur

es whi

chare sa

id to be characteristic of B V E can als

o be found in wh

ite

spee

ch, although not necessarily in the

-same com

bina

tion

, and

particularly in th

e white speech of the so

uthe

rn states of the U S A.

1Vlo

st fea

ture

s of B V E, thi

s vi

ew cla

ims,

are the

refo

re :d

erived

hist

oric

ally

from British or ot

her wh

ite di

alec

ts. They hav

e come

to be interpreted as

bl

ack .English' because bl

ack pe

ople

hav

eI

'emi

grat

ed from the south to the northem.cities of the USA, so

that

what wer

e originally geographical dif~'erences have now be-

come, in

the nor

th, e

thni

c -group di

ffer

ence

s. (The

re ase par

alle

lshe

re, of co

urse

, with the Serbo-Croat of Sa

rajevo.) Furthermore,

it i

s .al

so p

ossible that' ra

cial

seg

rega

tion

and the growth of

ghet

toes

, wh

ich have meant that-th

ere -

has been onl

y. min

imal

cont

act.

betw

een Blacks and Whi

tes,

have led to the independent

deve

lopm

ent of the Eng

lish

of the two gro

ups —that the two

' varieties have gen

erat

ed their own distinct l

ingu

isti

c,in

nova

tion

s.The oth

er vie

w cl

aims

tha

t many, at

least;

of th

e ch

arac

teri

stic

sof B V E can be exp

lain

ed by sup

posi

ng tha

t th

e first American

Blacks spoke some kind of Eng

lish

Cre

ole:

(I sha

ll leave a ful

ldi

scus

sion

of creole la

ngua

ges

unti

l Ch

apte

r 8,

pp.. 1.77-

91.

Language and Eth

nic Group 61

Simp

ly put, however, the

term creole is applied to a pid

gin la

n-

guage wh

ich has become the

native la

ngua

ge of a speech com-

muni

ty, and has the

refo

re become exp

ande

d again, and acquired

all the fu

nction

s and characteristics of a ful

l na

tura

l language.

A pid

gin is a red

uced

, si

mpli

fied

, often mixed la

ngua

ge evo

lved

for, say, trad

ing pu

rpos

es.b

y sp

eake

rs with no common lan

guag

e.

Varieties of Eng

lish

Creole (

that

is, c

reol

ized

Pidgin English) are

wide

ly spoken in

the West Ind

ies by peo

ple of Afr

ican

descent.

In their pu

rest

' form the

y are not im

medi

atel

y co

mpre

hens

ible

to Eng

lish

spe

aker

s, although th

e vocabulary is similar, and thex

show fai

rly co

nsid

erab

lE inf

luen

ce from Afr

ican

languages.) The

hypothesis is

, the

n, th

at B V E is

not

der

ived

from Bri

tish

Eng

lish

dialects, bu

t rather from an Eng

lish

Creole much like that of,

say, Jam

aica

. This vie

w would hold that the earliest American

',

Blacks had a creole as

the

ir native language, and that th

is has

,

over the

'years, come to re

semb

le more and

. more closely -th

e

lang

uage

of the Whi

tes.

In

othe

~i war

ds, wh

ile .the lan

guag

e of

American Bla

~'ks

should

clearly now be ref

erre

d to as En

glis

h,

those places whe

re B V E dif

fers

from oth

er Eng

lish

varieties are

the result of continuing creole influence. Adherents of thi

s vi

ew

also suggest that similarities between the

speech of Blacks and

sout

hern

Whi

tes may be due to the

inf

luen

ce of the former on

the latter, rather than vice versa. (There are some cle

ar cases of

lexi

cal ite

ms whi

ch hav

e be

en introduced in

to American Eng

lish

from Af

rica

n languages, e

.g.

vood

oo,

pint

o `c

offi

n', goober

`peanut'.)

Let us attempt a sho

rt review of the

evidence. We sha

ll sel

ect

some of th

e most fr

eque

ntly

cited characteristics of B V E, be

gin-

ning

with certain phonological features, and then see how the

y

can bes

t be exB

lain

ed.

1 _Many black. speakers do not have non-

prevocalic /r

/din car

t

or car

. This feature can qui

te clearly be traced bac

k to Bri

tish

dial

ects

; and it is

als

o, of cou

rse,

a fea

ture

found in th

e speech

of many American Whi

tes.

