Regional variation of pronunciation in the south-west of England

addition adjectival at times. This is further supported by the fact that

when presented with sentences of the type:

He turned that “hare “three “times and “he caught it.

the informant claimed that /рi-ki:/ would be equally acceptable and could

indicate no distinction. Thus there are pairs of sentences such as

I used to walk that there “two mile and “half.

You'd walk thicky “nine “mile.

or again

That finished “that job.

I wouldn’t have “thicky job.

There are certain cases where either one form or the other seems to be

required. In particular, /рat/ is used when actually indicating a size with

the hands:

Go up and see the stones “that length, “that thickness.

while /рi-ki:/ is used in contrast with /t?-рr/, where Standard English

would normally use ‘one’ or ‘the one’.

Soon as they got it “thicky hand, they’d thruck(?) it away with the

“tother.

In the adjective plural, the contrast between /рi-ki:/ and /рej/ is

not a real one, since /рi-ki:/ is found only with numerals.

I had thicky “eighteen “bob a “week.

I expect thicky “nine was all “one “man’s sheep.

When presented with /рi-ki:/ before plural nominals, the informant

rejected them. It would therefore be preferable to redefine ‘singular’ and

‘plural’ in the dialect to account for this, rather than to consider /рi-

ki:/ as a plural form; this would accordingly neutralize in the plural any

/рi-ki:/:/рat/ opposition which may exist in the singular.

In the pronominal system, there is only one occurrence of /рi-ki:/:

My missis bought “thicky before her “died (a radio).

It is true that most of the occurrences of /рal/ as a pronoun do not

refer to a specific antecedent, e.g. I can’t afford to do “that, but there

are a number of cases where /рat/ does play a role closely parallel to /рi-

ki:/ above.

As “I was passing “that, and “that was passing “me (a dog).

As there are no other examples of /рi-ki:/ as a singular pronoun,

either simply or as part of a ‘first’ or ‘second compound’, and no cases at

all in the plural, it seems fair to say that any /рat/:/рi-ki:/ opposition

is realized only in the singular adjective, and that here too it is

difficult to see what the basis of any opposition might be. A list of

representative examples of /рat/, /рat р?r/, /рi-ki:/ and /рi-ki: р?r/ is

given below, in their function as singular adjectives, so that they can

easily be compared.

/рat/

All they got to “do is steer that little “wheel a bit.

You’d put in “dynamite to blast that stone “off.

Us’d go “in that pub and have a pint of “beer.

/рat р?r/

I used to walk that there “two mile and “half.

Good as “gold, that there “thing was.

/рi-ki:/

All of us be in “thicky boat, you see.

‘Thicky “dog’, he said, ‘been there all “day?’

Stairs went up “there, like, “thicky side, “thicky end of the wall.

Thicky place would be “black with people . . .

I travelled thicky old road “four “ year . . .

What’s “thicky “little “place called, before you get up “Yelverton?

Thicky field, they’d “break it, they called it.

He was going to put me and Jan “up thicky night.

“Never been through thicky road “ since.

/рi-ki: р?r/

Jim Connell carted home thicky there jar of “cyder same as he carted

it “up.

We got in thicky there “field . . .

The morphological status of /рi:z/ and /рis/ as singulars, and of

/рejz/ and /рi:z/ as plurals has already been discussed. Syntactically,

their use seems to correspond to Standard English closely, except in one

important respect: the ‘first compound’ forms are used in a way similar to

a non-standard usage which is fairly widespread, in the sense of ‘a’ or ‘a

certain’.

/рi:z ji:r/

He’d got this here “dog.

You’d put this here great “crust on top.

The ‘first compound’ is never used as an equivalent to Standard

English ‘this’, being reserved for uses of the type above, although there

is another form /рi:z . . . ji:r/, which is occasionally used where

Standard English would show ‘this’, eg Between here and this village “here

like.

In the plural, an exactly parallel syntactic division occurs between

/рejz/ (cf Standard English ‘these’) and /рejz ji:r/.

These here “maidens that was here . . .

I used to put them in front of these here “sheds.

They got these here “hay-turners . . .

In all the above examples, the ‘first compounds’, both singular and

plural, refer to items which have not been mentioned before, and which are

not adjacent to the speaker; they are thus referentially distinct from the

normal use of Standard English ‘this’.

