Stop and go (away)sknee/nwav_aspiration_Nov6.pdf · Goldvarb X • First present stopping rates for...

Stop and go (away) Linguistic consequences of non-local aspirations among small-town

Newfoundland youth

Sarah Knee Gerard Van Herk Memorial University of Newfoundland

1 nwav39, 06/nov/10

Explaining social influences on linguistic variation

•  “You talk like who you are.” – Speech community, social categories like age,

gender, class

•  “You talk like who you talk to.” – Social networks, communities of practice

•  “You talk like who you want to be.” – Speaker design, agency, social mobility,

performance

•  Which of these matters? Depends on situation.

2 nwav39, 06/nov/10

Explaining social influences on linguistic variation

•  “You talk like who you are.” – Speech community, social categories like age,

gender, class

•  “You talk like who you talk to.” – Social networks, communities of practice

•  “You talk like who you want to be.” – Speaker design, agency, social mobility,

performance

•  Which of these matters? Depends on situation.

3 nwav39, 06/nov/10

“Who you want to be”

•  Implies speaker agency •  Social aspirations

4 nwav39, 06/nov/10

Hypotheses, predictions: “You talk like…

•  “…who you are.” – Differences between categories (e.g.,

genders)

•  “…who you talk to.” – Differences between social networks,

communities of practice

•  “…who you want to be.” – Differences within categories and networks,

due to speaker aspiration

5 nwav39, 06/nov/10

Today’s question

•  Can we tease out social aspiration from social categories, networks, communities?

•  In other words, what happens (linguistically) when we manipulate these factors to test the hypotheses that they imply?

•  Can we do that?

6 nwav39, 06/nov/10

Investigating speaker aspiration

•  The right social situation – Meaningful social options for speakers

•  “mobility” (Chambers 2003): movement across social categories is possible

•  aspirations can be realized

•  The right variable – Socially salient variation – Shared understanding of social options

indexed by each variant

7 nwav39, 06/nov/10

8 nwav39, 06/nov/10

Situation: Newfoundland English (NE)

•  Rapid social and linguistic change •  Strong (and growing) local pride •  Distinct and diverse local variety,

heavily implicated in identity practices •  = intense sociolinguistic forces

9 nwav39, 06/nov/10

Variable: Interdental Stopping

•  [θ] [t], [ð] [d] •  widespread and well attested

phenomenon in Newfoundland English (PADDOCK, 1981, COLBOURNE, 1982, CLARKE, 1991, 1997, 2004, 2008)

10 nwav39, 06/nov/10

Stopping and salience

My take on NL, is I like some words that we use like I use b’y, like ‘eh b’y’, or maid. [I do that just to make fun of myself.] We’re forever sayin’ that.

But like, I don’t like it when they mispronounce ‘th’, like tree [3]. I hate that. A tree is a living thing that grows from the ground, not the number.

---Aphrodite 11 nwav39, 06/nov/10

12 nwav39, 06/nov/10

The Variable:

All they used to do was make fun of my accent. All the time. Especially when I’d say tree [3].

For one week straight, like ever two seconds a kid would come up to me and dey’re like: “say ‘three million, three thousand, three hundred, and thirty three’”.

And I’d be like: “ 3,003,333”. Dey’re like: “No, the way you always say it”. And I was like, kay, “tree million, tree tousand, tree hundred, and tirty tree”

---Jessica 13 nwav39, 06/nov/10

Petty Harbour (Van Herk et al 2009)

•  Young women orient toward education, StdE –  limited opportunities within rural traditional

roles since decline of the fishery (1992)

•  Young men split –  some match the women – others maintain high rates of local traditional

forms, orient toward vernacular culture and working class occupations (92)

14 nwav39, 06/nov/10

But…

•  These are young adults, already in workforce

•  Petty Harbour has limited local (traditional) employment

•  People commute to nearby urban centre for school and work

•  Hard to disentangle aspiration/affiliation, experiences, social networks/CoPs

15 nwav39, 06/nov/10

So…

•  Let’s look elsewhere

16 nwav39, 06/nov/10

So…

•  Let’s look elsewhere •  New age group •  New Community

17 nwav39, 06/nov/10

So…

•  Let’s look elsewhere •  New age group: 12-16 year olds •  New Community: New-Wes-Valley

http://townofnewwesvalley.com/ 18 nwav39, 06/nov/10

New-Wes-Valley

•  Population: 2,485 (2006 CENSUS)


