Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-79b67bcb76-jn9wc Total loading time: 4.424 Render date: 2021-05-13T10:27:04.760Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true }

Persistence in phonological and morphological variation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2016

Meredith Tamminga
Affiliation:
University of Pennsylvania

Abstract

Persistence, the tendency to repeat a recently used variant in speech, has been observed for a range of sociolinguistic variables. This paper uses quantitative data from ING and TD in Philadelphia English to show that persistence reflects morphological structure and can therefore be a useful tool for defining variables at the phonology–morphology interface. For both ING and TD, persistence arises only when prime and target belong to the same morphological category, with additional interactions between morphological category and lexical repetition. This pattern of results suggests that both the linguistic variables and cognitive processes at play are multifactorial.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

Access options

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

References

Baayen, R. Harald, Douglas, Davidson, & Bates, Douglas. (2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language 59:390412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Babel, Molly. (2012). Evidence for phonetic and social selectivity in spontaneous phonetic imitation. Journal of Phonetics 40:177189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barr, Dale, Levy, Roger, Scheepers, Christoph, & Tily, Harry. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language 68:255278.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bates, Douglas, Machler, Martin, Bolker, Ben, & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4 . Journal of Statistical Software 67(1):148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bock, Kathryn. (1986). Syntactic persistence in language production. Cognitive Psychology 18:355387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bock, Kathryn, & Loebell, Helga. (1990). Framing sentences. Cognition 35:139.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Branigan, Holly, Pickering, Martin, Liversedge, Simon, Stewart, Andrew, & Urbach, Thomas. (1995). Syntactic priming: Investigating the mental representation of language. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 24(6):489506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brouwer, Susanne, Mitterer, Holger, & Huettig, Falk. (2010). Shadowing reduced speech and alignment. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 128(1):EL32EL37.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
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):977990.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bybee, Joan. (2002). Word frequency and context of use in the lexical diffusion of phonetically conditioned sound change. Language Variation and Change 14:261290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cameron, Richard. (1992). Pronominal and null subject variation in Spanish: Constraints, dialects, and functional compensation. PhD dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Cameron, Richard. (1993). Ambiguous agreement, functional compensation, and non-specific tú in the Spanish of San Juan, Puerto Rico, and Madrid, Spain. Language Variation and Change 5:305334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cameron, Richard, & Flores-Ferrán, Nydia. (2004). Perseveration of subject expression across regional dialects of Spanish. Spanish in Context 1(1):4165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell-Kibler, Kathryn. (2011). The sociolinguistic variant as a carrier of social meaning. Language Variation and Change 22:423441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chartrand, Tanya, & Bargh, John. (1999). The chameleon effect: The perception–behavior link and social interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 76:893910.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clark, Lynn. (2014). Phonological repetition effects in natural conversation: Evidence from TH-fronting in Fife. In Lawson, R. (ed.), Sociolinguistics in Scotland. London: Palgrave Macmillan. 153176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Omena, Nelize Pires. (1978). Pronome pessoal de terceira pessoa: Suas formas variantes em função acusativa. Master's thesis, Pontifíca Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro.Google Scholar
Dell, Gary. (1986). A spreading-activation theory of retrieval in sentence production. Psychological Review 93:283321.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Deutsch, Avital, Frost, Ram, & Forster, Kenneth. (1998). Verbs and nouns are organized differently in the mental lexicon: Evidence from Hebrew. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 24(5):12381255.Google Scholar
Dinkin, A. (in press). Variant-centered variation and the like conspiracy. Linguistic Variation.Google Scholar
