English since Shakespeare Prof. R. Hickey WS 2007/2008

Nina Remor (LN)Hauptstudium English since Shakespeare Prof. R. Hickey WS 2007/2008 ‘Talking Proper - The Rise of Accent As Social Symbol’ by Lynda Mugglestone

Accent as Social Symbol ORThe rise of prescriptivism in the 18th and 19th century • 18th and 19th century: new popularity of elocution • Shift in the role of accent as part of social definition  non-localized accent as dominant social symbol • Class-dialect vs. local dialect • Spoken language: pronunciation

Establishment of a ‘standard’ • 14th century: speaking French as symbol of superiority (language of the court) vs. English  ‘rude and barbarous’ • Choice between two languages rather than between two varieties or different ways of pronouncing one word • Absence of a standard: all regional varieties not only spoken, but also written

Establishment of a ‘standard’ • Shift in London English (variety) from dialect to a non-localized, super ordinate language • other dialects were displaced from the written • association of literacy with superiority • metropolitan vs. provincial; political, legal, administrative, commercial and cultural centre

Establishment of a ‘standard’ • Ideal standard language: ‘maximum variation of function’ with a ‘minimal variation of form’ • late 14th century: use of English in government and law • biblical translation • 17th century: use in intellectual discourse

How should a standard be used? • John Dryden: ‘The foundation of the rules is reason’  criteria based on logic, ‘mathematical thinking’

Ideology of standardization • Also applied on pronunciation, e.g. classifying sounds • 17th-18th century: shift from defining the ‘best dialect’ (Christopher Cooper, phonetician) to a ‘displacement of all inferior forms of speech’ (Thomas Sheridan)

Ideology of standardization • Description vs. prescription  standard = conjunction of ‘status’ and ‘codification’ of English • based in the capital • used by those with access to the ‘best’ London society

Written vs. spoken standard • written: supra-localized, for those of good standing and education • spoken: influenced by social factors  localized to a larger degree • though based in the nature of language, variation was to be resisted  encouragement rather than inhibition regarding prescriptivism

Written vs. spoken standard • shift of tolerance concerning accent variability • codifying of spelling and grammar vs. variation in pronunciation • 18th century: nature to be reformed by reason and art  polishing and refining the language matter of public as well as private responsibility; national as well as social honour • state of language = mirror of state and nation

Intended effects of a standard • Place of origin predefines accent • Attempt to formulize one pronunciation for each word eliminate distinctions, create new equality of speech by prescriptive means  accent difference being removed with adoption of a new • still social and geographical barriers inhibit spread of ‘proper’ norms  accent as a social symbol creating exclusivity and exclusion instead of intended equality

Problems of acquisition • No ‘method’ • Linguistic legislation (grammar, lexis) inapplicable to spoken English

Suggestions • Acquisition by books as well as conversation • Pronunciation as part of the taught language by the end of 18th century

Technical problems • No interest in proprieties of accent before, therefore pronunciation not indicated in dictionaries • Samuel Johnson: first to print an accent above the particular syllable • Later dictionaries: vowel length indicated by a macron (-) for long and a contras-tive breve (ˇ) for short  inadequate with regard to the recent developments at the time

Technical problems • William Kenrick to be the first one to add set of small numerals above the letters to work out the details • Sheridan combined this in General Dictionary of the English Language (1780) by respelling the word; e.g. choke- tshòke

Technical problems • Once the pronouncing dictionary was instituted, the demand was high • Predominant part of society could not purchase copies due to their income • Desire for a more economical format  due to problems in ‘performance’, more conscientious application than occasional reference

Technical problems • Elimination of features by individual industry pronouncing dictionaries as essential tool not only in the private household but also in libraries and educational institutions

Naïve beliefs • Recognition of a standard automatically involved a non- or sub-standard • Non-localized accent no longer symbol of egalitarianism but most potent social symbol ever

Noah Webster’s ‘perfect liberty’ • Sameness of pronunciation produces political equality only in theory • Impossible in reality, ‘idea in the mind’ • Provides new sets of inequality instead ” ‘perfect liberty’ can only rest in the descriptive acknowledgement that all varieties of the language are equal, same to their speakers”

Noah Webster’s ‘perfect liberty’ • Accent as a social symbol fare more complex than ‘good’ or ‘bad’ • Differences indicate more than social status, e.g. group membership, solidarity, inclusion/ exclusion etc.  society not one-dimensional • Dichotomy between patterns and attitudes

Results • Heterogeneity rather than homogeneity mark linguistic usage in multi-dimensional society • Any sort of prescription will not affect any change • Language varies regionally, socially and contextually

End of ´Accent as Social Symbol Presentation‘ Thank you for your attention!!!

´Talking Proper`- 18th century prescriptivism Sociolinguistic stereotypes: The ´elegant`vs the ´vulgar`speaker Andrea Wolff (LN) Hauptstudium English since Shakespeare Prof. R. Hickey WS 2007/2008

18th century prescriptivism • Pre-1700: views preceding prescriptivism • 1700: Age of Sheridan & Walker • The ´elegant`speaker • The ´vulgar`speaker • Sociolinguistic value of prescriptive rules

1) Pre-1700: views • Aims: protect English from change (Jonathan Swift) • Authors: content to describe enunciation & fluctuations marking its use

2) 1700: Age of Sheridan & Walker • 18th century: age fascinated by prescriptive ideology • Accent as marker of social identity • Need for ´standardization`to clarify linguistic insecurities • Stated correlations of accent and rank social & linguistic stereotypes

2) 1700: Age of Sheridan & Walker • Johnson: linguistic ideal of written and spoken language ´in harmony` • Thomas Sheridan (1719-1788) & John Walker (1732-1807): Notable elocutionists: authors of works on elocution, rhetorical grammars, dictionaries (with pronunciation guides)