Many low

er-c

lass

Blacks, however,

also

demonstrate loss of int

ervo

cali

c /r/ (t

hat

is, /r/ between

vowe

ls) i

n words li

ke Carol and Paris (Ca'ol, P

a'is

), so that Paris

and pas

s;. parrot and pat may be homophonous (i

.e., sound the

62 Sociolinguistics

same

). Th

is fe

ature, thou

gh not ne

arly

so commonly, can be he

ard

in-the

speech

of,certain southem'Whites (British re

ader

s will

°per

haps

be fa

mili

ar with th

is sort of p

ronunciation from

Wesfems: Howdy she'iff!), and the

re are

als

o speakers of Br

itis

hRP w,h

o can be heard, f

or example, to say very and sim

ilar

words

with no /r/: ve

y nic

e. Some black speakers al

so show loss of /r

/after i

nitial consonants, in cer

tain

cas

es, e

.g. f'om = from, p'otect

= protect, This last may be pec

ulia

r to B V E.

2. Many black speakers often do not have /8

/, as in thing,. or

/~/, as in t

hat.

In

initial po

siti

on they may be merged with /t

/(rarely) and /d/

res

pect

ivel

y, so that this i

s di

s, fo

r ex

ampl

e. This

feat

ure is als

o found, to a certain ext

ent,

in th

e speech of whi

teAm

eric

ans,

but

not

, it app

ears

, nearly so fr

eque

ntly

. It is wor

thmo

otin

g that it is als

o a feature of Caribbean Creoles. In -oth

erpositions, /A/.and /~/

may be merged with /f/ and /v%, so

that

pronunciations such as

b uvv

uh /ba

va/,

for br

othe

r', may occ

ur.

This fea

ture

is well-know, in

London speech. It al

so occ

urs in

othe

r British va

riet

ies,

and in th

e speech of Whi

tes in I~e

htuc

ky.

3. All

English- s

peak

ers,

in their normal speech; si

mplify final

cons

onan

t clusters in words like

lost

, west, desk, end or cold

(whe

re bot

h consonants are

eit

her voiceless or

voiced), wh

ere

another co

nson

ant fo

llow

s: los

' time, wes

' co

ast.

Where a vow

elfollows,. h

o-wever, sim

plif

icat

ion do

es not

occ

ur: lost ele

phan

t,we

st end. In B V E, on the oth

er hand, sim

plif

icat

ion can tak

epl

ace

in al

l en

viro

nmen

ts, so

th

at pr

onun

ciat

ions

like

los'

elep

hant

, wes' en' may' occur. This aneans that, in B V E, plurals

of nouns ending in sta

ndar

d En

glis

h in -st

, -sp

and -sk are oft

enformed on the

pat

tern

of cl

ass:

classes r

ather than of cl

asp: cl

asps.

For exa

mple

, the pl

ural

of des

k may be desses, t

he plu

ral of~test,

tesses. Consonant-cluster reduction of th

is typ

e is als

o a fea

ture

of CaritSbean Creoles, but it ap

pear

s, too, to be common in the

speech of Wh

ites

.in some par

ts; of th

e South. However there als

ose

ems to be at least one res

pect

in wh

ich some types of B V E

are un

ique

. While some Whi

tes say tes' and oth

ers te

st, -

they all

have for

ms like te

ster

and testing: wh

ere

-.the

cluster is fo

llow

edby a suffix be

ginn

ing with a vow

el; si

mpli

fica

tion

does no

t ta

kepl

ace:

This is als

o usual with black spe

aker

s, particularly. in the

North, but there are some Blacks, pa

rticularly sou

ther

n children;

Language and Ethnic Group 63

who hav

e tessing and tes

ser.