Although we can fairly say that /рi:z/ and /рejz/ are syntactically

distinct from their equivalent first compounds, what of the other adjective

compounds /рat р?r/, /рi-ki: р?r/ and /рej р?r/? There seems to be no

syntactic division in these cases between them and their equivalent simple

forms, so it is perhaps not surprising that Table 2 shows them to be

without exception much less common than /рi:z ji:r/ and /рejz ji:r/, which

have a distinct syntactic role. Forms such as

Us got in thicky there “field

and

Good as “gold, that there “thing was.

do not seem any different from

Us “mowed thicky little plat . . .

and

He turned that “hare “three “times . . .

There is certainly no apparent correlation with any notional degree of

emphasis.

In the case of the singular pronouns, the ‘first compounds’ are

extremely rare, cf.

He done “well with that there. (/рat р?r/)

He went out “broad, this here what’s “dead now. (/рi:z ji:r/).

The basic opposition here is between the simple forms and the ‘second

compounds’ /рis ji:r ji:r/ and /рat р?r р?r/. Here the syntactic division

is fairly clear: the second compounds are used in certain adverbial

phrases, particularly after ‘like’, where the demonstrative refers to no

specific antecedent:

Tis getting like this here “here.

I’ve had to walk home “after that there there.

and also, with reference to a specific antecedent, when particular emphasis

is drawn to the item in question.

I’ve had the “wireless there, this here “here, for “good many years.

One of these here “crocks, something like that there “there.

In all other cases, the simple forms are used.

“This was coming “this way.

Then he did meet with “this.

That’s “one “bad “job, “that was.

/рat/ is used particularly frequently in two phrases, ‘likes of that

and ‘and that’.

He doed a bit of “farmering and likes of “that.

I got a “jumper and that home “now.

The last question is one of the most interesting. Is there really only

one form /рej/ functioning as a plural pronoun? At first sight, this would

seem improbable, given that there is a plural adjective form /рejz/ and

that the 'this':'that' opposition is maintained elsewhere in the system.

However, all attempts to elicit such a form failed, and there is at least

one spontaneous utterance where, if a form /рejz/ did exist as a pronoun,

it might be expected to appear:

There’s “thousands of acres out there would grow it better than they

in “here grow it.

Taking all these factors together, we tentatively suggest that the

opposition ‘this’:’that’ is neutralized in this position, even though this

seems rather unlikely, given the adjectival system.

But there is another point. It is in fact difficult to identify

occurrences of /рej/ as demonstratives with any certainty, because the form

is identical with that of the personal pronoun /рej/ (Standard English

‘they’ or ‘them’).

We may observe at this point that in the dialect, the third plural

personal pronoun forms are /рej/ and /?m/. The first form is used in all

stressed positions and as unstressed subject except in inverted Q-forms;

the second is used as the unstressed non-subject, and as the unstressed

subject in inverted Q-forms. Thus we find:

/рej/

“I had to show the pony but “they winned the cups.

I could chuck “they about.

That’s up to “they, they know what they’m a”bout of.

They’d take ‘em back of your “door for half-a-crown.

/?m/

They expect to have a “name to the house, “don’t ‘em?

Where do ‘em get the “tools to?

That was as far as “ever they paid ‘em.

I stayed there “long with ‘em for more than a “year.

When considering /рej/, we find a series of utterances such as the

following in which a division between personal and demonstrative pronouns

would be largely arbitrary.

I could “throw ‘em. chuck “they about.

“They in “towns, they go to concerts,

Us finished up with “they in ...

They do seven acres a “day, now, with “they.

There is “they that take an “interest in it.

I could cut in so straight (as) some of “they that “never do it.

Although, following the system of Standard English, we have so far

differentiated between /рej/ as a stressed personal pronoun and /рej/ as a

demonstrative pronoun, it is clearly more economical, in terms of the

dialectal material, to consider the two functions as coalescing within one

system: STRESSED /рej/; UNSTRESSED /?m/. This system would operate in all

positions where Standard English would show either a third person plural

personal pronoun, or a plural demonstrative pronoun. Similarly, there is a

dialectal system STRESSED /рat/ UNSTRESSED /it/ in the third person

singular, where the referent is abstract or non-specific, in that /рat/

never occurs unstressed nor /it/ stressed. Thus in contrast to the last

example above, we find:

I seed some of ‘em that never walked a “mile in their “lives,

where the form /?m/ is unstressed. (Such unstressed examples are much rarer

than stressed examples in positions where Standard English would show a

demonstrative pronoun simply because ‘those’ is normally stressed in

Standard English.)

