|
Formation of Postcolonial Englishes: Theories
|
|
The developmental processes of post-colonial Englishes have been discussed by many linguists, and multiple theories have emerged to explain the phenomenon. Among these are Peter Trudgill's theory on New-Dialect Formation and Edgar Schneider's Dynamic Model of Post-Colonial English. Peter Trudgill's Theory on New-Dialect Formation Trudgill’s theory on new-dialect formation of post-colonial Englishes describes how settlers from a range of linguistic backgrounds come together to form a new dialect, or variety . Trudgill provides a deterministic explanation , arguing that, if the input varieties and the proportions of the prevalence of each variety in the new settlement are known, one can predict what the resulting variety will sound like. It involves six key processes: mixing, levelling, unmarking, interdialect development, reallocation and focussing. The first five processes together are referred to as koineisation. When focussing is added to this process, it becomes New-Dialect Formation. New-Dialect Formation can be divided more broadly into three main stages, each representing a generation of the new colony: (1) Rudimentary levelling, (2) Variability and apparent levelling, and (3) Determinism. Six Key Processes # Mixing is the coming together of speakers of different varieties of one language, or of two mutually intelligible languages. # Levelling is when variants from demographically minor varieties are lost. Generally, the proportionately insignificant varieties accommodate to, or adopt, the linguistic forms of more dominant varieties. Each of these major varieties competes to provide the successful form for each variant. These variants range from lexical items (vocabulary), allophones (pronunciations) and grammatical forms. # Unmarking occurs during the selection of variants. It involves the selection of less marked, or more regular, forms in the context of the participating varieties. For example, if two out of three major varieties favour a particular form, it will likely be selected over the third form. Similarly, the most structurally simplistic form is also often preferred. # Interdialect development is when a new form in the developing variety is the result of the interaction between two or more preexisting forms. This can be seen when the new form is one of the following: ## A simpler or more regular form of multiple preexisting forms ## An intermediate form of preexisting forms ## The result of misuse of a grammatical rule, usually hypercorrection, which is when speakers of the new variety over apply preexisting and often high status forms incorrectly. # Reallocation is when more that one variant succeeds in the levelling phase, causing each variant to take on a slightly different literal meaning or social connotations (eg. Social class, politeness). # Focussing is when the successful variants chosen and defined in the previous stages stabilize, becoming the unquestionable norms in the new variety. Three Stages Stage 1: Rudimentary levelling The first stage involves the adult immigrants who settle in new colony. Mixing begins as settlers from a multitude of linguistic backgrounds come together, occurring while traveling to the new settlement and directly after arrival. Levelling occurs almost immediately after mixing begins, as settlers begin to change their speech. Some lesser-known or more intricate linguistic forms accommodate to more common or more simplistic forms. This initial levelling is quite basic. For example, the first signs of levelling may include some forms being forced to fall out due to gaps in mutual intelligibility between the various varieties. The majority of interdialect development occurs in the first stage, where new linguistic forms arise out of the interaction of different variants. Stage 2: Variability and apparent levelling The second stage involves the second generation, or the children of those who migrated to the new colony. At this point, there is no developed variety in the colony to adapt to within the community. Due to this lack of structure and rules, children have the freedom to both choose and change forms from the extensive linguistic pool of available forms. This freedom causes a great deal of variability between the linguistic tendencies of different children. Interestingly, unlike their parents, little accommodation occurs; as the children age, they do not adapt to each other’s linguistic tendencies, but rather maintain the choices they made at a younger age. Due to a fair amount of levelling during Stage 1, there is less variability in this stage, as many preexisting forms have already been forgotten by the time language acquisition of the second generation occurs. Further reduction of variability is due to the lack of selection of certain forms by the second generation, which are therefore removed from the new variety. This may seem to be levelling, but is not, as members of the second generation do not accommodate their speech to others’, but simply never employ some forms to begin with. Stage 3: Determinism In Trudgill’s third stage, the children in the third generation of colonists are not bombarded with linguistic variability to the same extent of the previous generations. Due to this greater stability in the community and in the variety itself, the children are able to subconsciously detect and select more common forms, causing a further reduction of variability. In some cases where multiple forms with the same meaning or purpose exist, the different forms are reallocated, giving each variant a different meaning. At this point, there is also a fair amount of unmarking done, as more regular forms are preferred over complex and uncommon forms. At the end of this stage, the variety undergoes focussing, resulting in a more stable, cohesive and accepted variety. Examples of New-Dialect Formation in Canadian English * According to Trudgill’s model, the development of Canadian English began with mixing during the first wave of immigration to Canada, spanning from 1776 to 1812, when British loyalists who were against American independence emmigrated from the United States, specifically Pennsylvania, New York and New England . Mixing continued during the second wave of immigration, when British war veterans and their families began migrating to Canada in 1815 due to overpopulation in Britain. This wave lasted until Confederation, in 1867 . * Levelling can be seen in the disappearance of certain modals from Canadian English, like must necessarily . * An example of the effects of stage two, during which children select features of the language to employ, is Canadian Raising. This relocation of some diphthongal onsets, which became a commonly selected phenomenon, is more economical, as the space between the two vowels in the diphthong is reduced, which supports Trudgill’s