New-Wes-Valley

•  economy still centers around the local fishplant


New-Wes-Valley

•  the nearest shopping centre is 1h30 away by car

21 nwav39, 06/nov/10

New-Wes-Valley

•  One school: K-12 (about 300 students)

22 nwav39, 06/nov/10

New-Wes-Valley: not Petty Harbour

•  Local traditional employment still viable •  Shared local schooling •  Non-local aspirations require leaving the

community (and people do)

23 nwav39, 06/nov/10

Why 12-16 year olds?

•  We need to talk to people who want to leave, but before they do leave

•  12-16 year olds usually can’t choose where to live (up to parents/guardians)

•  But some independence •  Thinking about where they want to be,

plans for after high school, etc

24 nwav39, 06/nov/10

Reminder of Hypotheses: “You talk like…

1.  “…who you are.” 2.  “…who you talk to.” 3.  “…who you want to be.”

25 nwav39, 06/nov/10

Addressing Predictions

Who are we? – Speech community – Age

– Socioeconomic class – Sex


26 nwav39, 06/nov/10


Who are we? – Speech community: New-Wes-Valley – Age: 12-16 year-olds

– Socioeconomic class – Sex


27 nwav39, 06/nov/10


Who are we? – Speech community: New-Wes-Valley – Age: 12-16 years old

– Socioeconomic class – Children of working class parents

– Sex


28 nwav39, 06/nov/10


Who are we? – Speech community: New-Wes-Valley – Age: 12-16 years old

– Socioeconomic class – Children of working class parents

– Sex: 6 male, 6 female


29 nwav39, 06/nov/10


•  Social factors held steady: – Community, Age, SES

•  Social factor that varies: – Sex

PREDICTION:

 DIFFERENCES WILL BE BETWEEN MALES AND FEMALES, NOT WITHIN MALES OR WITHIN FEMALES


30 nwav39, 06/nov/10


PREDICTION:  GREATER VARIATION BETWEEN PARTICIPANTS

IN DIFFERENT SOCIAL NETWORKS/COPS THAN PARTICIPANTS IN THE SAME SOCIAL NETWORK/COP


31 nwav39, 06/nov/10


Networks/CoPs •  Gabe & Kole – friends, participate in the

same activities together, share the same friends and interests

•  Venus & Aphrodite – share same interests, on same sports teams, hang out inside and outside of class

•  Jessica & Elizabeth – fraternal twins, raised together, involved in church together, spend most of their (free) time together


32 nwav39, 06/nov/10


Aspirations •  Education

–  Trade –  university –  undecided

•  Local vs. non local –  Newfoundlanders vs. Mainlanders –  Newfoundlanders vs. Come-From-Aways (CFA) –  Townies (from St. John’s) vs. Baymen

PREDICTION:   PARTICIPANTS WITH LIKE ASPIRATIONS SHOULD PATTERN MORE

SIMILARLY THAN PARTICIPANTS WITH UNLIKE ASPIRATIONS


33 nwav39, 06/nov/10


1.  “…who you are.” – Differences will be between males and

females, not within males or within females 2.  “…who you talk to.”

– The following pairs should pattern more similarly Gabe&Kole, Venus&Aphrodite, and Jessica&Elizabeth

3.  “…who you want to be.” – Participants sharing aspirations will pattern

similarly; Differences within categories and networks

34 nwav39, 06/nov/10




– The following pairs should pattern similarly Gabe&Kole, Venus&Aphrodite, and Jessica&Elizabeth


similarly; Differences within categories and networks

35 nwav39, 06/nov/10




– The following pairs should pattern similarly: Gabe&Kole, Venus&Aphrodite, and Jessica&Elizabeth


similarly; Differences will be within categories and networks

36 nwav39, 06/nov/10

Method: Participants

•  Found participants through a friend-of-my-friend method

•  Interviews were: – digitally recorded – between 45mins – 2 hours long

– conducted in private homes in New-Wes-Valley, usually in a living room or kitchen