We should note finally, however, that this analysis of the material

does not in any way explain the absence of a plural pronoun /рejz/, any

more than the linking of /рat/ with /it/ precludes the existence of a

singular demonstrative pronoun /рi:z/. The non-existence of /рejz/ as a

pronoun seems best considered as an accidental gap in the corpus.” (№18,

p.20 )

3.6 Verbs.

- In the south-western dialects in the singular and in the plural in

Present Indefinite the ending ‘-s’ or ‘-es’ is used, if the Subject

is expressed as

a noun.

e.g. Boys as wants more mun ask.

The other ehaps works hard.

- In Devonshire ‘-th’ [р] is added to verbs in the plural in Present

Indefinite.

- The form ‘am’ (’m) of the verb ‘to be’ is used after the personal

pronouns:

e.g. We (wem = we are) (Somersetshire)

you, they

- After the words ‘if’, ‘when’, ‘until’, ‘after’ Future Indefinite

sometimes used.

- The Perfect form in affirmative sentences, in which the Subject is

expressed as a personal pronoun, is usually built without the

auxiliary verb ‘have’:

e.g. We done it.

I seen him.

They been and taken it.

- The negation in the south-western dialects is expressed with the

adding of the negative particle ‘not’ in the form ‘-na’ to the

verb.

e.g. comesna (comes not)

winna (= will not)

sanna (= shall not)

canna (= cannot)

maunna (= must not)

sudna (= should not)

dinna (= do not)

binna (= be not)

haena (= have not)

daurna (= dare not)

- It is typical to the south-western dialects to use too many

nigotiations in the same phrase:

e.g. I yin’t seen nobody nowheres.

I don’t want to have nothing at all to say to you.

I didn’t mean no harm.

Ye’ll better jist nae detain me nae langer.

- The negative and interrogative forms of the modal verbs are built

with the help of the auxiliary verb ‘do’.

e.g. He did not ought to do it.

You do not ought to hear it.

- Some verbs which are regular in the Standard language become

irregular in the south-western dialects:

e.g. dive - dave, help - holp

- Sometimes the ending ‘-ed’ is added to some irregular verbs in the

Past Simple:

e.g. bear - borned, begin - begunned, break - broked, climb - clombed,

dig - dugged, dive - doved, drive - droved, fall - felled, find

-

funded, fly - flewed, give - gaved, grip - grapped, hang -

hunged,

help - holped, hold - helded, know - knewed, rise - rosed, see -

sawed, shake - shooked, shear - shored, sing - sunged, sink -

sunked, spin - spunned, spring - sprunged, steal - stoled,

strive -

stroved, swear - swored, swim - swammed, take - tooked, tear -

tored, wear - wored, weave - woved, write - wroted.

- But some irregular verbs in the Past Simple Tense are used as

regular:

e.g. begin - beginned (Western Som., Dev.)

bite - bited (W. Som.)

blow - blowed (Dev.)

drink - drinked (W. Som.)

drive - drived (Dev.)

fall - falled (W. Som., Dev.)

fight - fighted (W. Som.)

fall - falled (Som., Dev.)

go - gade (Dev.)

grow - growed (W. Som.)

hang - hanged (W. Som.)

lose - losed (W. Som., Dev.)

ring - ringed (W. Som.)

speak - speaked (Som.)

spring - springed (W. Som., Dev.)

- Many verbs form the Past Participle with the help of the ending ‘-n’.

e.g. call - callen

catch - catchen

come - comen

- In some cases in the Past Participle a vowel in the root is

changed, and the suffix is not added.

e.g. catch - [k t?]

hit - [a:t]

lead - [la:d]

- In the south-western dialects intransitive verbs have the ending ‘-

y’ [?].

- In Western Somersetshire before the infinitive in the function of

the adverbial modifier of purpose ‘for’ is used:

e.g. Hast gotten a bit for mend it with? (= Have you got anything to

mend it with?)

3.7 Adverbs.

- In the south-western dialects an adjective is used instead of the

adverb.

e.g. You might easy fall.

- To build the comparative degree ‘far’ is used instead of ‘further’;

‘laster’ instead of ‘more lately’.