claim that more simplistic forms are often preferred . * The example of Canadian Raising extends to the third stage of New-Dialect formation, in the process of reallocation. Although raised diphthongs were often selected during stage two, the original diphthongs also survived. Therefore, the two allophones of each form were given slightly different definitions. For example, the raised pronunciation of house refers the noun, and the original pronunciation refers to the verb . * By considering the when mixing among British loyalists began, the time required for each stage to pass, and the evolving state of Canadian English, 1850 is approximated as the starting point for focussing . After this point, what was becoming Canadian English began to stabilize, aided by political events that increased national pride and unity, like Confederation and World War I. Criticisms * Some argue that contact between settlers with different varietal backgrounds is not enough to cause the mixing of varieties. They reason that, if all settlers speak the same language, simply different varieties of that single language, the degree of mutual intelligibility between varieties should be very high. Therefore, if all settlers are able to communicate, there is no reason to combine varieties . However, Trudgill responds, explaining that New-Dialect formation does not occur due to necessity, but that it is inevitable with such constant face-to-face interaction . He argues that we have an “innate tendency to behavioral coordination” . * A second argument that is new varieties are not the result of the combination of multiple preexisting varieties, but are entirely influenced by a single variety. Due to geographic and social separation, the two branches of the variety differentiate over time, eventually becoming two distinct varieties. Trudgill responds by providing many examples of varieties that have developed, showing evidence of input from multiple varieties . * Trudgill chooses not to involve societal variables in his explanation of new-dialect formation. Although this is beneficial to the strength of the theory in terms of its predictive ability and falsifiability, one can argue that the social or political power associated with different entering varieties can have an effect on the degree of influence these incoming varieties have on the emerging variety; if speakers of an entering variety are proportionately small, but socially or politically influential, their variety could have a larger effect on the emerging variety than predicted by their proportions. These social and political roles could include wealth, education level, military ranking and government control. * Trudgill’s model neglects to consider the extensive period of time in which immigration to a new settlement can last. As stated above, Canadian settlement occurred in two major waves, the first one beginning in 1776, and the second one ending in 1867. Therefore, mixing among settlers occurred quite consistently for 90 years. However, as Trudgill’s model claims that the new variety should be undergoing the focussing process after three generations in the settlement, the initial Canadian settlers’ speech should be fairly focussed by the time of the arrival of the later immigrants. Do later immigrants have less influence over the developing variety than initial immigrants? * Finally, Trudgill only discusses the influence that settlers have on the new variety, disregarding any influence that aboriginal communities have on its development. For an explanation of this influence, see Schneider’s Dynamic Model of Postcolonial English. Edgar Schneider's Dynamic Model of Post-Colonial English Edgar Schneider's of postcolonial English proposes a cyclical framework to account for the emergence and development of New Englishes in postcolonial regions. The dynamic model, suggesting synchronically observable variations in the new dialects over time, highlights the relationships between these dialects by dividing them into five separate stages in a diachronic process. Sociopolitical Conditions lead to new dialect formation Ultimately, Schneider’s theory proposes a common underlying process that drives the formation of new languages, and functions whenever a new dialect is born. This process is made up of two factors: # Concept of identity: In literature, identity writings in particular, the inhabitants of the new nation’s concept of ‘self’ and ‘other’ is subject to a natural and unavoidable change over time. Initially, the settlers in a foreign land will identify themselves as an extension of the ‘us’ of their motherland, whereas the ‘other’ will be the indigenous inhabitants of their new homeland. After some time however, a new, regionally based concept of ‘us’ is established, in which the indigenous population is included, and the country of origin becomes the ‘other’. Similarly, the indigenous inhabitants’ classification of the colonial settlers will change from ‘them’ to ‘us’. As the indigenous peoples and the settlers find themselves becoming increasingly more interdependent up to the point where they consider themselves one people, the need for a common language develops, and linguistic contributions are made from both parties. # ‘Strands of communicative perspective’: the unavoidable relationship between the two most relevant social groups involved in the colonization process- the colonizers and the colonized; the settlers and the indigenous inhabitants. The Model=== Schneider’s theory proposes a dynamic model outlining five stages of the linguistic evolutionary process. The five stages take into account the perspectives from the two major parties - settlers from the English-speaking colonial mother-nation (STL) and residents indigenous to the region under colonial rule (IDG). Each phase is made up of four categories: #Sociopolitical background #Identity constructions (ie. Each party’s concept of ‘self’ and ‘other’) #Sociolinguistic conditions # The resulting linguistic effects The Model in Table Form * The model is temporally vague: No timeline is given pertaining to how long each phase should take. This makes the model difficult to test for efficacy. * Linguistic Input from parties other than settlers and natives is not considered: In the case of Canada, for example, during the foundation period, a linguistic and cultural battle for the new territory was being fought by settlers from both France and England. During the nativization period, in 1867, Canada signed a bilingualism act, officially declaring French to be a second official language. Clearly, the French language has had a large presence in the nation, an influencing factor that is not taken into account in Schneider's model. See Also
|
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
Main Menu
| Home |
| Articles |
| Search |
| Submit Article |
| Contact Us |
| Donate to Wikibin |
