Blackwell Reference Online

Extract

The term “new variety” implies the convergence, by a population of speakers, on a set of linguistic norms which are collectively different from previous norms. There are two epistemological issues here. The first is defining what is meant by a “population.” Trivially, this can refer to some set of people who, in our case, stop speaking Variety A and start speaking Variety B. More usefully, the term “population” can be applied in the sociolinguistic sense of “speech community”- individuals having some affinity with others through sharing linguistic norms, both in terms of linguistic structure and in terms of patterns of variation and subjective evaluation. This essentially Labovian view ( Labov 1989 : 2; Patrick 2002 : 584–8) places the focus on collective behavior, and therefore allows for a time depth spanning generations – obviously essential if we assume that language change entails young speakers innovating, or at least adopting new features, differentiating them from their elders. The second epistemological issue is how to set criteria for a “new” variety. In a “normal” speech community, subject to no more than medium rates of in- and out-migration, language change is gradual and the concept of a “new” variety is irrelevant. The formation of a new variety (which may be a language or a dialect) involves more than just changes in norms. We need to envisage a prior period of ... log in or subscribe to read full text