- The suparative degree: ‘farest’; ‘lastest’; ‘likerest’; ‘rathest’.

a) The adverbs of place:

abeigh [?b?x] - ‘at some distance’

abune, aboon - ‘above’

ablow - ‘under’

ben, benn - ‘inside’

outbye [utba?] - ‘outside’

aboot - ‘around’

hine, hine awa - ‘far’

ewest - ‘near’

b) The adverbs of the mode of action:

hoo, foo - ‘how’

weel - ‘great’

richt - ‘right’

ither - ‘yet’

sae - ‘so’

c) The adverbs of degree:

much

e.g. How are you today? - Not much, thank you.

‘much’ is also used in the meaning of ‘wonderfully’

e.g. It is much you boys can’t let alone they there ducks.

It was much he hadn’t a been a killed.

rising

‘rising’ is often used in the meaning of ‘nearly’

e.g. How old is the boy? - He’s rising five.

- ‘fell’, ‘unco’, ‘gey’, ‘huge’, ‘fu’, ‘rael’ are used in the meaning of

‘very’.

- ower, owre [aur] - ‘too’

- maist - ‘nearly’

- clean - ‘at all’

- that - ‘so’

- feckly - ‘in many cases’

- freely - ‘fully’

- naarhan, nighhan - ‘nearly’

- han, fair - ‘at all’

d) Adverbs of time:

whan, fan - ‘when’

belive, belyve - ‘now’

yinst - ‘at once’

neist - ‘then’

fernyear - ‘last year’

afore (= before)

e.g. Us can wait avore you be ready, sir.

next - ‘in some time’

e.g. next day = the day after tomorrow

while = till, if

e.g. You’ll never make any progress while you listen to me.

You have to wait while Saturday.

3.8 Transitivity and intransivity in the dialects of South-West

England.

One of the most important aspects of studying south-western English is

dialect syntax. So, the article by Jean-Marc Gachelin can give us much

information about transitivity and intransitivity in the dialects of South-

West England.

“Wakelin has pointed out that ‘syntax is an unwieldy subject which

dialectologists have fought shy of’. This brushing aside of dialect syntax

is regrettable because the study of grammatical variation can shed light on

the workings of any language, and thereby enrich general linguistics. The

present chapter deals with an area of dialect syntax - transitivity in

south-west of England dialects - and attempts to characterize and explain,

synchronically and diachronically, its salient features.

We prefer the moderation of Kilby, who simply admits that the notion

of direct object (DO) ‘is not at all transparent in its usage’. The

problem, therefore, should be not so much to discard but rather to improve

our notions of transitivity and intransitivity. In this regard, the

dialects of South-west England are important and interesting.

1. A description of transitivity and intransitivity in the dialects of

South-west England.

When compared with the corresponding standard language, any

geographical variety may be characterized by three possibilities:

(a) identity; (b) archaism (due to slower evolution); and (c)

innovation. Interestingly enough, it is not uncommon in syntax for (b) and

(c) to combine if a given dialect draws extensively on a secondary aspect

of an older usage. This is true of two features which are highly

characteristic of the South-west and completely absent in contemporary

Standard English.

1.1 Infinitive + y

One of these characteristics is mentioned by Wakelin, the optional

addition of the -y ending to the infinitive of any real intransitive verb

or any transitive verb not followed by a DO, namely object-deleting verbs

(ODVs) and ergatives. The use of this ending is not highlighted in the

Survey of English Dialects (SED, Orton and Wakelin). It is only indirectly,

when reading about relative pronouns, that we come upon There iddn (=

isn’t) many (who) can sheary now, recorded in Devon (Orton and Wakelin).

However, Widen gives the following examples heard in Dorset: farmy,

flickery, hoopy (‘to call’), hidy, milky, panky (‘to pant’), rooty (talking

of a pig), whiny. Three of these verbs are strictly intransitive (ftickery,

panky, whiny), the others being ODVs. Wright also mentions this

characteristic, chiefly in connection with Devon, Somerset and Dorset.

In the last century, Barnes made use of the -y ending in his Dorset

poems, both when the infinitive appears after to:

reдky = ‘rake’

skimmy

drashy = ‘thresh’

reely

and after a modal (as in the example from the SED):

Mid (= may) happy housen smoky round/The church.

The cat veil zick an’ woulden mousy.

Страницы: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7