Ecay, Aaron, & Tamminga, Meredith. (in press). Persistence as a diagnostic of grammatical status: The case of Middle English negation. In Mathieu, E. & Truswell, R. (eds.), From micro-change to macro-change. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Eisikovits, Edina. (1987). Variation in the lexical verb in inner-Sydney English. Australian Journal of Linguistics 7(1):124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Estival, Dominique. (1985). Syntactic priming of the passive in English. Text 5(1/2):721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferreira, Victor. (2003). The persistence of optional complementizer production: Why saying “that” is not saying “that” at all. Journal of Memory and Language 48:379398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fischer, John. (1958). Social influence of a linguistic variant. Word 14:4756.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forrest, Jon. (2015). Community rules and speaker behavior: Individual adherence to group constraints on (ING). Language Variation and Change 27(3):377406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foulkes, Paul, & Docherty, Gary. (2006). The social life of phonetics and phonology. Journal of Phonetics 34:409438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fruehwald, Josef. (2012). Redevelopment of a morphological class. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 18(1):7786.Google Scholar
Garrod, Simon, & Pickering, Martin. (2004). Why is conversation so easy? Trends in Cognitive Science 8(1):811.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrod, Simon, & Pickering, Martin. (2009). Joint action, interactive alignment, and dialog. Topics in Cognitive Science 1:292304.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Giles, Howard. (1973). Accent mobility: A model and some data. Anthropological Linguistics 15:87105.Google Scholar
Giles, Howard. (1980). Accommodation theory: Some new directions. York Papers in Linguistics 9:105136.Google Scholar
Goldinger, Stephen. (1998). Echoes of echoes? An episodic theory of lexical access. Psychological Review 105(2):251279.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gries, S. T. (2005). Syntactic priming: A corpus-based approach. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 34(4):365399.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Griffin, Zenzi, & Weinstein-Tull, Justin. (2003). Conceptual structure modulates structural priming in the production of complex sentences. Journal of Memory and Language 49:537555.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Guy, Gregory. (1980). Variation in the group and the individual: The case of final stop deletion. In Labov, W. (ed.), Locating language in time and space. New York: Academic Press. 136.Google Scholar
Guy, Gregory. (1991). Explanation in variable phonology: An exponential model of morphological constraints. Language Variation and Change 3:122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guy, Gregory. (2007). Lexical exceptions in variable phonology. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 13(2):109119.Google Scholar
Guy, Gregory, & Boyd, Sally. (1990). The development of a morphological class. Language Variation and Change 2:118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haddican, Bill, & Johnson, Daniel Ezra. (in press). Constant effects and the independence of variants in controlled judgment data. Linguistic Variation.Google Scholar
Hazen, Kirk. (2008). (ING): A vernacular baseline for English in Appalachia. American Speech 83(2):116140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Houston, Ann. (1985). Continuity and change in English morphology: The variable (ING) . PhD dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Johnson, Keith. (2006). Resonance in an exemplar-based lexicon: The emergence of social identity and phonology. Journal of Phonetics 34:485499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labov, William. (1984). Field methods of the Project on Linguistic Change and Variation. In Baugh, J. & Scherzer, J. (eds.), Language in use. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall. 2853.Google Scholar
Labov, William. (1989). The child as linguistic historian. Language Variation and Change 1:8597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labov, William. (2001). Principles of linguistic change. Vol. 2: Social factors. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Labov, William, Cohen, Paul, Robins, Clarence, & Lewis, John. (1968). A study of the non-standard English of Negro and Puerto Rican speakers in New York City. Final report, Cooperative Research Project 3288, vols. 1 and 2. Washington, DC: Office of Education Bureau of Research.Google Scholar
Labov, William, & Rosenfelder, Ingrid. (2011). The Philadelphia Neighborhood Corpus of LING 560 studies, 1972–2010. With support of NSF contract 921643. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Marslen-Wilson, William, Tyler, Lorraine, Waksler, Rachelle, & Older, Lianne. (1994). Morphology and meaning in the English mental lexicon. Psychological Review 101(1):333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayol, Laia. (2012). An account of the variation in the rates of overt subject pronouns in Romance. Spanish in Context 9(3):420442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neu, Helene. (1980). Ranking of constraints on /t,d/ deletion in American English: A statistical analysis. In Labov, W. (ed.), Locating language in time and space. New York: Academic Press. 3754.Google Scholar