In ot

her words, the form of.

item

s

of th

is typ

e must be assumed'to be tess for these sp

eal~

ers since

they

nev

er hav

e a t in any con

text

. We' can say, then,. th

at there

are some B V E speakers who; li

ke creole sp

eake

rs, do not hav

e

final co

nson

ant c

lusters of th

e type -s

t_

4.'A number of oth

er fea

ture

s are characteristic of BVE pro-

nunciation. They inc

lude

the

nas

aliz

atio

n of vow

els before nas

al

cons

onan

ts and the subsequent loss of the con

sona

nt: ru

n; rum,

rung = [r

a]; vocalization and Ion

s ofnon-prevocalic /I

/: told may

be pro

noun

ced id

enti

call

y with toe

; and devoicing offinal /b

/, /d/,

lgl (bud and but may be distinguished onl

y by the

slightly longer

vowe

l of the

former) and pos

sibl

e loss of fi

nal /d

/: toa

d may be

pron

ounc

ed i

dent

ical

ly w

ith

toe. All

these features,-with th

e

possible exc

epti

on .of the

last, can be found in various .white

varieties of En

glis

h.Perhaps more cen

tral

to

this

argument about the ori

gin of

diff

eren

ces between B V E and oth

er forms of Eng

lish

are

gram-

mati

cal di

ffer

ence

s.

1. Many bla

ck speakers do not hav

e -s

in third-pe

rson

sin

gula

r

present-tense forms, so that forms suc

h as

he go,

it come, she

like are us

ual.- We saw in Ch

apte

r 2,

however, that th

is is

a fea

ture

of cer

tain

British dialects (i

t is

wid

espr

ead in East Ang

lia and

in par

ts of thG West Country), and also oc

curs

in the speech of

many (parti~larly southern) wh

ite Americans. A cer

tain

amount

of res

earc

h, however, has ne

vert

hele

ss suggested that we can

not

necessarily ascribe th

is B V E feature to an ori

gin in

white speech.

It has bee

n shown that, in Mississippi, there is

a significant di

ffer-

ence

between the speech of bla

ck and white chi

ldre

n from the

lowe

st social-cl

ass gr

oups

with respect to thi

s fe

atur

e. All

the.

whit

e ch

ildr

en studied used some -s

in the appropriate verb forms,

and the

average score for the gro

up as a

-who

le was 85 per

cen

t -s

usag

e. On the oth

er hand, only 76 per

cen

t of the black chi

ldre

n

used any -s, and the

ove

rall

average score for -s usage was onl

y

13 per

cent. There are two possible i

nter

pret

atio

ns oft

hese

figures.

One interpretation is

that bo

th varieties are inh

eren

tly variable

with res

pect

to -s; and that — as we hav

e se

en to be the cas

e with

clas

s di

alec

ts —• it is

sim

ply the proportions of -s us

age th

at are

diff

eren

t. A second in

terp

reta

tion

is that, leav

ing aside th

e va

riet

y

,~ ,.

,,.

Y

..

_ ..

- -

- --

-~r~

. _.,

_

—,y ~ r,

.. ~~ ...

--.1

.~. ~

,_.~..

i S

64 Soc

ioli

ngui

stic

s

E spoken by the white chi

ldre

n, the - bla

ck chi

ldre

n 'speak a variety

of English which, like English Cre

oles

, ha

s no -s. The few cases

kwhere black ch

ildr

en do use~the sta

ndar

d English form (13 per

- cen

t), th

is int

erpr

etat

ion wo

uld ho

ld; ar

e the

resu

lt of dialect

mixt

ure —the inf

luen

ce of sta

ndar

d En

glis

h. Even thi

s second

interpretation,. however, do

es not

nec

essa

rily

indicate a cre

ole

orig

in for

B V E — we see in Ch

apte

r 2 tha

t L W C Norwich

speakers too

are

alm

ost in

vari

able

in the use of

forms wi

thou

t -s.

2. An imp

orta

nt gra

mmat

ical

cha

ract

eris

tic of

B V E is the

absence of

the copula —the verb to

be — in th

e pr

esen

t tense_ Thi

sch

arac

teri

stic

is ce

ntra

l to

the

pre

sent

. con

trov

ersy

.. in B V E, as

in Rus

sian

, Hu

ngar

ian,

Thai and many other Languages includ-

ing, crucially, Creoles, the

fol

lowi

ng typ

e of sentence

is gram-

maticaL•

She real ni

ce.

They out

there_

He not

Ame

rica

n.If you good, you

goi

ng. to he

aven

.

4 (Where

-the cop

ula appears in

ex

pose

d'-pos

itio

n, as~

in I know

what it is

, or Is

she?, it

is al

ways

pre

sent

.) What is

the origin of

this

fea

ture

in BVE

?Dia

lect

olog

ists

pointout th

at in some var

i-eties of

whi

te English cop

ula absence .

is gra

mmat

ical

.. Creo

list

s,.~

on the other hand, point out tha

t the English Cr

eole

s of the

. Ca

ribbean ha

ve in~

+ari

abie

copula absence. The cre

olis

ts' _case

• appears to

be strong. The same Mis

siss

ippi

stu

dy we dis

cuss

edabove, for ex

ampl

e, shows tha

t copula del

etio

n in whi

te southern

speech, a

ltho

ugh it doe

s occur, is

hardly of th

e same ord

er as th

isphenomenon in black sp

eech

. While black children deleted'is ir

inearly 28 per cen

t of

cases, white chi

ldre

n lacked is l

ess than 2 pe

rce

nt of the

time. Sim

ilar

ly, Blacks deleted are

in 77 per cen

t of

cases, whi

le Whites showed del

etio

n in only 21 per cen

t of

case

s.Advocates of

the cre

ole origin of copula de

leti

on in B V E can

ther

efor

e point to the fac

t (a) that

copula deletion•does not occur

in Bri

tish

dialects, (b)-t

hat copula absence is

a fea

ture

of Engl

ish-

based Cr

eole

s .spoken by Blacks in the Caribbean and

'(c)

tha

tit is

much mor

e. common in the speech of American Blacks th

anAm

eric

an Whites:. They mig

ht also like to'

sugg

est th

at copula

Lang

uage

and Eth

nic Group 65

dele

tion

. in white Am

eric

an -but not

British

-- Eng

lish

is the re-

sult

of in

flue

nce from B V E. Opponents of t

his vi

ew, on the

other

hand, ca

n point to

ano

ther

crucial problem: is copula deletion

in B V E a gra

mmat

ical

or a .p

honological phenomenon? Is the

copu

la, th

at is,

not there' in B V E, or is

it

there' but

not

pro

-

nounced? B V E, as we, ha

ve seen, is fr

eque

ntly

cha

ract

eriz

ed

by absence ofnon-prevocalic /r

/.~I

s, th

eref

ore,

the deletion of ar

e

simp

ly an exa

mple

of th

is same phenomenon — is th

ey'r

e > they

an exa

mple

of th

e same phenomenon as car > cah

? A fur

ther

point to

bea

r in mind is that, a

s ot

her linguists ha

ve poi

nted

out

,

B V E del

etes

the

copula on

ly in those co

ntex

ts where standard

English contracts

it —where is becomes 's or ar

e be

come

s 're.

It is

therefore possible to con

clud

e th

at copula deletion may be a

phonological innovation

, of B V E w

hich. co

ntin

ues th

e ol

der

proc

ess of

deleti

on, t

hus: he is > he s > he; th

ey are

> they're >

they.

3_ Per

haps

the most important cha

ract

eris

tic of BVE is th

e

so-c

alle

d in

vari

ant be

': the

: use of the

form be as a fin

ite verb

form

. For exa

mple

,

He usu

ally

be ar

ound

.So

meti

me she be f

ight

ing.

Some

time

when th

ey do

it, mos

t of th

e problems alw

ays

be wrong.

,She be ni

ce and happy.

they som

etim

es be in

comp

lete

_

At fir

st sight, th

is use

of be appears to be no different from its

occu

rren

ce in

cert

ain

British

dialects, where I be, he

be e

tc.

correspond to st

anda

rd English I am, he

is. T

here is, however, a

crucial d

ifference be

twee

n B V E and all

other varieties of En

glis

h.

As the

adverbs usu

ally

and som

etim

es in th

e ab

ove sentences

show, inv

aria

nt be

is used in B V E only. to in

dica

te ha

bitu

al

aspe

ct' — it is

onl

y used to ref

er to some eve

nt tha

t is

rep

eate

d

and

is not

con

tinu

ous.

There is therefore a ver

bal contrast in

BVE whi

ch is not possible in sta

ndar

d En

glis

h.

B V E

Stan

dard

English

He;bus

y right no

w.

