Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-59df476f6b-dmbfl Total loading time: 0.186 Render date: 2021-05-18T21:41:07.796Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true }

Interspeaker covariation in Philadelphia vowel changes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 August 2019

Meredith Tamminga
Affiliation:
University of Pennsylvania

Abstract

The paper asks whether six ongoing vowel changes in Philadelphia English show interspeaker covariation. In a sample of 66 young white women, pairwise correlations are significant only between three changes that have previously been observed to show parallel diachronic trajectories of change reversal, whereas changes that do not exhibit this diachronic pattern do not show covariation. I propose that the interspeaker covariation in this subset of the changes in progress arises from a shared social motivation for the change reversals that is not shared by the other changes.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.

Footnotes

This material is based on work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant Number 1627972, “Cognitive characteristics of the leaders of language change.” I am indebted to many research assistants for their contributions to this project, especially graduate students Wei Lai, Lacey Wade, and Robert Wilder and lab manager Elisha Cooper. I am also grateful to Bill Labov for his detailed feedback, to Dave Embick for conversations that led me to this topic in the first place, to audiences at UC Davis, Stanford University, New York University, Northwestern University, and the Third Edinburgh Symposium in Historical Phonology for their comments on the ideas contained here, and to several very constructive anonymous reviewers. Of course, all remaining errors are my own.

References

Auer, Peter. (1997). Co-occurrence restrictions between linguistic variables: A case for social dialectology, phonological theory, and variation studies. In Variation, Change, and Phonological Theory, Hinskens, F., van Hout, R., and Wetzels, W.L. (Eds.), 6999. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.10.1075/cilt.146.05aueCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bates, Douglas, Mächler, Martin, Bolker, Ben & Walker, Steve. (2015). Fitting linear mixed- effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1):148.10.18637/jss.v067.i01CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Becker, Kara. (2016). Linking community coherence, individual coherence, and bricolage: The co-occurrence of (r), raised BOUGHT and raised BAD in New York City English. Lingua 172–173:8799.10.1016/j.lingua.2015.10.017CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brysbaert, Marc & New, Boris. (2009). Moving beyond Kučera and Francis: A critical evaluation of current word frequency norms and the introduction of a new and improved word frequency measure for American English. Behavioral Research Methods 41(4):977–90.10.3758/BRM.41.4.977CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Conn, Jeffrey. (2005). Of “moice” and men: The evolution of male-led sound change. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
DeCamp, David. (1971). Implicational scales and sociolinguistic linearity. Linguistics 9(73):3043.10.1515/ling.1971.9.73.30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fruehwald, Josef. (2013). The phonological influence on phonetic change. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Gregersen, Frans & Pharao, Nicolai. (2016). Lects are perceptually invariant, productively variable: A coherent claim about Danish lects. Lingua 172–173:2644.10.1016/j.lingua.2015.12.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guy, Gregory R. (2013). The cognitive coherence of sociolects: How do speakers handle multiple sociolinguistic variables? Journal of Pragmatics 52:6371.10.1016/j.pragma.2012.12.019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guy, Gregory R. & Hinskens, Frans. (2016). Linguistic coherence: Systems, repertoires and speech communities. Lingua 172–173:19.10.1016/j.lingua.2016.01.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Hout, Roeland. (1989). De structuur van taalvariatie: Een sociolinguistisch onderzoek naar het stadsdialect van Nijmegen. Ph.D. dissertation, Katholieke Universiteit Nijmegen.Google Scholar
Labov, William. (1994). Principles of Linguistic Change, Vol. 1. Internal Factors. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Labov, William. (2001). Principles of Linguistic Change, Vol. 2. Social Factors. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Labov, William. (2006 [1966]). The Social Stratification of English in New York City (2nd edition). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511618208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labov, William, Ash, Sharon, & Boberg, Charles. (2006). The Atlas of North American English: Phonetics, Phonology and Sound Change. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110167467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labov, William & Rosenfelder, Ingrid. (2011). “The Philadelphia Neighborhood Corpus of LING 560 Studies, 1972–2010.” With support of NSF contract 921643.Google Scholar
Labov, William, Rosenfelder, Ingrid & Fruehwald, Josef. (2013). One hundred years of sound change in Philadelphia: Linear incrementation, reversal, and reanalysis.” Language 89(1):3065.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ma, Roxana & Herasimchuk, Eleanor. (1972). Speech styles in Puerto Rican bilingual speakers: A factor analysis of co-variation of phonological variables. In Advances in the Sociology of Languages, Fishman, J.A. (Ed.), II:268–95. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Maclagan, Margaret A., Gordon, Elizabeth & Lewis, Gillian. (1999). Women and sound change: Conservative and innovative behavior by the same speakers. Language Variation and Change 11:1941.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nevalainen, Terttu, Raumolin-Brunberg, Helene & Mannila, Heikki. (2011). The diffusion of language change in real time: Progressive and conservative individuals and the time depth of change. Language Variation and Change 23: 143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newlin-Łukowicz, Luiza. (2016). Co-occurrence of sociolinguistic variables and the construction of ethnic identities. Lingua 172–173:100115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oushiro, Livia. (2016). Social and structural constraints in lectal cohesion. Lingua 173–173:116–30.10.1016/j.lingua.2015.10.015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oushiro, Livia & Guy, Gregory R. (2015). The effect of salience on co-variation in Brazilian Portuguese. Penn Working Papers in Linguistics 21(2).Google Scholar
R Core Team. (2015). R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
Rickford, John R. & McNair-Knox, Faye. (1994). Addressee- and topic-influenced style shift: A quantitative sociolinguistic study. In Sociolinguistic Perspectives on Register, Biber, D. & Finegan, E. (Eds.), 235–76. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rosenfelder, Ingrid, Fruehwald, Josef, Evanini, Keelan & Yuan, Jiahong. (2011). FAVE Program Suite [Forced Alignment and Vowel Extraction]. University of Pennsylvania. fave.ling.upenn.edu.Google Scholar
Sneller, Betsy. (2015). A community divided: co-occurrence in retreat from local features. Poster presented at the 10th UK Language Variation and Change Conference, University of York, UK, Sept. 2.Google Scholar
Stuart-Smith, Jane & Timmins, Claire. (2010). The role of the individual in language variation and change. In Language and Identities, Llamas, Carmen & Watt, Dominic (Eds.), 3954. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Thorburn, Jennifer. (2014). Dialect development in Nain, Nunatsiavut: Emerging English in a Canadian aboriginal community. Ph.D. dissertation, Memorial University of Newfoundland.Google Scholar
Wagner, Suzanne Evans. (2008). Linguistic change and stabilization in the transition from adolescence to adulthood. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Waters, Cathleen & Tagliamonte, Sali. (2017). Is one innovation enough? Leaders, covariation, and language change. American Speech 92(1):2340.10.1215/00031283-4153186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wells, John C. (1982). Accents of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Interspeaker covariation in Philadelphia vowel changes
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Interspeaker covariation in Philadelphia vowel changes
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Interspeaker covariation in Philadelphia vowel changes
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *