1. The Spread of English: Colonization The Age of Prescriptivism: Late Modern English 27 September 2016 English as a Colonial Language Kachru’s Circle Model (1985) Schneider’s Dynamic Model (2003) How to say “please” LModE lingusitic problems Prescriptivism and Prescriptive Grammarians Methods of Prescriptivists

2. Exam 3 Oct – Format: Topics for the exam found on GUL Practice in Seminars this week 7 “long” questions, such as Explain the social characteristics of the Norman Conquest and their effects on language use in England in the Middle English period Explain the major phonological/phonetic changes in the Early Modern period with examples Interpret a passage with you/thou from Shakespeare 1 “short” question with several components such as this: Explain briefly, in a sentence or two, the following concepts, names or dates in the context of the history of English koinéization case syncretism apocope 1204 Beowulf

3. Transcription of EModE (Cyrstal 2005: 37) tu ː ˈ hə ʊ sho ː ldz ˈ bo ː Ө ə ˈ lə ɪ k ɪ n ˈ d ɪ gn ɪ tə ɪ ɪ n ˈ f ɛːɹ və ˈ ro ː nə ˈ hw ɛːɹ w ɪ ˈ le ː ə ʊɹ ˈ se ː n frəm ˈɛː n ʃɪ ənt ˈ gr ɤ d ʒ ˈ bre ː k tə ˈ nju ː ˈ mju ː tnə ɪ hw ɛːɹ ˈ s ɪ v ɪ l ˈ bl ɤ d me ː ks ˈ s ɪ v ɪ l ˈ handz ən ˈ kle ː n Two households, both alike in dignity, In fair Verona, where we lay our scene, From ancient grudge break to new mutiny, Where civil blood makes civil hands unclean. Romeo and Juliet (Prologue I) (1591-95)

4. Peter Strevens (1980 [1992]): American and British English “branch”

5. Tom McArthur (1992)

6. Kachru’s (1985, 1988) Circle Model Shortcomings of Kachru’s model

7. English as a Lingua Franca The numbers game: speakers of English in Kachru’s model Ratio of Non-Native Speakers to Native speakers in 2015? In 2015: 5:1 (David Crystal), in 2003: 3:1 English as a Lingua Franca is “any use of English among speakers of different first languages for whom English is the communicative medium of choice, and often the only option” (Seidlhofer 2011: 7) Think Break: What might the demographic facts mean for the future of English?

8. Shortcomings of Kachru’s model Model is not based on the speaker’s identification with English (a key claim of a World Englishes paradigm). It is based on history and geography. Can you think of so-called L2 speakers that have made English one of their languages? The model reflects a hierarchy – centre (or base) and periphery (or additions) Delimitation lines are not quite clear: fuzzy borders between Inner and Outer Circle, also between Outer and Expanding Circle

9. How does it mirror multilingual realities? Bilingual developmental histories of speakers? Proficiency in English in not accounted for, compare the “L1 Southern US (white) bricklayer and the “L2 professor of Rhetoric”: who is likely to have the greater vocabulary, who is likely more familiar with standard English? Including differences of countries within one circle: Inner Circle countries (e.g. Ireland – English and Irish and Canada), Outer Circle (e.g. who speaks English – elites or the populace?) Terminology: Inner – the core/heart of English?

10. Edgar Schneider’s Dynamic Model (2003) Accounting for the development of postcolonial English A general schema for the development of “new” varieties Weaving together of a settler (STL) and an indigenous stream (IDG) into a new variety Five phases, very general. No prediction to how long phases may last is given.

11. Dynamic Model History & Politics Identity Construction Sociolinguistics of contact/use/attitu des Linguistic developments Phase I: Foundation STL: colonial expansion IDG: occupation STL: part of original nation IDG: indigenous STL: cross-dialectal contact IDG: minority bilingualism STL: koinéizatoin, Toponymic borrowing Phase II: Exonormative Stabilization Stable, colonial status STL: English plus local IDG: local plus English More mixing of STL/IDG Lexical borrowing Phase III: Nativization Weakening ties, often independence, but cultural assimilation Permanent resident of STL or IDG origin Cleavage between innovative speakers (STL, approximating IDG), and conservative speakers (just STL Heavy lexical borrowing, Structural changes: phonological/synt actic changes etc Phase IV: Endonormative Stabilization Post- independence (possibly “Event X”) Member of new nation, increasingly pan- ethnic Acceptance of local norm, literature in local norm Stabilization of new variety, codification Phase V: Diversification Stable young nation, internal sociopolitical diversification Group-specific (no longer nation specific) Network construction dialect birth

12. Some varieties and their approximate status Phase 2: Fiji English (since about 1930s) Phase 3: Hong Kong English, Malaysian English, Philippine English Phase 4: Singapore English Phase 5: American English (since WWI) Canadian English (since 1970s), Australian English (since 2000)

13. Dynamic Model: Strengths and Weaknesses Strengths: – very general model, applicable to all postcolonial Englishes (and other postcolonial languages) – Intuitive five phases – Flexible – Widely applied today Weaknesses: – No or little predictive power (no length of phases is defined, merely the progression of phase 1 to 5) – Not a testable model (you will see what you need to see)

14. The four “Crossings” of English (Mesthrie & Bhatt) 1 st crossing: Germanic dialects to England, 5 th century (449 AD according to the Venerable Bede) 2 nd crossing: Ireland, 12 th century 3 rd crossing: colonial period, 17 th -19 th centuries 4 th crossing: “virtual”, cultural crossing, post- WWII to present-day

15. Late Modern English

16. In Beryl Bainbridge’s novel According to Queeney (2001, featuring Dr. Samuel Johnson, the Thrale Family) one of the characters entreats Mrs Thrale, the protagonist’s mother: Do please get the child to read to us (2001: 37) BBC series Aristocrats, based on a study of the lives of Caroline, Emily, Louise and Sarah Lennox (1740  1832) by Tillyard (1994): Please, I must tell you, I’m so unhappy Please, don’t cry. Harriet O’Carroll (screenwriter), and the examples derive from the fifth episode.

18. Saying please in the 18 th century (Tieken and Faya 2007) I beg the favour of You to return this Letter (1762, Merrick to Lowth; Bodl. Lib. MS Eng Lett C573, f. 62) be pleased to strike it out (1774, Lowth to James Dodsley; BL Add. MSS 35,339, f. 45). Pray send me word as soon as you can (1755, Lowth to his wife; Bodl. Lib. MS Eng Lett. C572 f. 23). I (would) desire you to, I desire that you would I (must) beg you to, I (must) beg the favour of you to, I beg the favour (Please see over) (1788, HAMMOND JAMES to Mr. Richd. Orford, Lyme, Buxton, Derbyshire; CLE-CP) – earliest attestation of “parenthetical please” Be pleased to send all letters directed to Lord Frederick Cavendish at the Castle in Dublin in the same character as that of the present note forthwith to Dr. Lowth at Limerick. Late Modern English

19. please – attested in 1788, 1794 in Canada (lower class writer). Please – lower-class usage Unlikely that middle and upper-middle class cirlces such as Johnson’s would’ve used the “lower class” parenthetical please in the 1760s-1790s.

20. How LModE speakers may have said “please” *Do please get the child to read to us. Pray, do get the child to read to us. *Please, I must tell you, I’m so unhappy. I would desire you to know I’m so unhappy. *Please, don’t cry. I beg you not to cry.

21. Late Modern English problems Disparity between spelling and sound since GVS Spelling reformers since mid-16 th century: John Hart (1570), William Bullokar (1580) – radical spelling reforms Richard Mulcaster (1582): more measured approach that was more successful – minor changes (one spelling for one form), no big changes

22. Enrichment of vocabulary: – via borrowings (Latin and Greek), e.g. Sir Thomas Elyot – or via word-formation (‘build’ new words with native means) – e.g. Edmund Spenser – ‘inkhorn controversy’: many words were borrowed, ridiculed by some e.g. education, confidence, expect, maturity… first ridiculed, but remained truage ‘tribute’, deruncinate ‘weed’, homogalact ‘foster brother’, demit ‘send away’ … first ridiculed and fell out of use

23. LModE: rise of Linguistic Prescriptivism = not natural language change, but linguistic engineering Reasons for prescriptivism: Increased social mobility (Industrial Revolution!) – grammars for the upper classes to maintain social distance e.g. Robert Lowth. 1762. A Short Introduction to English Grammar. London. – most influential grammar! – grammars for the lower classes to close the linguistic gap e.g. William Cobbett. 1818. A Grammar of the English Language. New York. – for lower classes

24. Philosophical trends: – Linguistic insecurity AND linguistic conservatism: idea of a “Golden Age” of English (1590s-1660s, long gone) ideas that English was in decay from a glorious state. – Age of Reason: rationalist philosophy: knowledge can be derived from principles (not just experiences). Focus on “principles” – applied to language. – Principles: Authority (‘best writers), Model of Latin, Etymology, Reason (analogy)

25. Some prescriptive grammarians writers: Ben Jonson, Daniel Defoe, Jonathan Swift, Richard Sheridan, Joseph Addison, Samuel Johnson clergymen: Robert Lowth, William Ward, Joseph Priestley (non- conformist and scientist) “men of letters”, Lindley Murray, Nathan Bailey, George Campell, Noah Webster occasionally women: Ann Fischer

26. Noah Webster and Joseph Priestley had very modern points of view: more descriptive than prescriptive in their approach. Noah Webster: – Spelling Book (1783) Dictionary (1806) – enlarged dictionary (1828) – B&A p. 360 Joseph Priestley. 1761. The Rudiments of English Grammar. London. Most liberal publication of his time. “the best forms will, in time, establish themselves by their own superior excellence”

27. Prescriptive Grammarians recognized that English grammar was not codified in grammar books Jonathan Swift (1712): English grammar is “extremely imperfect … in many Instances, it offends against every Part of Grammar.” Samuel Johnson (1755): “tongues, like governments, have a natural tendency to degeneration” Process of Ascertainment: disambiguation of English, purging uncertainties

28. Books Most important for LModE readers: Johnson, Samuel. 1755. A Dictionary of the English Language. London: W. Strahan. Lowth, Robert. 1762. A Short Introduction to English Grammar. London: R. Dodsley.

29. Johnson 1755

30. Samuel Johnson 1755: Samuel Johnson’s dictionary was published in 2 volumes: became the leading dictionary until 1928 (Oxford English Dictionary) used citations to illustrate the use of words Johnson realized that language change cannot be stopped: “sounds are too volatile and subtle for legal restraints; to enchain syllables and to lash the wind are equally undertakings of pride”

31. Samuel Johnson

32. Bishop Robert Lowth

33. Ascertainment of English: 3 steps 1.Codify the rules of English, settle disputes, standardize all its forms and functions 2.Refine the language, remove defects, correct unwanted tendencies 3.‘fix’, set the standard of English for eternity

34. Language Academy best way to ‘ascertain’ the language: a language academy Italy: Academia della Crusca (*1582 – 1612 dictionary) France: Académie Française (*1636 – 1694 dictionary) England: Royal Society Committee (1664, John Dryden); Swift’s 1712 A Proposal for Correcting, Improving and Ascertaining the English Tongue. 1714: Queen Anne died (supporter of Academy), successor: George I was from Hanover, Germany.

35. Examples: Avoid preposition stranding Avoid split infinitives Avoid “wrong” case Introduction of man-made ‘rules’: examples of “strictures” by prescriptivists, and their PDE expressions

36. Avoid Preposition stranding: You have not acquired … anything like that amount of exact knowledge which I looked for (Dickens, Hard Times, 1854). … anything like that amount of exact knowledge for which I looked.

37. Burchfield 1996 based on Fowler and Fowler’s The King’s English (1906) Claim: “The acknowledged authority”

38. In most circumstances, esp. in formal writing, it is desirable to avoid placing a preposition at the end of a clause or sentence, where it has the appearance of being stranded. (Burchfield 1996: 619) But there are many circumstances in which a preposition may or even must be placed late… and others where the degree of formality required governs the placing. (ibid)

41. Lindley Murray’s grammar (1795, 1827 edition) (Murray 1827: 49)

42. (Murray 1827: 49-50)

43. (Murray 1827: 50)

44. Classical grammatical categories had a strong influence on the 18 th -century grammarians, as on everyone dealing with language at the time. Murray also presents the “declension” of the English substantive (noun)

45. They would be ready to happily pay for the difference. “To boldly go where no man has gone before.” Latin: to praise: laudare (-are other infinitive ending: -ire, -ere) I praise: laudo (-o 1 st p. sg. pres. ind.) In Latin, the infinitive is a single word (stem + inflection). In Modern English, that’s not the case, but, by analogy, false analogy, purists suggest the infinitive marker to and the verb are treating as such Avoid split infinitives: To boldly goTo boldly go

46. Robert Lowth’s grammar (1762: 127-8, B&A: 365) and the split infinitive: The Preposition is often separated from the Relative which it governs, and joined to the Verb at the end of a Sentence, or some Member of it: as ‘Horace is an author, whom I am much delighted with’ … This is an Idiom, which our language is strongly inclined to; it prevails in common conversation, and suits very well with the familiar style in writing: but the placing of the Preposition before the Relative is more graceful, as well as more perspicuous; and agrees much better with solemn and elevated style.

47. Robert Lowth’s grammar (1762: 127-8, B&A: 365) and the split infinitive: The Preposition is often separated from the Relative which it governs, and joined to the Verb at the end of a Sentence, or some Member of it: as ‘Horace is an author, whom I am much delighted with’ … This is an Idiom, which our language is strongly inclined to; it prevails in common conversation, and suits very well with the familiar style in writing: but the placing of the Preposition before the Relative is more graceful, as well as more perspicuous; and agrees much better with solemn and elevated style.

48. Fowler and Fowler, 1908. The King’s English. 2 nd ed. 25. 'SPLIT' INFINITIVES The 'split' infinitive has taken such hold upon the consciences of journalists that, instead of warning the novice against splitting his infinitives, we must warn him against the curious superstition that the splitting or not splitting makes the difference between a good and a bad writer. [cont.]

49. [cont.] The split infinitive is an ugly thing, as will be seen from our examples below; but it is one among several hundred ugly things, and the novice should not allow it to occupy his mind exclusively. Even that mysterious quality, 'distinction' of style, may in modest measure be attained by a splitter of infinitives: 'The book is written with a distinction (save in the matter of split infinitives) unusual in such works.'—Times.

50. 4 Methods of the prescriptivists 1.Appeal to Authority – use of one’s ‘personal’ authority and harsh language to make a claim: ‘This is not English’, ‘we must not say’, ‘we never ought write’, ‘is hardly to be approved of’ – use of ‘best writers’ – whatever they are. However, they were aware that the ‘best writers’ are not always consistent themselves.

51. 2.Latin Model (as laid out above) Samuel Johnson (B&A, p. 366): ‘every language must be servilely formed after the model of some one of the ancient”

52. Which structure do you use? Excel spread sheet

53. “Wrong”.ca domain search (28 Feb. 2010) “Right”.ca domain search (28 Feb. 2010) It is me (It is her) N/AIt is I (It is she) N/A between you and I147,000between you and me 4,600 You and me are [both students] 8,680You and I are [both students] 221,000 Who is it for?34,000Whom is it for? For whom is it? 5 14,600 (for whom is it intended, suitable) if I was14,200,000if I were185,000 taller than me15,800taller than I < taller than I am 13,300 (she is taller than I was when I was 13)

54. Avoid “wrong” case: Between you and I “Between you and I is considered to be ‘a common vulgarism’ in the language of Dickens’s characters” (Brook 1970, qtd. in Tieken 2009: 88)

55. 3.Etymology decimate < Lat. decimare ‘to punish every 10 th person’ American Heritage Dictionary, 4 th ed. (2000): Usage Note: Decimate originally referred to the killing of every tenth person, a punishment used in the Roman army for mutinous legions. Today this meaning is commonly extended to include the killing of any large proportion of a group. Sixty-six percent of the Usage Panel accepts this extension in the sentence The Jewish population of Germany was decimated by the war, even though it is common knowledge that the number of Jews killed was much greater than a tenth of the original population. However, when the meaning is further extended to include large-scale destruction other than killing, as in The supply of fresh produce was decimated by the nuclear accident at Chernobyl, only 26 percent of the Panel accepts the usage.

56. mail 1a ‘A bag, pack, or wallet; a travelling bag, a portmanteau.’ c1275 Ich e wulle bi-tache a male riche. 1893 R. L. STEVENSON Catriona xvii. 190 He...emptied out his mails upon the floor that I might have a change of clothes.R. L. STEVENSON 2 ‘A bag or packet of letters or dispatches for conveyance by post’ 1654 Ord. Office Postage Lett. §8 To have in readiness one good Horse or Mare to receive and carry the Male of Letters... 1966 ‘J. HACKSTON’ Father clears Out 45 When Mother asked him if he were really going to post the letter.., he swore that this one was going to the mail.‘J. HACKSTON’

57. 4b ‘email’ 1972 A. K. BHUSHAN Request for Comments (Network Working Group) (Electronic text) No. 385. 3 The use of would allow a network user to send mail to other users who do not have NIC identification but whose is known. 2010, 2 Mar, 00:52 Sweet! Got some mail from @smashingmag! http://moby.to/vdl7ob http://twitter.com/MartijnSnels/status/9866495885smashingmaghttp://moby.to/vdl7ob http://twitter.com/MartijnSnels/status/9866495885 Saying decimate must mean ‘1 out of 10’ is like saying mail must always mean the ‘bag that carries letters.’

58. Consider the effects of the etymological argument, if taken seriously: manufactured: This car was manufactured in Oshawa. ‘made my had’ (manus, Lat. hand. facere, Lat. to make) verbal: He informed me verbally ‘words spoken or written’ (< verbum, Lat. ‘word’) alternative: We have three alternatives to option 1. ‘two choices’ (< alter, Lat. ‘the other one’)

59. 4.Logic and Reason: apply randomly selected principles. Do not use double negatives: -2 * -2 = +4 Do not use double comparatives or superlative forms, e.g. *most wonderfullest ‘Incomparables’: don’t compare them: unique, *more unique; perfect, *most perfect… Comparative for two, superlative for three or more forms: *the brightest of the two only before the modifier: *I only spoke three words

60. Regularity in language as a goal he need, she dare SHOULD take an –s in the third person singular * he needs not go (vs. he needs to go) * she dares not go (vs. she dares not to go) who, whose (animate); which, of which (inanimate) The book whose author I know; the book, the author of which I know

61. References Burchfield, R. W. 1996. Fowler’s Modern English Usage. 3 rd ed. Oxford: OUP. Fowler, Henry Watson. and Francis George. Fowler. 1908. The King’s English. Oxford: Clarendon. Online edition: http://www.bartleby.com/116/ [1 st ed. 1906].http://www.bartleby.com/116/ Michael, Ian. 1970. English Grammatical Categories and the Tradition to 1800. Cambridge: CUP. Murray, Lindley. 1827. English Grammar. Bridgeport: Baldwin [1 st ed. 1795]. Online: http://books.google.com/books?id=ta8AAAAAYAAJ&dq=lindley%20murray%20englis h%20grammar&pg=PA1#v=onepage&q=&f=false http://books.google.com/books?id=ta8AAAAAYAAJ&dq=lindley%20murray%20englis h%20grammar&pg=PA1#v=onepage&q=&f=false Seidlhofer, Barbara. 2011. Understanding English as a Lingua Franca. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Tieken-Boon van Ostade, Ingrid. 2009. An Introduction to Late Modern English. Edinburgh: EUP. Yañez-Bouza, Nuria. 2008. Preposition stranding in the eighteenth century: Something to talk about. In: Tieken-Boon van Ostade (ed.) Grammars, Grammarians and Grammar Writing in Eighteenth-Century England. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 251-77.