He's

bus

y right no

w.

Sometime he be

busy:

_ So

meti

mesh

e's bu

sy.

--

~ —

—

'1'~~, V)

1 ~~~'

Sr,~,.~1. „~,~ ,~ w

l~~..~~

~-e~.~;..

a.

eio

~cc~t v~~i~io

As we have already seen, the accent of British English which has been

most fully described, and which is usually taught to foreign learners,

4

is the accent known as

itr.

In t

his chapter we s

hall,

first, give a

brief outline of the main

regional differences to be found in non-ttP accents of British English

and compare them with

ttP We do not attempt to

give a d

etailed

account of all the regional and social differences in pronunciation to

be found in British Isles English. In parricular, we do not attempt at

all to describe accents associated with Tradirional Dialects, spoken

by older people in rural areas (for these, see Wakelin, 1972). Rather

we concentrate on urban and other regional accents of the type which

{'

are most widely heard as one travels round the country, and which are

most l

ikely to be e

ncountered by f

oreign visitors. More d

etailed

k

discussion of phonological features takes place in Chapter 5. Intona-

tional and o

ther prosodic features are not dealt with, but can of

course be noted from the tape.

l~egiona~. accept differences

1 'The vowel /n/

(a) One of the best known differences between English accents is one

of phoneme inventory —the presence or absence

of particular

phonemes (see p. 36). Typically, the vowel /n/ does not occur in the

accents o£ the north and Midlands of England, where /u/ is to be

~'

found

in t

hose words that

elsewhere

have /

n/. The vowel

/n/

is

Regional accent variation

ss

relatively recent, in the history of English, having developed out of

/u/, and northern accents have not taken part in this development. The

result is that pairs of words such as put: putt, could: cud which are

distinguished in Welsh, Scottish, Irish and southern English accents

are not distinguished in the north and Midlands, where words like

blood and good, mud and hood, are perfect rhymes. (There are a few

common words, though, which have /n/ in the south of England but

which have /n/ in much of the north of England. These include one,

which rhymes with on in these areas, tongue, and none.)

Many northern speakers, under the influence of xr, have a vowel

which

is between /u/ and /n/ in

quality in words such as but (and

sometimes in words such as put also). Generally, th

is vowel is around

[a] (see table 4.1). This

is particularly true of younger, middle-class

speakers in areas of the southern Midlands. (Some speakers too, of

course, hypercorrect —see Chapter 1.)

We can also note that many (particularly older) northern speakers,

while they do not have /n/, do have /u:/ rather than /u/ in words such

as hook, book, look, took, cook. They therefore distinguish p

airs

such as book and buck, which in the south are distinguished as /buk/

and /bnk/, as /bu:k/ and /buk/. (All English E

nglish accents have

shortened the original long /u:/ in oo words to /u/ in items such as

good, hood; and all seem to have retained /u:/ in words such as mood,

food. But in other cases there is much variation. ttr s

peakers may have

either /u:/ or /u/ in room, broom; eastern accents have /u/ rather than

/u:/ in roof, hoof: western

accents, as well as those from p

arts of

Wales, may have /ul rather than /u:/ in tooth; and so on.)

(b)

It i

s usual, in

decriptions of x

r, to

consider /n/ and /

a/ as

distinct vowels, as in butter /b'nta/). This also holds good for accents

of the south-east of England, Ireland, and Scotland. However, sp

eak-

ers from many parts of Wales, western England, and the Midlands

(as well as some northern speakers —see above) have vowels that are

identical in both cases: butter /b'ata/, another /an'a8a/ (

see table 4.1).

Table 4.1

/n/, /u/ and /a/

but

put

xP

/n/

/u/

Northern

~~~

~~~

Western; modified northern I

/a/

/u/

Modified northern II

- /a/

/a/

Hypercorrect northern

/n/

/n/

ss

English accents and dialects

Figure

4.1

4 /r/

Most Eng

lish

acc

ents

permit /r

/ where it

occurs be

fore

a vowel, as

in

rat,

trap, carry. They v

ary,

however, in

whether t

hey

permit the

pron

unci

atio

n of /r/

after a vow

el (`post-vocalic' /r/), as in

wor

dssuch as bar and bark. RP

doe

s no

t have post-vocalic /r

/ an

d has bar

/ba:

/, bar

k /ba:k/. Sc

otti

sh and Iri

sh accents (li

ke most Nor

th Amer-

ican accents) do have /r

/ in

this position.