37 nwav39, 06/nov/10

Method: Data Extraction

•  Tokens were extracted after the first 15 mins of an interview – Exception Gabe&Kole

•  Type-token ratio of 5 •  These types were lexical not

phonological – 5 tokens of they’re and 5 tokens of there

were kept

38 nwav39, 06/nov/10


•  4 different kinds of that were kept – Pronoun: I like that – Complementizer: I said that I wanted to

leave – Determiner: that book was terrible – Modifier: it wasn’t that quick

39 nwav39, 06/nov/10


•  Contracted forms were included as the same as the non contracted form – e.g., that’s would count as that

•  Exception: –  if the vowel quality and syllable type was

change by the contraction, this was coded as a different word

– E.g., they’re would not count as they

40 nwav39, 06/nov/10


Exclusions •  Tokens that could not be identified after

looking at a spectrogram or waveform

•  Tokens that were proceeded or followed by one of the variants unless a contrast could be heard – Ex With them

41 nwav39, 06/nov/10

Linguistic Factors

•  Place in syllable –  onset –  coda

•  Word class (FOR ð) –  lexical –  Functional

•  Lexical stress –  stressed syllable –  unstressed syllable

•  Voicing –  Voiced and voiceless run separately

42 nwav39, 06/nov/10

Social Factors

•  Sex –  male –  female

•  Local Aspiration –  local (plans to live in small town NL) –  non local (plans to move away)

•  Educational Aspiration –  university –  trade –  undecided

43 nwav39, 06/nov/10

Method: Data Analysis & Results

•  All statistical analyses were done using Goldvarb X

•  First present stopping rates for ð then θ •  Then look at individual rates of

stopping

44 nwav39, 06/nov/10

Total N = 664, corrected mean .68

Education Local

uni trade undec. nonlocal local

prob .25 .52 .87 .20 .69

% 33 83 90 30 80

N 291 214 159 236 428

range 62 range 49

Rate of ð-stopping

Not significant: place in syllable, word class, lexical stress, sex 45 nwav39, 06/nov/10

Total N = 360, corrected mean .262

Sex Education Local

female male uni trade undec. nonlocal local

prob .36 .64 .38 .45 .75 .18 .69

% 53 47 10 47 59 10 48

N 177 183 143 130 87 126 234

range 28 range 37 range 51

Rate of θ-stopping

Not significant: place in syllable, lexical stress 46 nwav39, 06/nov/10

STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT

X

STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT

√ Results for ð-stopping Participant asp. fricative stop other total % stop

Uhura N U 56 2 0 58 3% Aphrodite N U 61 4 1 66 6% Elizabeth N U 41 17 1 59 29% Cat L U 26 32 3 61 52% Venus L U 17 40 2 59 68% Jay L T 12 34 0 46 74% Daniel N D 10 48 3 61 79% Jessica L T 10 48 3 61 79% Ken L T 9 50 4 63 79% Kole L D 4 42 1 47 89% Ty L T 5 46 0 51 90% Gabe L D 3 53 1 57 93%

47 nwav39, 06/nov/10

Participant asp. fricative stop other total % stop

Uhura N U 56 2 0 58 3% Aphrodite N U 61 4 1 66 6% Elizabeth N U 41 17 1 59 29% Cat L U 26 32 3 61 52% Venus L U 17 40 2 59 68% Jay L T 12 34 0 46 74% Daniel N D 10 48 3 61 79% Jessica L T 10 48 3 61 79% Ken L T 9 50 4 63 79% Kole L D 4 42 1 47 89% Ty L T 5 46 0 51 90% Gabe L D 3 53 1 57 93% *

*

Results for ð-stopping STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT

X

48 nwav39, 06/nov/10



*

*


√

49 nwav39, 06/nov/10



*

*


√

50 nwav39, 06/nov/10


Aphrodite N U 32 0 2 33 0% Elizabeth N U 36 0 5 41 0% Uhura N U 26 1 1 29 3% Venus L U 16 5 6 27 19% Jessica L T 26 10 3 39 26% Cat L U 27 11 1 39 28% Daniel N D 25 12 2 39 31% Jay L T 23 14 0 37 38% Ken L T 17 14 4 35 40% Ty L T 6 26 4 36 72% Gabe L D 6 25 3 34 74% Kole L D 5 17 1 23 74%

Results for θ-stopping

51 nwav39, 06/nov/10



* *

Results for θ-stopping STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT

X

52 nwav39, 06/nov/10



*

*


√

53 nwav39, 06/nov/10



*

*


√

54 nwav39, 06/nov/10

Difference between θ and ð

•  Lower rates overall of θ-stopping •  Significant sex difference between θ-

stopping but not ð-stopping

•  Why? – θ-stopping is more salient than ð-stopping (Van Herk et al 2009)

55 nwav39, 06/nov/10

Discussion

•  Which predictions were borne out?

56 nwav39, 06/nov/10


1.  “…who you are.” –  Differences will be between males and

females, not within males or within females

2.  “…who you talk to.” –  The following pairs should pattern more

similarly: Ty&Ken, Venus&Aphrodite, and Jessica&Elizabeth

3.  “…who you want to be.” –  Participants sharing aspirations will

pattern similarly; Differences within categories and networks

ð θ

57 nwav39, 06/nov/10








X √

ð θ

58 nwav39, 06/nov/10








X √

ð θ

59 nwav39, 06/nov/10








X

X

√

ð θ

X

60 nwav39, 06/nov/10








X

X

√

ð θ

X

61 nwav39, 06/nov/10








X

X

√

ð θ

X

√ √

62 nwav39, 06/nov/10

Discussion

•  For this population and variable, we need to appeal to speaker agency

•  Speakers are making decisions (whether conscious or not) about how they speak

•  Their decisions to use local vs. non local features are related to their educational and local aspirations

63 nwav39, 06/nov/10

Discussion

•  These findings suggest that personal aspirations also need to be considered when explaining sociolinguistic variation

•  In accordance with previous research (ECKERT 2000, GARDNER 2010, HAZEN 2001, ITO&PRESTON 1998)

64 nwav39, 06/nov/10

Thanks!

SPECIAL THANKS TO: SSHRC Jennifer Thorburn, Lindsay Harding, James Bulgin, Evan Hazenberg, & Suzanne Power Participants

65 nwav39, 06/nov/10

Chambers, J. K. (2003). Sociolinguistic theory: linguistic variation and its social significance (2nd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.

Clarke, S. (1991). Phonological variation and recent language change in St. John's English. In J. Cheshire (Ed.), English around the world: Sociolinguistic perspectives (p. 109-122). Cambridge University Press.

Clarke, S. (2004). Newfoundland English phonology. In B. Kortman & E. Schneider (Eds.), Handbook of varieties of English (p. 355-370). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Colbourne, W. B. (1982). A sociolinguistic study of Long Island, Notre Dame Bay, Newfoundland. Regional Language Studies, 10 , 20-21.

Eckert, Penelope. (2000). Back to the Future. Plenoquium on the Future of Sociolinguistics. NWAV 29. East Lansing: Michigan State University.

Gardner, Matt. (2010). The in-crowd and the "oat"-casts: diphthongs and identity in a Cape Breton high school. NWAV 39.

Hazen, Kirk. (2000). Identity and ethnicity in the rural south: a sociolinguistic view through past and present BE. PADS. 83. Raleigh, North Carolina: Duke University Press.

Ito, Rika and Preston, Dennis. (1998). Identity, discourse and language variation. Language and Social Psychology 17, 4, 465-483.

Paddock, H. (1981). A dialect survey of Carbonear, Newfoundland (No. 68). University of Alabama Press.

Van Herk, G., Childs, B., & Thorburn, J. (2009). Identity marking and affiliation in an urbanizing Newfoundland community. In W. Cichocki (Ed.), Papers from the 31st annual meeting of the Atlantic provinces linguistic association/actes du 31e colloque annuel de l'association de linguistique des provinces atlantiques (p. 85-94).

Williamson, M., & Cardoso, W. (2009). The social stratification of the voiced interdental in the Battery Dialect of Newfoundland. NWAV 38.

Selected References

66 nwav39, 06/nov/10

Date post:	13-May-2021
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	1 times
Download:	0 times

Stop and go (away)sknee/nwav_aspiration_Nov6.pdf · Goldvarb X • First present stopping rates for...

Documents