An extract from Walker´s Critical Pronouncing Dictionary (1791)

3) The ´elegant`speaker • Sheridan & others : ´doctrine of subjective inequality` • Sociolinguistic stereotypes in the speech community • Accent as image of speaker´s inner qualities

3) The ´elegant`speaker: Ascriptions • Masters art of good enunciation • Is a gentleman, metropolitan = London • Is part of ´best` society, has kept ´good` company • Is of class & status, politeness, refinement • Is ´cultivated & elegant`, well-bred • Keeps language ´pure`= social responsibility • Pronounces with accuracy sign of culture & intelligence • Respects aural & social sensibilities of speakers: uses non-localized accent

3) The ´elegant`speaker: Repercussions • Social pressure: Model for emulation Has to use: definite number of sounds to be uttered with precision, distinctness, in proper places • Excludes the ´provincial` • Educated status regardless of real level of education. • Is hunted by people wanting to be fashionable or members of ´beau monde` • Even ´gentry`not immune from charges of social disgrace

4) The ´vulgar`speaker: • ´Vulgarity`: effective epithet of prescriptive censure – a major prescriptive weapon applied to variants regarded with disfavour within prescriptive tenets of correctness. • Commonplace of comment on pronunciation • Is a person simply not knowing the correct forms of language (misapplies sounds, mars or alters them).

4) The ´vulgar`speaker: Ascriptions • Walker: ´vulgar`= plebeian, suiting lower people; ´mean`= wanting dignity, of low rank/birth, low-minded, base, despicable; low in the degree of any property, low in worth. • ´grating`sounds of provincial discourse, rough, unpleasant, vicious, ludicrous, awkward, sub-standard, illiterate, uninformed, ignorant, incorrect, ugly, bad and wrong, no manners, has kept ´bad`company • „provincialisms have no place in cultivated speech“ • Sociolect: lower-class speech of London

4) The ´vulgar`speaker: Repercussions • Social pressure: social consequences might ensue • Mastering the standard improves one´s lot in life (R. Hickey,2007) • Negligence: social & political disadvantages due to ´provincial`accent • Has perpetual ambition to achieve higher social level • Falls victim to hypercorrection: reveals linguistic insecurity & willingness to receive ´proper` language

5) Sociolinguistic value of prescriptive rules • Embody formulations of attitudes to language use indicators of social views of ´correctness`: influences stereotyping and hypercorrection; both important variables in style-shifting • Depict social importance of language • Censure: often a reaction to observable changes in progress in a language: shows attitudes to accent & sound changes in progress • ´helped`an emerging phonetic science

Conclusion:18th century prescriptivism • Sociolinguistic stereotypes evolved from language attitudes (the ´elegant` & ´vulgar`speaker, the lady, the gentleman & many more) • Real direction of linguistic change did run counter to prescriptive propaganda; proper pronunciation still important in Great Britain today • Disjunction between standardization as process and as ideology; prescriptive fictions advocated by Sheridan, Walker and others • Nevertheless valuable documents of historical changes in English language, attempts of transcription, language attitudes and pronunciations in the 18th century

End of presentation on 18th century stereotypes Thank you for your attention!!!

English since Shakespeare Prof. R. Hickey WS 2007/2008 h-dropping: Important signs of social status Manuela Behrendt (RC) Hauptstudium

h-dropping: Important signs of social status • 19th and 20th century correct pronunciation of h most important signal of social identity ↓ ↓ presence of h in initial positions loss of h = educated and polite = vulgar and lower class

h-dropping:Important signs of social status • Old English: in native words the grapheme <h> could be realized as phoneme [h] e.g.: hand horse house in loan words h was not realized at all e.g.: horrible humour • Middle English: no realization of h in metrically stressed words e.g.: hand height

h-dropping:Important signs of social status • Accents: part of new ideals of speech • Heightened responsiveness to external markers of social status • Thomas Sheridan (in 1762): h-dropping part of language in counties correct use of h part of London accent = the standard • Standard: set up oppositions between educated and false/ metropolis and provincial • James Elphinsten: the loss of h in words like: human, humour and humble = not historical suggested to spell those words without h: e.g.: humbleness – umbleness by 1860’s role of h consolidated still further now an h had to be pronounced whenever and wherever it was spelled

h-dropping:Important signs of social status • The ability of pronouncing the h correctly was also connected with a person’s reputation for learning • E.g.: George Vandenhoff in Lady’s Reader in 1862 : “Nothing so surely stamps a man as below the mark in intelligence, self-respect and energy as this unfortunate habit”

h-dropping:Important signs of social status • By the end of the 19th century only the words honest, honour and hour (and derivatives) remained h-less

English since Shakespeare Prof. R. Hickey WS 2007/2008 The Development of the [g]-sound Marlene KralemannTN Studienbuch, Reading course)Hauptstudium, 7. SemesterLA Gym/Ge

Introduction The Development of the [g]-sound 1. What it means today 2. What it meant in former times 3. What it means in phonetic terms 4. The “Dropped Letters”

The Development of the [g]- sound [g] like in gun, egg, get, ghost, guess [ŋ] like in walking, sing, uncle [n] like in no, funny, now

Today vs. Former Times Today: Standard to use [ιŋ] like in walking

Today vs. Former Times In former times: Traditionally used without the [g] Standard to use [ιn] like in walkin‘

Poetry in the mid-18th century Contemporary rhyming around 1791: doing► ruin delight in► fighting

In Phonetic Terms: Change from: [n] = alveolar nasal voiced To: [ŋ] = velar nasal voiced ([g] = velar voiced)

English since Shakespeare Prof. R. Hickey WS 2007/2008