Regi

onal

accent va

riat

ion

59

Within En

glan

d an

d Wales

the

position o

f po

st-v

ocal

ic /

r/ in

regi

onal

acc

ents

is qu

ite co

mple

~c, bu

t we can g

eneralize and

say

that

the pro

nunc

iati

on wit

h /r

/ is be

ing

lost

—po

st-v

ocal

ic /r/

is

dying out —and tha

t on

e is more likely to hear po

st-v

ocal

ic /r/s in

the sp

eech

of older, working-class rural spe

aker

s than from yo

unge

rmiddle-class urb

an s

peak

ers.

Fig

ure 4.2 shows t

hose

are

as whe

repo

st-v

ocal

ic /r/

still occurs in

urb

an speech.

This

diffe

renc

e between

English

acce

nts

is due t

o a

linguistic

chan

ge i

nvolving t

he l

oss

of p

ost-

voca

lic

/r/, w

hich began some

B = /a:

/ in path

C = f ae/-

/a:/

contrast ab

sent

or in

dou

bt

A=po

st-v

ocal

ic /r

y presrnl

B=po

st-v

ocal

ic /r/

abs

ent

Figure 4.2

sz

English accents and dialects

Thus Scottish speakers make no distinction between pairs of words

such as the following:

Pam

pull

cot

palm

pool

caught

G /h/

Unlike t

tr, most urban regional accents in England and Wales do not

have /h/, or are a

t least

variable in

its usage. For these speakers,

therefore, art and heart, arm and harm, are pronounced the same.

Speakers i

n the

north-east o

f Fzgland, including Newcastle, do

however retain /h/, as do Scottish and Irish speakers.

~ ~?]

xP speakers may use the glottal stop (see p. 39) word-

initially before

vowels: ant [?~ntj:

or before certain

consonants or consonant

clusters: batch [b~?c], six [sr?ks], simply [scm?plr] (Brown, 1977).

In most British regional accents, however, the glottal stop is more

widely used, particularly as an allophone of word-medial and word-

final /t/. It is most common in the speech of younger urban working-

class speakers, and i

s found in most regions, with the p

articular

exception of many parts of Wales. It occurs much more frequently

in some phonological contexts than others:

most frequent

that man

—finally before a consonant

button

— before a syllabic nasal

that apple

—finally before a vowel

bottle

— before a syllabic /U

least frequent

better

— before a vowel

(In the that man context, the

glottal stop can a

lso be heard from

many RP speakers, as we have already noted.)

.In some areas, especially the north-east of England, East Anglia,

and

Northern I

reland, the

glottal stop may a

lso be pronounced

simultaneously with the

voiceless stops /p/, /t/, /k/ in certain posi-

tions, most strikingly when betwcen vowels:

~ipper

[fl' ~p?a]

city

(s'~t?i:]

flicker

[fl'ik?aj

Regional accent variation

63

8 /n/

(a) Most non-xP speakers of English, particularly in informal styles,

do not have /p/ in the suffix -ing. In forms of this type they have /n/

instead: singing

/s' ig i

n/walking

/w'~:kin/

This pronunciation is also stereotypically associated (see also p. 40)

with older members of the aristocracy, who are often caricatured as

being particularly interested in huntin', shootin', and fishin'.

(b) In an area of western central England which includes Birming-

ham, Manchester and Liverpool, words which elsewhere have /r

~/ and

are spelt ng are pronounced with [rig]:

singer

[s►r

~ga]

thing

[Arr~g]

9 /j/ -dropping

At an earlier stage in the history of the English language, words like

rude and rule,

it i

s thought, were pronounced /

rju:d/,

/rju:l/. In

modern English, however, the /

j/, where

it occurred

after

/r/, has

been l

ost, and the

pronunciation

is now /

ru:d/, /ru:l/. The same

thing

is t

rue of earlier /ju:/ a

fter /

1/: words such

as Luke, which

formerly had /

j/, are today pronounced 11u:k/ (except

that_ some —

particularlyScottish —accents

still preserve /j

/ in words like illumine,

allude). Currently, too, /j

/ is being lost after /s/: most speakers have

super /s'u:pa), but many still retain /j/ i

n suit /s

ju:d, f

or example (see

p. 42). In xP and many other English accents, though, this is as far as

the process has gone, and /j/ can still occur before /u:/ after all other

consonants. In c

ertain r

egional

accents, however, the change has

progressed a good deal further. In

parts of the north of England,

for example, /j/ has been l

ost

after

/e/, so

that enthuse may be

/En6u:z]. In London, /j

/ is very often lost after /n/: news may be /nu:z/

rather than ttP-type /nju:z/. (And, as in a number of North American

accents, /j/ can a

lso, at least in northern areas of London, be lost

after /t/ and /d/: tune /t

u:n/, duke /du:k/, rather than /tju:n/, /

dju:k/ as

in xP) In a large area of eastern England, however, /j/ has been lost

before /u:/after all consonants. This area covers Norfolk and parts of

Suffolk, Essex, Cambridgeshire, Northamptonshire, Bedfordshire,

Leicestershire, Lincolnshire and Nottinghamshire, and

includes the

towns of Norwich, Ipswich, Cambridge and Peterborough. In

this

` ,

rte"

aNewcastle

Carlisle

~Sundedand

•Durham

Z--. Mi

ddle

sbro

ugh

'Lan

g'

•Lan

cast

er

82tlford . ~~d:

<bum e

Manc

hest

er

Scun

tt

c ~

•Sh0

1

Nottinghan

Stak

e. p~

Y

wolverhampton..Walsall

•Lei

cest

er, ~peterborough

Birtningharp No

rtha

mpto

n.

~ •Cambndge

•Bedford

Here

ford

Gloucester• Lon~ ~

Oxfo

rd°

~✓//~

London•

~ /" •B

rist

ol

Sali

sbur

y.Southampton

eoumemoujh

~—

Exet

er.

Portsmouth

Truro

~ •Plymouth

Norw

ich

~~ ~

u a~

Exet

er•

Trur

o Pl

ymou

Newcastle

~ •C

arlisle

~ ~Sundertand

•Durham

•Middlesbrough

`Nee

t'Lancaster

• .

~ York

0rddford

Hull

ackbum.

•Leeds

'~~

Manc

hest

er. -

.

Scun

thof

pe

~ ~

• Sh~e(tl

Stok

e.

~~~~ "~~~~~

D~y

Wo(v

erha

mpto

n.,W

a~sa

ll

•Lei

cBst

er,~

;Pel

erao

roug

h

8irm

ingn

'arn No

rtha

mpto

n•

•Cambridge

Hereford.

~ ~~

fO~" ' •'

•II

Gloucester•

~Nll~~,~

~ ~

~Ox

tord

Condon:.

~•-Bristol

..

_.

S2li

sbur

y.Southampton

_

Brig

hton

Bournemouth ~ ve~

~~B

y '

.

j~~(,

(F~'~'

~

d~"

Map r

Long

A4ap z

Night

~~~

T s

('`

~"~

glish Tr

adir

iona

l Di

alec

ts nor

th of the

river Humber as

it is of

Fie, Rog

er, fie! a sai

ry lass to

wrang,

,~ .

its. This can

be seen

in some Traditional Dialect

poe

try from

And let her

aw thi

s trouble un

derg

ang.2

~ `,

3mberland. Note the spe

llin

g of long

and wrong:

(Here lall means "li

ttle

" and

sairy means "poor".)

F; ,

How lang I've fas

ted,

and 'til hardly fou

r;Pe

rson

al surnames such as

Lang or Laing and Strang ar

e no

rthe

rn

k~'-

This

day I doubt 'i

ll ne'

er be

Bitten owr

, ve

rsio

ns of the sou

ther

n names Long and Strong, and there are many

And thcer as fa

ng a night, aleis! beside:

nort

hern

place names whi

ch als

o show this fo

rm, such as Langdale =

f

I Ta

ll thought fasts soc

k fearful th

ings

to bide.

"long va

lley

" in Cumbria and Langcliffe = "lo

ng cliff" in Yorkshire.

~ ;.

<<

;~-~..