Real English

The Grammar of English Dialects in the British Isles

James Milroy, Lesley Milroy

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2014
• eBook ISBN: 9781317896951
• Topic: Languages & Linguistics
• Subtopic: Linguistics
• Index: Languages & Linguistics

While it is accepted that the pronunciation of English shows wide regional differences, there is a marked tendency to under-estimate the extent of the variation in grammar that exists within the British Isles today. In addressing this problem, Real English brings together the work of a number of experts on the subject to provide a pioneer volume in the field of the grammar of spoken English.

Part I

Dialect in Education

1 Syntactic variation in non-standard dialects: background issues

Jenny Cheshire and Jim Milroy

1.1 The process of language standardization

In order to understand some of the differences between standard and non-standard forms of language, it's convenient to begin by looking at the process of standardization. We must emphasize that this is indeed a process and that it is permanently in progress in any language that undergoes it. That is to say that it didn’t terminate at some time in the past - the English language was not finally standardized once and for all in, say, the eighteenth century, and then stabilized in that final form. Standardization is a process that is never complete, but it aims at uniformity and values this above all things.

The term standardization can be used of phenomena outside language and means the imposition of uniformity upon a class of objects. Thus, we may describe a set of motor-car components, or electric plugs, or a coinage system, as being ‘standardized’. When such objects are described as ‘sub-standard’, the implication is that they are not of the quality required to perform their function in the most reliable way. When we speak of language as sub-standard, we are, therefore, implying an analogy with factory rejects and suggesting some form of functional inadequacy. When, on the other hand, we speak of items as non-standard, there is no such value-judgement. The best analogy here is with hand-made, as against factory-made, tools. Whereas factories produce large numbers of items (e.g. spades) that are all identical, those made by traditional craftsmen are all slightly different. But a factory-made ('standardized’) tool is not necessarily in any given instance better or more functional than a hand-made one; indeed it is sometimes the hand-made item that is more highly valued. A sub-standard item, however, is defective and will command a low price.

Although such analogies help us to understand the nature of language standardization, language is obviously different in many ways from objects like spades and electric plugs. First, it is incomparably more complex than these other phenomena; secondly, it is a medium of communication and exchange. As a coinage system is also a medium of communication and exchange, we now briefly consider the analogy between language and coinage.

The purpose of standardizing a coinage is to ensure fixed values for the counters in the system: coins of particular denominations must all be of the same size and weight. When a coinage is not standardized, people cannot automatically rely on the value of a coin. With language also, many people seem to feel that variability is inconvenient and uniformity desirable. In practice, however, it is those who wield the most power who have most influence in determining the ‘correct’ forms of standard languages. They are socio-political, as well as linguistic, entities.

As for its effect on linguistic form, standardization of language necessarily involves the suppression of variability. This happens at all levels of language: spelling, grammar, vocabulary and pronunciation. It is never fully successful at all these levels: it has clearly been most successful in spelling (where very little variation is tolerated) and least successful in pronunciation (as many widely divergent accents of English enjoy a flourishing life). The standardization of English grammar has certainly deeply influenced popular attitudes: many people feel a compulsion to accept only one out of two or more variants as the ‘correct’ form (e.g. different from as against different to), even when there is no difference in meaning between the forms, and they will often write to the newspapers complaining about alleged misuses. It's assumed by these people that only one of any two variants can be correct — the other must be wrong. Thus, uniformity is desired and variation not tolerated. In vocabulary also, there is a tendency to believe that there is only one ‘correct’ meaning for a particular word and that some usages of it are ‘incorrect’ (for example, aggravating in the sense ‘irritating’ is often held to be incorrect). This has not always been the case: in earlier centuries the English language seems to have been more tolerant of variability, and the rather rigid attitudes that we observe nowadays seem to be a consequence of a process of increasing standardization that has taken place gradually over the centuries. We now look briefly at this process.

The process of language standardization characteristically consists of several stages, which may overlap in time. First of all, a particular variety must be selected from a pool of competing varieties. If the process is to be successful, the variety chosen must be one that will gain acceptance by a group of users who are capable of influencing other groups. The variety must then be diffused socially and geographically by various means - often with very far-reaching effects upon speakers of other varieties (which are now becoming ‘non-standard’). The diffusion process typically takes place through the writing system, the educational system, and through discrimination of various direct and indirect kinds against speakers of non-standard varieties. The standard language must also be maintained, and the process of maintenance is clearly linked to that of diffusion, being promoted through much the same channels - education, literacy and so on. Other stages of standardization that are particularly relevant to educators are: elaboration of function, codification and prescription. We shall now consider some of these stages, emphasizing their sociopolitical aspects.

First, we must note that the selection and acceptance of a given variety depend on social, and not linguistic, factors. The variety selected is not necessarily more logical, more expressive or more elegant than other varieties. What is of most importance is its acceptability amongst the most powerful and influential sectors of society. In the case of English, the London area had become dominant by the late Middle Ages, and it was the language of this area that fifteenth-century printers selected as the language of printed books. As a result of the selection and acceptance of this variety by influential groups, all literate people today use its modern form in writing, whatever their regional origin may be, and they may well be influenced by it in their speech also. But notice also that a consequence of the selection of one variety for standardization is the automatic devaluation of other varieties.

As the standard language is diffused socially and geographically, it also tends to be diffused into a wider variety of functions: it undergoes elaboration of function. As the ‘official’ language, it is used in administrative functions, but also in science, philosophy and literature. As a result, the users of the language usually feel the need for a wider vocabulary for use in these administrative and learned domains. In English, elaboration of vocabulary came about (c.1550–1800) mainly through massive borrowing of words from Latin and Greek.

A relatively late stage in the historical process is codification. The standard variety is codified so that interested persons can learn and use the ‘correct’ forms that they believe will give them social advancement. In English, the great century of codification was the eighteenth century, during which Dr Johnson's Dictionary and many grammar books appeared. At this point the codified forms become available for prescription; these are now regarded as the ‘lawful’ or legitimate forms, whereas those forms not admitted to the grammar books and dictionaries become, as it were, illegitimate. In other words, standard norms are subject to legislation, sometimes by lawfully constituted bodies (as in France), but sometimes by influential private persons (as in Britain). Typically, these authorities are now consulted by speakers and writers as the arbiters of correct usage (even though they may sometimes be inaccurate or eccentric). An important mechanism for spreading knowledge of prescriptive norms is the educational system.

It is important to understand that, although the standard variety has ...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Half Title page
• Real Language Series
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Contents
• Contributors
• Editors' Preface
• Acknowledgements
• Part I Dialect in Education
• Part II Regional Variation in English Grammar: Case Studies
• Part III Resources
• Index to Parts I and II