Patrick, Peter. (1991). Creoles at the intersection of variable processes: (td)-deletion and past-marking in the Jamaican mesolect. Language Variation and Change 3(2):171189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pickering, Martin, & Branigan, Holly. (1998). The representation of verbs: Evidence from syntactic priming in language production. Journal of Memory and Language 39:633651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pickering, Martin & Ferreira, Victor. (2008). Structural priming: A critical review. Psycholinguistic Bulletin 134(3):427459.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pierrehumbert, Janet. (2002). Word-specific phonetics. In Gussenhoven, C. & Warner, N. (eds.), Laboratory Phonology 7. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 101139.Google Scholar
Pierrehumbert, Janet. (2006). The new toolkit. Journal of Phonetics 34:516530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pitt, Mark, Dilley, Laura, Johnson, Keith, Kiesling, Scott, Raymond, William, Hume, Elizabeth, & Fosler-Lussier, Eric. (2007). Buckeye Corpus of Conversational Speech. 2nd release. Columbus: Department of Psychology, Ohio State University.Google Scholar
Poplack, Shana. (1980). Deletion and disambiguation in Puerto Rican Spanish. Language 56(2):371385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poplack, Shana. (1984). Variable concord and sentential plural marking in Puerto Rican Spanish. Hispanic Review 52(2):205222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poplack, Shana, & Tagliamonte, Sali. (1989). There's no tense like the present: Verbal -s inflection in early Black English. Language Variation and Change 1:4784.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
R Core Team. (2015). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.Google ScholarPubMed
Roelofs, Ardi. (1992). A spreading-activation theory of lemma retrieval in speaking. Cognition 42:107142.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rosenfelder, Ingrid, Fruehwald, Josef, Evanini, Keelan, & Yuan, Jiahong. (2011). FAVE program suite [forced alignment and vowel extraction]. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Sankoff, David, & Laberge, Suzanne. (1978). Statistical dependence among successive occurrences of a variable in discourse. In Sankoff, D. (ed.), Linguistic variation: Models and methods. New York: Academic Press. 119126.Google Scholar
Santa Ana, Otto. (1991). Phonetic simplification processes in the English of the barrio: A cross-generational sociolinguistic study of the Chicanos of Los Angeles . PhD dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Scherre, Maria Marta Pereira. (2001). Phrase-level parallelism effect on noun phrase number agreement. Language Variation and Change 13(01):91107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scherre, Maria Marta Pereira, & Naro, Anthony. (1991). Marking in discourse: “Birds of a feather.” Language Variation and Change 3:2332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scherre, Maria Marta Pereira, & Naro, Anthony. (1992). The serial effect on internal and external variables. Language Variation and Change 4(01):113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shockley, Kevin, Sabadini, Laura, & Fowler, Carol. (2004). Imitation in shadowing words. Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics 66(3):422429.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sumner, Meghan, & Samuel, Arthur. (2005). Perception and representation of regular variation: The case of final /t/. Journal of Memory and Language 52:322338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt. (2005). Language users as creatures of habit: A corpus-linguistic analysis of persistence in spoken English. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 1(1):113149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt. (2006). Morphosyntactic persistence in spoken English: A corpus study at the intersection of variationist sociolinguistics, psycholinguistics, and discourse analysis. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali. (2004). Someth[in]’s go[ing] on!: Variable ing at ground zero. In Gunnarson, B.-L, Bergström, L., Eklund, G., Fidell, S., Hansen, L. H., Karstadt, A., Nordberg, B., Sundergren, E., & Thelander, M. (eds.), Language variation in Europe: Papers from the Second International Conference on Language Variation in Europe, ICLAVE 2. Uppsala: Department of Scandinavian Languages, Uppsala University. 390403.Google Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali. (2006). Analysing sociolinguistic variation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tamminga, Meredith. (2014). Persistence in the production of linguistic variation . PhD dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Travis, Catherine. (2007). Genre effects on subject expression in Spanish: Priming in narrative and conversation. Language Variation and Change 19:101135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
VanWagenen, Sarah. (2005). The morphologically organized mental lexicon: Further experimental evidence. Master's thesis, University of California–Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Weiner, Judith, & Labov, William. (1983). Constraints on the agentless passive. Journal of Linguistics 19(1):2958.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.

Persistence in phonological and morphological variation
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.

Persistence in phonological and morphological variation
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.

Persistence in phonological and morphological variation
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *