Covert Prestige and Dialect Change in Glasgow Bob Kakisina
S4254929
Radboud University Nijmegen
BA Thesis English Linguistics Prof. dr. A van Kemenade
Abstract
This research considers different contributory factors for dialect change, i.e. mobility and dialect contact, class, broadcast media, local identity, and language ideology, and how these factors apply to dialect change in Glasgow. The focus lies on the working-class in Glasgow, where a covert prestige enforces the way most linguistic changes take place in this city. By reviewing literature on the discussion regarding dialect change and Glaswegian, this research will discuss how different contributory factors influence dialect change generally, and how this relates to Glasgow specifically. On the basis of three small case studies, several apparent linguistic changes will be analysed, and how these are motivated by different contributory factors. It appears that a sense of covert prestige, resulting from Glasgow's stigmatized, working-class image, can account for many surprising changes in the Glasgow dialect, which instead of showing more signs of being affected by the spread of southern English characteristics, is more subject to local changes.
Keywords: dialect change, covert prestige, Glasgow, Glaswegian, media influence, local identity, social practices
Table of Contents 1. Introduction
2. Background
2.1 Regional Dialect Levelling in Britain 2.2 The City of Glasgow: An Overview 2.2.1 History of Glasgow
2.2.2 Glasgow's class system
2.2.3 Attitudes towards Glaswegian dialect 2.3 Contributory Factors for Dialect Change 2.3.1 Social and geographical mobility 2.3.2 Spoken media and dialect change 2.3.3 Local identity
3. Research Question and Case Studies
3.1 Case Study: L-Vocalization and Spoken Media
3.2 Case Study: T-Glottaling, Clear /l/, and Local Glaswegian Identity 3.3 Case Study: Neds, CAT, and (θ) Variation
4. Discussion
4.2 Spoken Media and Dialect Change 4.3 Masculinity and 'Toughness' in Glasgow 5. Conclusion
References
1. Introduction
Previous research in the field of sociolinguistically informed dialectology has repeatedly pointed out the concept of dialect levelling as the main force behind dialect change in the UK (e.g. Kerswill, 2003; Kerswill & Williams, 2000; Milroy, Milroy, Hartley, & Walshaw, 1994), with London being the principal source of current linguistic innovations in Britain. Dialect levelling is motivated and accelerated by a combination of contributory factors, such as social and geographical mobility (Kerswill, 2003; Macafee, 1983), spoken media (Stuart-Smith, Pryce, Timmins, & Gunter, 2013), and local identity and language attitudes (Braber & Butterfint, 2008; Lawson, 2011). The case for Glasgow is interesting taken alongside the city's unique working-class character, with most dialect innovations being propelled by less mobile, working-working-class adolescents (Stuart-Smith, Timmins, & Tweedie, 2007). Looking at the linguistic changes that are happening in Glasgow at this moment, it appears that the Glasgow dialect firmly retains local features (while in some cases they have changed in their own way), with only few instances of adopting southern (London) English. This raises the question as to what extent Glasgow’s infamous working-class reputation and the covert prestige this gives to young working-class speakers, influences dialect change in this city.
This paper will investigate how different factors influence Glaswegian dialect change, paying special attention to Glaswegian working-class identity, class differences, media influence and attitudes towards language. The results will ultimately lead to answering the research
question as to what extent dialect change in Glasgow is motivated by the dialect's covert prestige. After explaining the concept of dialect levelling, chapter 2 contains a brief overview of
depraved, violent and crime-ridden city came about. Subsequently, the general attitudes and ideologies surrounding Glasgow and the Glaswegian dialect are analysed. The following sections will analyse different contributory factors for dialect change, and how these factors apply in the context of Glasgow. In the three small case studies that follow, a few specific linguistic changes will be analysed along with the different mechanisms that bring about these changes. The first case study on L-vocalization will focus on the possible media influences for the spread of this feature among working-class adolescents in Glasgow. The next case study will discuss to what extent the concept of local identity (for both working-class and middle-class speakers) is linked to the spread of two linguistic variables in Glasgow: T-glottaling and 'clear' /l/, which represent a traditional and stigmatized Glaswegian feature and an innovative, southern English feature respectively. The final case study will again look at working-class adolescents, but focuses on how within an apparently homogenous group of young males there appears to be considerable variation in the use of Glaswegian linguistic features. Finally, in light of these three case studies, it will become apparent that dialect change in Glasgow is enforced by a complex intersection of factors which in turn all appear to be linked to the dialect's covert prestige.
2. Background 2.1 Regional Dialect Levelling in Britain
Regional dialect change is widespread in Britain. Kerswill (2003) describes 'regional dialect levelling’ as leading to the loss of local features in British dialects, which are
subsequently replaced by features used over a wider region. Two possible mechanisms are said to be responsible for this phenomenon: 'geographical diffusion' and 'levelling'. Geographical diffusion is the spread of certain new features from a densely populated, politically and culturally dominant region to other nearby regions. Through direct contact, speakers from the nearby regions choose, for all manners of reasons, to adopt the new varieties used by speakers from the dominant region. It has been repeatedly argued that London is the main source of linguistic variation in Britain. With a population of 8.5 million, the regions around the London area are more susceptible to geographical diffusion.
'Levelling' is the result of a certain type of speech accommodation, where speakers of different but mutually intelligible dialects avoid 'marked' (i.e. standing out as highly local) forms when conversing with one another. The long-term result is that the differences between the two dialects are levelled out, and this can lead to the formation of a new dialect that lacks the highly
local forms. Levelling happens locally, whereas geographical diffusion covers a much wider area in Britain (pp. 1-3).
Regional dialect levelling in Britain appears to be happening at an increasing rate in recent years. This has been attributed to a number of different factors, including mobility, dialect contact, and media influence (e.g. Milroy, 2002; Stuart-Smith et al., 2013; Kerswill, 2003). The general idea is that in recent years many speakers in Britain come into contact with other regional dialects (both face-to-face contact and through broadcast media) more easily and more often, which in turn results in a weakening of their own group-internal linguistic norms. This increases the speakers' receptiveness of linguistic innovations, and makes them more willing to take up diffusing changes. Because every speech community (in Britain) is different and has its own social structure, the social-psychological mechanisms of dialect levelling determine the way in which dialect levelling takes place in a community, and which linguistic features are more readily accepted. On dialect levelling in Newcastle for example, Foulkes and Docherty (1999) say that (young) speakers take up linguistic features which they perceive as modern and 'new', accommodating to speakers whom they perceive as socially attractive because of their
'modernity'. This means avoiding particularly local features and adopting non-local ones.
Using language as a way to influence how speakers are perceived by others, and thereby forging a personal identity, is a central theme in dialect levelling in Britain, and indeed in Glasgow.
2.2 The City of Glasgow: An Overview
Dialect change in Glasgow is intrinsically linked to the city's history, social structure and socio-economic circumstances. This chapter sets out to give a brief overview of the city's
turbulent history and its social problems, and how this has affected attitudes towards Glasgow and the Glaswegian dialect, both inside and outside of the city.
2.2.1 History of Glasgow. Aside from being the third largest city in Britain, Glasgow is specifically a Scottish city. When the city expanded after the industrial revolution, it received large numbers of migrants from Ireland and the Highlands of Scotland, where Celtic ethnicity
remained politically and culturally significant (Macafee, 1983, p. 7). The city thrived on heavy industry, trade, and shipbuilding, which by the end of the nineteenth century had made Glasgow one of the richest cities in the world (pp. 10-12). Glasgow was hit hard by the Depression that followed the First World War, when the city's major industries were severely truncated. Unemployment rose to almost one third in the early 1930s. By the time of the Recession in the 1950s, Glasgow had only attracted 29 per cent new industry, compared with a national average of 36 per cent, while unemployment was twice the national average (p. 12). Unemployment continued to increase in the 1960s and 1970s, which came with many of Glasgow's social problems for which the city became notorious. It was during this time that Glasgow's infamous slums were demolished, and its inhabitants were mainly relocated into new suburban estates called 'schemes', which quickly turned into newly deprived areas (p. 16). This resulted in a damaging social segregation between rich and poor areas, and a great deal of working-class resentment against these unpopular housing policies. Alcohol and drug abuse became widespread and violent youth gangs roamed the city which resulted in a moral panic at the time. Nowadays, Glasgow still ranks among the most violent cities in Western Europe, with life expectancies among the lowest in Europe, but the city has also been going through a period of regeneration in the last few years. Glasgow has become relatively more peaceful in the last decade (“Glasgow ranked UK's most,” 2013), and the city has reinvented itself as a major cultural hub, well-known for its vibrant music scene. In 2014, the same year that Glasgow was ranked as the most violent city in the UK, it was also voted 'friendliest city in the world' in a poll by travel publisher Rough Guides (“The world’s friendliest cities,” 2014). Despite Glasgow's recent regeneration, the effects of decades of degeneration and class-divide are still visible.
2.2.2 Glasgow's class system. Glasgow is socially stratified into the working classes and the numerically weak middle classes. (Glasgow's upper class are practically non-existent)
(Macafee, 1983, pp. 25-26). There is a high level of class-consciousness in Glasgow: the working class struggled after the Great Depression against the loss of jobs and later on against eviction from their homes. This resulted in a high level of working class solidarity and
resentment of the middle class, who are nowadays still widely perceived as snobbish and posh. Anecdotal evidence provided by Stuart-Smith et al. (2007) suggests that middle-class
Glaswegians in general strongly reject Glaswegian vernacular features, and rather maintain the regional standard, going as far as rejecting themselves as speakers of 'Glaswegian'. Although there appears to be some evidence that certain vernacular features are finding their way into middle-class speech (see for example Macfarlane & Stuart-Smith, 2012; Braber & Butterfint, 2008), it seems that what is considered the 'Glaswegian dialect' is primarily the speech, or 'slang',
of the working-class, as opposed to 'proper speech' preferred by the middle-class. The rest of this paper will indeed consider Glaswegian to be predominantly working-class speech.
2.2.3 Attitudes towards Glaswegian dialect. Just as the city of Glasgow has long suffered from its reputation as a degenerated and violent city, so too has the Glasgow dialect historically been heavily stereotyped and stigmatized. Macafee (1983) quotes a university lecturer who stated that “The accent of the lowest state of Glaswegians is the ugliest accent one can encounter . . . but that is partly because it is associated with the unwashed and the violent” (p. 27). This reflects the poor reputation of Glasgow in general during the city's 'moral panic' in the 1960s and 70s, when the working class dialect became associated with Glasgow's social problems (Macafee, 1983, p. 28). Since then attitudes towards the Glaswegian dialect have been more liberal, with broad Glaswegian being heard on popular Scottish television shows such as the popular Limmy's Show and on local radio stations such as Radio Clyde. Despite this more liberal attitude towards Glaswegian, a feeling of working class insecurity still lingers on. A study by Macaulay from 1975 investigated attitudes towards localised Glasgow speech, and this showed a pattern of 'linguistic insecurity' among working class Glaswegians, who seemed to negatively evaluate their own type of speech and showed a lack of confidence when interacting with the middle class. This negative evaluation did not necessarily reflect individual opinions, but in many cases it reflects the general, dominant ideology towards working class speech of the time (as cited in Macafee, 1983, 27). Sixteen years later, Menzies (1991) investigated attitudes to the Glasgow dialect among secondary school pupils in Glasgow, which showed that linguistic insecurity was still present in young speakers of Glaswegian. Despite a generally strong feeling of national (Scots) and regional (Glasgow) identity, there appeared to be an underlying negative evaluation of their own dialect. They perceived words that are typically used in Glaswegian as
'slang', as opposed to 'proper speech'. At the same time however, the children displayed an almost indignant sort of pride in their Glaswegian identity, a feeling that appears to be shared with many working class Glaswegians. Braber and Butterfint (2008) state that
anecdotal evidence suggests that in spite of this negativity, or perhaps even because of it, many Glaswegians are fiercely proud of Glasgow and use Glaswegian, with its covert prestige to signal solidarity among working-class speakers and the desire to maintain distinctiveness from other social groups. (p. 25)
Research by Macafee (1983) and Stuart-Smith et al. (2007) indicates a strong disdain among working class schoolchildren for the middle class and 'proper speech', an attitude which has gone largely unchanged in the last few decades. To illustrate, Macafee (1983) cites an interview conducted in 1977: “Whenever you are out with your friends and you accidentally say something politely then they laugh at you and say you are a snob” (p. 26). In an interview with
schoolchildren conducted thirty years later, Stuart-Smith et al. (2007) note: “posh people are pure poofs [slang = gay]” and “everybody talks like us . . . an’ then if you don’t talk like that you get a doing, an’ you get bullied for the rest of your wee, your life” (pp. 253-54).
The sense of covert prestige associated with the Glaswegian dialect is arguably the most important factor for the way it is changing, and sets it apart from dialect change in many other parts of Britain. Whereas young speakers in other parts of Britain, such as Newcastle for example (see section 2.3.3), seem to be moving away from 'old-fashioned' local features and adopting 'new' ones, young Glaswegian speakers appear to firmly retain their local features to emphasize their identity as Glaswegians.
Dialect change in Britain has been identified as being mainly the result of dialect levelling, which in turn is propelled by a combination of factors “working together, from the fragmentation of social networks and enhanced opportunities for geographical mobility, to the association of social meanings with variation during shared social practices and developing social identities” (Stuart-Smith et al., 2013, p. 505). This chapter will set out to discuss the different main factors for dialect change generally, and how they apply to Glaswegian specifically.
2.3.1 Social and geographical mobility. Kerswill (2003) states that increased
opportunities for social and geographical mobility can motivate and accelerate dialect levelling in a region. Many countries in western Europe, including Britain, experienced an increase in geographical and social mobility after the second World War, which allowed regional dialect levelling to take place at a much faster rate than before. A high degree of geographical mobility, manifested in emigration and different forms of short-distance travelling such as commuting, should result in a high degree of linguistic contact and the disruption of close-knit networks. Speakers will subsequently be more susceptible to linguistic changes, and this allows these changes to move rapidly across the language area (p. 2). Conversely, a low degree of geographical mobility would typically indicate a close-knit network in which speakers are strongly tied, and are more likely to resist linguistic change.
A high degree of social mobility provides the opportunity for individuals to move within or between social strata in society. For example, a working-class individual who has realistic expectations of joining a higher class, either through marriage or employment (upward social mobility), may adopt the outward characteristics of the higher class, e.g. a certain type of speech (Macafee, 1983, p. 26).
The mobility-factor in Glasgow is indeed involved in dialect change, but not in the way that is typical for dialect change elsewhere in Britain, i.e. a highly mobile population being linked to rapid dialect change. Middle-class Glaswegians have been shown to be relatively (geographically) mobile, and frequently maintain linguistic contact with speakers outside of Glasgow, including ‘English English’ speakers. Despite this, weakly-tied, mobile middle-class speakers have been shown to maintain traditional Scottish features as opposed to a movement towards English English through levelling. It has been suggested (e.g. Johnston, 1985; Stuart-Smith et al., 2007) that language ideology, specifically middle-class rejection of vernacular features, prompts these speakers to maintain the regional (Scottish) standard. Previous research on linguistic variation in Glasgow (e.g. Macafee, 1983; Aitken, 1984; Stuart-Smith et al., 2007; Stuart-Smith et al., 2013), has repeatedly pointed out that relatively immobile, working-class adolescents are the biggest users of non-standard linguistic forms, and the main innovators in dialect change in Glasgow. According to Stuart-Smith et al. (2007), these speakers are “using all possible linguistic resources to construct identities which are as middle-class, and anti-establishment as possible” (p. 251). An important factor for upwards social mobility is the availability of suitable jobs (Macafee, 1983, p. 26). Glasgow's historically high level of
unemployment has therefore made upward social mobility relatively difficult for working-class Glaswegians. Beside the lack of opportunities for upward social mobility, or perhaps because of it, many working-class Glaswegians take great pride in their working-class nature, a form of covert prestige, and are less likely to be motivated to move upwards in society, partly due to the city's history of conflict between the working-class and middle-class. Geographical mobility for working-class Glaswegians also remains difficult, partly as a result of Glasgow's rehousing
policies that started in the 60s and 70s which have left few opportunities to escape poor council housing in many areas of Glasgow (p. 226).
Social and geographical mobility, or rather the lack thereof, has shown to be a key factor in Glaswegian dialect change. Geographical diffusion brought about by increased mobility may therefore not be the main 'motor' behind dialect change in Glasgow. It is more likely that levelling on a local level is more important here.
2.3.2 Spoken media and dialect change. It was initially thought that the arrival of widespread broadcast (spoken) media at the turn of the 20th century would lead to significant
structural changes in spoken language in Britain, specifically the diminishing of dialect variety (Stuart-Smith et al., 2013, p. 503). Decades of exposure to (standard) language varieties directly into people's homes have not shown to have had a significant effect on language change, and sociolinguists have generally considered the influence of media on dialect change in Britain to be weak. Broadcast media influence seems to be limited to transmission of vocabulary and phrases (Trudgill, 1986; Rice & Woodsmall, 1988; Charkova, 2007), improving the intelligibility of standard accents (Clopper & Bradlow, 2008), and greater awareness of regional dialect diversity in Britain (Milroy & Milroy, 1999), whereas the primary factor for linguistic change remains face-to-face contact between speakers.
There are a number of linguistic features traditionally associated with the London working-class accent which have found their way into the Glaswegian dialect in recent years, such as TH-fronting ([f] for [θ] in e.g. thought), leading to a 'new' dialect which the media have mockingly dubbed 'Jockney' (a combination of jock = working-class Scot plus Cockney). Although it has been suggested that media exposure does not have a significant effect on dialect change in Britain, Stuart-Smith et al. (2013) argue that in the context of Glasgow, broadcast
media could contribute to the standardization of the Glaswegian regional dialect, and may help accelerate ongoing diffusing linguistic changes (p. 503).
2.3.3 Local identity. The concept of local identity and national identity is linked with an individual's sense of belonging to a community, which is usually manifested in a feeling of 'us' versus 'them', and contrasting in different ways, including linguistically, with what is different to them (Braber & Butterfint, 2008, p. 23). On a national level, Scotland has always maintained a strong sense of distinct identity from its dominant southern neighbour England, i.e. a sense of being 'Scottish' as opposed to 'British'. This paper is concerned with identity on a local level and how identities are formed by being, for example, born and raised in Glasgow. Previous research on other British dialects, e.g. in Middlesborough (Llamas, 2007), Berwick (Pichler & Watt, 2004) and Durham (Kerswill, 2002) suggests that speakers who feel more connected to their local region tend to use more local language variants. For example, Kerswill (2003) discusses how local identities can affect regional dialect levelling by comparing linguistic changes in the north eastern cities of Durham and Middlesborough, as researched by Kerswill (1984) and Llamas (2007) respectively. Both cities are adopting features from the nearby Geordie 'heartland' of Tyneside (which includes Newcastle), although Middlesborough speakers are also adopting TH-fronting, a variant not found in Tyneside, to distinguish themselves. Middlesborough speakers showed a strong dislike for the Newcastle accent, and would strongly object to being labelled as 'Geordies', whereas Durham speakers seemed to strongly identify with the Geordie heartland, and showed a strongly positive attitude towards the Newcastle accent, illustrating that regional identities can significantly affect the way regional dialect levelling takes place.
In the context of Glasgow, a strong sense of local, working-class identity is what sets Glasgow apart from many other places in Britain, and could be one of the main factors for dialect
change in this city. Research on identity in Glasgow (e.g. Braber & Butterfint, 2008; Braber, 2009) has shown that despite Glasgow's heavily stereotyped reputation, many working-class Glaswegians are proud of the city they come from which is manifested in a strong feeling of belonging to their local community, a feeling of 'us' versus 'them', with 'them' on a national level being those outside of Glasgow, and 'them' on a local level being the middle-class, 'posh people', or anyone else representing the 'establishment'. Again, this goes to show that covert prestige is a central theme here.
3. Research Question and Case Studies
The research question for this paper is: to what extent is dialect change in Glasgow motivated by the dialect's covert prestige? The contributory factors for dialect change that have been discussed suggest a link between Glaswegian dialect change and a sense of covert prestige for young working-class Glaswegian speakers. This chapter includes three small case studies discussing a few specific linguistic features currently appearing or spreading in the Glaswegian dialect: L-vocalization, T-glottaling, 'clear' /l/, and (θ) variation. In order to answer the research question, each case study, based on previous research, will look at dialect change in different contexts. The first case study on L-vocalization focuses on the supposed media influence on the spread of this feature, and how this applies to working-class adolescents specifically. The second case study investigates two phonological features, T-glottaling and 'clear' /l/, and to what extent the use of these features are directly linked to local identity. The final case study will analyse (θ) variation among working-class adolescent males, and how this is linked to 'Community of Practice' membership. This chapter will be followed by a detailed discussion on the role of covert prestige in Glasgow based on the evidence provided by these case studies.
This small case study of two types of L-vocalization in Glasgow draws on empirical evidence from Stuart-Smith, Timmins, and Tweedie (2006), and Stuart-Smith et al. (2013). Stuart-Smith et al. (2006) describe two different types of L-vocalization present in Glaswegian vernacular Scots: traditional Scots L-vocalization and a 'new' kind of L-vocalization typical for Cockney and South East London English. This case study will discuss different factors
propelling the spread of new L-vocalization including exposure to spoken media, and social practices and social meaning. The results ultimately lead back to the Glaswegian dialect's covert prestige.
The Glaswegian dialect is known for maintaining a traditional Scots variant called Scots L-vocalization, which affects /l/ after short vowels, leading to a small set of lexically determined alternations of /l ~ V/ (V = vowel) in e.g. a’/all, shooder/shoulder, gowd/gold. Based on two corpora of Glaswegian, one collected in 1984/5 (see Macafee, 1988) and the other in 1997 (see Stuart-Smith, 1999), traditional Scots L-vocalization was found to be used extensively by the working-class, and almost categorically by working-class adolescents whenever this type of vocalization was possible, whereas it was found to be completely absent in middle-class speech (Stuart-Smith et al., 2006, pp. 76-77). By comparing the results from the two corpora, there appears to be no evidence for any real-time increase in the usage of Scots L-vocalization, nor any significant gender differences in the usage of this feature, demonstrating that this feature of Glaswegian is being well maintained.
It has also been found that a seemingly non-local, innovative variant, which has been called 'new' L-vocalization (the vocalization of coda /l/ in e.g. milk, people), appears to be spreading rapidly among working-class adolescents in Glasgow since the late 1990s. This new type of L-vocalization, traditionally associated with the South East of England and London in
particular, has also apparently started to spread into RP recently, and is likely to become entirely standard in English over the course of the next century (p. 78). It would seem paradoxical considering the great ideological and geographical distance between Glasgow and the south of England, that such a feature is spreading so quickly among Glaswegian working-class speakers.
Stuart-Smith et al. (2006) analysed 'new' L-vocalization for every phonetic environment where it could occur (so excluding instances where 'old' Scots L-vocalization can occur) across four groups of speakers in Glasgow (i.e. young working-class, older working-class, young middle-class, and older middle-class speakers) to see to what extent the factors of age, class, and age/class were significant for the usage of this feature (the factor of gender played no significant role it was found). Out of the four groups, the young (adolescent) working-class speakers stood out significantly from the other groups as vocalizing the most by far, which indeed identifies these speakers as the innovators of this type of L-vocalization (p. 82).
This still leaves the question as to why this southern English feature is rapidly accelerating among young working-class Glaswegians. Stuart-Smith et al. (2013) go on to investigate the possible extralinguistic factors for the spread of L-vocalization. When the rapid spread of Cockney features such as L-vocalization and TH-fronting (see section 3.3.) among young working-class Glaswegians was discovered in the late 1990s, the media themselves were quick to establish a link to so called 'media-Cockney', a form of London, working-class English often heard in television shows, of which the London based drama EastEnders enjoys
considerable popularity with working-class Glaswegian adolescents (see Lawson, 2011; Stuart-Smith et al., 2013). However, it seems unlikely that non-standard features are simply being copied from TV, since interview data show that there seems to be no desire (or ability) among these viewers to speak in a Cockney accent. In an experiment by Stuart-Smith et al. (2013),
where the respondents were asked to mimic the informal London accents from the show, none managed to successfully do so. During the experiment, some comments were observed regarding this accent:
“1. ‘s just (.) pure English, no? 2. [he] says it posher
3. he talks more tough 4. Ah cannae talk like him
5. It’s aw right (.) I wouldnae like to speak like it but” (p. 529).
Note that this working-class Cockney accent is referred to here as 'posh' (which would be difficult for someone from England to understand), demonstrating the cultural and social distance between Glasgow and London. So instead of young speakers taking these Cockney variables directly off the media 'shelf', ensuing research on the influence of spoken media on language change in Glasgow demonstrated that television can have an accelerating effect on language change which is already in progress, seeing as instances of L-vocalization have been reported in Glasgow as early as the 1950s (p. 501). The Glasgow Media Project, a long-term program of research investigating the relationships between broadcast media and language variation and change in Glasgow suggests a link between sound change and active engagement with television, and the television show EastEnders in particular (Stuart-Smith et al., 2013). Running since 1985, EastEnders is a heavily dramatized depiction of everyday, mostly working-class life in inner-city East London, and features many controversial issues faced by (working-class) Britons. The exact figures for the viewing audience have varied over the years, but at the time of this study, EastEnders reached around 7.2 million viewers per episode, and airing four times a week. Regular viewers are therefore heavily exposed to 'media-Cockney', and the “wide
appeal and the format of the drama, which concentrates on the lives of seemingly ordinary people, means that viewers can and do become highly engaged emotionally and psychologically with the characters and their stories” (Stuart-Smith et al., 2013, p. 506). In this study,
'engagement with EastEnders' is captured in different variables such as speakers naming it as a favourite television show, speakers having a favourite character, and/or verbally criticizing the characters while watching it (p. 529). The results suggest that active engagement with
EastEnders could in fact play some kind of role in the spread of new L-vocalization.
Engagement with this show in particular was the second strongest extralinguistic factor that was analysed, although the influence of EastEnders was limited to the weak transfer of these media-Cockney features at a personal and almost covert or subconscious level. “Cognitive
psychological models of media influence propose that viewers use their stored experience of the world, organized into schema, to decode the media texts that they watch” (p. 530). Young working-class Glaswegians may hear instances of Cockney L-vocalization on EastEnders and associate it with 'toughness', or working-class speech, and the speaker has to integrate this feature within their already existing linguistic system, in this case 'old' Scots L-vocalization, which may help in accelerating the diffusion of 'new' L-vocalization.
Stuart-Smith et al. (2013) provide some evidence for the (rather weak) accelerating factor of spoken media in language change. However, the strongest extralinguistic factor for the usage of L-vocalization in Glasgow, after engagement with EastEnders, was the factor of 'social practices and social meaning'. For young speakers the association with the local Glaswegian subculture in terms of social practices, appearance and clothing, favourite music etc., is closely linked with the usage of local non-standard features (p. 502). The most frequent users of L-vocalization and other non-standard features were generally attracted to the local subculture, and
engaged in similar social practices such as drinking, going out on weekend nights, and hanging out in the streets. These social practices and meanings show a strong correlation with the Glasgow 'ned' identity (see section 3.3) which is associated with 'urban toughness', masculinity, and most importantly being anti-establishment and anti-middle-class. Furthermore, in a
questionnaire on attitudes towards several British dialects, the informal London accent was on average rated lower than other accents (only RP was rated lower, as it was generally disliked) (p. 520). Perhaps more importantly, the working-class Glaswegian dialect was rated highest,
demonstrating the high level of covert prestige for the respondents' own dialect.
In conclusion, Stuart-Smith et al. (2013) argue that new L-vocalization arrived in Glaswegian through diffusion from the South East of England around the time after World War 2, and has subsequently 'gone native' during transmission, in that it has to “fit in with, and then start to encroach on, existing patterns of local nonstandard variation” (p. 527), i.e. Scots L-vocalization. Strong engagement with television, in this case the show EastEnders, has subsequently helped accelerate the spread of this feature, when it was already part of the
Glaswegian dialect and has come to carry some sort of covert prestige. What is most important is that the sociolinguistic distribution of L-vocalization has to be understood within the context of Glasgow's social structure. The use of both the old and new variant of L-vocalization is an important tool for young working-class Glaswegians to polarize themselves from the
establishment, represented by middle-class adults. Stuart-Smith et al. (2006) conclude that we can interpret “this use of old and new variants together as a means of increasing the linguistic repertoire for marking and constructing an identity distinct from that of the acceptable educated standard which operates in the city” (p. 85).
This case study, based on research by Braber and Butterfint (2008) and Braber (2009), investigates feelings of local identity among working-class and middle-class Glaswegians, and how this is potentially linked to the usage of two phonological variables: T-glottaling and /l/ variation.
Previous research on the link between sound change and regional or local identity in Britain, e.g. in Middlesborough (Llamas, 2007) and Berwick (Pichler & Watt, 2004) have suggested that speakers with a strong sense of local identity use more localized linguistic features, and vice versa. However, these towns differ significantly from Glasgow in a
geographical, political, and historical sense, and the construction of local identity was shown to be notably fluid and complex here (Llamas, 2007, pp. 579-80). Both Middlesborough and Berwick can be considered 'border areas', Braber and Butterfint (2008) argue that
The historically transitional nature of location, due to changing borders, means that these towns are areas where different linguistic varieties may come into contact with one another, and that allegiance to one or the other region, i.e. Yorkshire or Tyneside, or Scotland and England, carries particular salience. (p. 24)
Speakers in these towns are aware that they can choose between multiple local identities, and how they express this identity. This is how Glasgow differs from these towns. Glasgow does not lie in a 'border area', and considering the city's complex history and socio-economic make-up, the potential link between identity and language change could have different underlying motivations.
Previous studies (e.g. Menzies, 1991; Macafee, 1983) have already noted that
Glaswegians generally have a strong sense of Scottish (as opposed to British) national identity, as well as a strong sense of Glaswegian local identity. Three quarters of the participants (both working-class and middle-class Glaswegians) in Braber and Butterfint's (2008) and Braber's
(2009) research expressed positive feelings towards Glasgow, with many centring on the friendliness and sense of humour of the Glaswegian people. Those who felt negatively about Glasgow mentioned Glasgow's bad reputation, and some wished to distance themselves from this. Glasgow's bad reputation was also mentioned by those with more positive attitudes towards the city, but these speakers were quick to add that this has been changing in recent years. All participants expressed that being Glaswegian was an important part of their identity, and were likely to mention Glasgow when asked where they were from, although middle-class participants tended to mention Scotland and Glasgow, rather than Glasgow alone. This demonstrates the sense of covert prestige in Glasgow for working-class speakers, while middle-class speakers “seem to adhere to a more overt prestige that values standard norms and values and by focusing on Glasgow and Scotland, allows them to distinguish themselves from the working-class speakers” (Braber, 2009, p. 315). Working-class speakers in turn frequently mentioned their dislike of Edinburgh, Glasgow's neighbour city which in a way represents everything Glasgow is not: where Glasgow has historically been associated with industrial deterioration, slums, drug abuse and gang violence, Edinburgh has a reputation as a cultured and worldly city (Thomas & Scobbie, 2015, p. 86). One of the reasons why local identity is important to working-class Glaswegians could be that it allows them to distance themselves from other parts of Scotland, and apparently Edinburgh in particular.
Following Braber and Butterfint (2008), two linguistic variables will be analysed: T-glottalling, i.e. the realization of word-medial /t/ in words like better as a glottal stop [ʔ], and onset /l/ realization, in e.g. let, in order to see to what extent the Glaswegian identity of both middle-class and working-class speakers, influences language use and language change in Glasgow.
T-glottaling is one of the most typical features of Glaswegian, and has been noted as far back as 1892 (Aitken, 1984). Though historically heavily stigmatized, the usage of this feature appears to be increasing among both working-class and middle-class Glaswegians, particularly adolescents (Braber & Butterfint, 2008, p. 28). For the analysis of the variables, the participants were grouped according to 'identity level', with speakers who expressed a very positive attitude towards Glasgow and Glaswegian getting assigned to the 'high identity' group, and those expressing negative attitudes being put in the 'low identity' group. Both groups included working-class and middle-class speakers. The results from the interview data indicated a
(slightly) higher usage of T-glottaling in the high identity group (at around 45%) than in the low identity group (30%). When the groups were stratified according to socio-economic grouping and gender, the results showed that both working-class and middle-class males employ similar levels of glottaling, at around 55-60%. Middle-class females showed a low amount of T-glottaling (>15%) whereas working-class females predominantly used the glottal realisation (just under 60%).
The auditory analysis revealed another linguistic change happening in Glaswegian: the realisation of onset /l/ as the more Standard British English realisation [l], or 'clear' /l/ which appears to be occurring alongside the traditionally Glaswegian velarised realization [lˠ], or 'dark' /l/ (pp. 31-32). While the data showed that all male speakers still preferred the traditional variant [lˠ] (nearly 100%, with middle-class males using it 95% of the time), an increase of 'clear' /l/ was apparent in female speakers, especially middle-class females, who use this variable almost 30% of the time. The results according to 'local identity' also revealed a significant effect for identity. Speakers in the high identity group almost exclusively used the velarised variant of onset /l/ (>99%), while the low identity group used it 72% of the time.
The results for the auditory analysis stratified according to socio-economic grouping and gender demonstrated some (perhaps unsurprising) observations regarding working-class speakers and their use of non-standard features, and some more interesting changes regarding middle-class speech. Whereas middle-middle-class males, in the case of T-glottaling at least, have moved towards an increased usage of local Glaswegian speech features, female working-class speakers could be increasingly adhering to an overt prestige associated with standard British English, judging from their increased usage of 'clear' /l/.
Some tentative conclusions can be drawn regarding the direct link between local identity and language change in Glasgow. The results for T-glottaling suggest a higher level of use of this local feature among high identity speakers. The results for variation in onset /l/ show a clearer link with identity, with low identity speakers evidently using 'clear' /l/ in onset position more frequently. This supports the simple hypothesis that a strong Glaswegian identity is linked to an increase in the usage of local features, and a weaker local identity to a decreased usage of local features.
Although Braber and Butterfint (2008) note that the results must be interpreted with caution due to the low number of participants in the study, it is reasonable to conclude that the factors of class and local identity play a role in dialect change in Glasgow. Moreover, the results have confirmed that local identity is of significant importance to many Glaswegians, both working-class and middle-class. Nevertheless, the results leave open a lot of questions regarding local identity and dialect change in Glasgow, and creates a few new ones. For instance, it was found that T-glottaling was the only feature that the participants could name when asked about typical, stigmatized Glaswegian features (p. 37), which suggests that T-glottaling is a highly salient feature which can be used to express ones 'Glaswegianness'. Does this mean that an
increased usage by middle-class male speakers signals that the Glaswegian dialect is becoming more prestigious for this group of speakers? Since the majority of research on Glasgow has focused on working-class speakers, it would be interesting to see further studies on middle-class speech as well.
3.3. Case Study: Neds, CAT, and (θ) Variation
This case study investigates (θ) variation (i.e. the usage of the innovative variant [f], along with the more established variants [h] and [θ]), and variation in the 'CAT vowel' in
Glasgow, based on research by Lawson (2011), Lawson (2014a), and Lawson (2014b). Focusing on how the use of linguistic variation is tied to Community of Practice membership, Lawson's ethnographic fieldwork can offer more social detail on the discussion of the influence of social identity and language use. An ethnographic study of a high school in the Southside of Glasgow conducted by Lawson (2011) investigates how male adolescent speakers of Glaswegian “exploit a linguistic stereotype in order to reify their own identities while explicitly distancing themselves from [what they consider] stigmatised groups” (p. 250). Since Glasgow and working class Glaswegians have long been stigmatized for their association with violence, crime, and
degeneration etc., the concept of 'negative identity practices' can offer a clearer picture of the link between social identity and language use-and change.
Lawson's (2011) research focuses on how linguistic variety is distributed across an apparently homogenous group of speakers, using data collected from a group of working-class adolescent males from a secondary school in Glasgow's Southside called Bannister Academy over the course of three years. Lawson (2011) focuses on four distinct 'Communities of Practice' (from now on CofP), meaning social groups whose members share similar values and beliefs, interests, and ways of talking (p. 74). Members can show their allegiance to a CofP and construct
an identity as a member of that group through linguistic variation and other social practices beyond language use. Lawson (2011) argues that “by adopting a CofP approach, we can go beyond a straightforward quantitative description of linguistic variation and integrate a range of social information in our pursuit of better understanding the sociolinguistic construction of identity” (pp. 74-75).
The four CofPs that Lawson (2011) focuses on are 'Ned', 'Schoolie', 'Sport' and 'Alternative'. the Ned and Schoolie CofP represent the opposite social extremities within the school, with the Alternative and Sports CofPs falling roughly in between, sharing characteristics of both Ned members and Schoolie members. I will briefly discuss each CofP in turn.
The Ned CofP gets its name from 'non-educated delinquent', which is a derogatory term used in Scotland to refer to anti-social, often petty criminal youths, defined by Lawson (2011) as follows:
In modern-day Glasgow, the most widely-accepted folk definition of a ‘ned’ is a working-class, adolescent male who wears a tracksuit, Burberry branded clothing (recognisable by its plaid design), a baseball cap, white sports trainers, gold sovereign rings, and a Berghaus ‘Mera Peak’ jacket (an expensive hiking jacket). ‘Ned’ social practices are assumed to be criminal or deviant in nature, including: vandalism and petty theft; age-restricted activities including alcohol, smoking and sex; muggings; loitering; criminal damage; general affray; and gang-related fighting and violence (both organised and random) (pp. 236-7),
and perhaps most importantly, a distinct way of speaking characterized by increased nasalisation, tense vowel production, and an elevated pitch range. Although the pupils falling into the Ned
CofP did not classify themselves as neds, they conformed to many of the ned characteristics mentioned above.
The antithesis of the Ned CofP was found in a group of boys in the Schoolie CofP, who conformed to the standards of ‘proper’ behaviour within the school, with a love for videogames, music, and high academic aptitude. The members of this CofP are arguably aspiring middle-class.
Members of the Alternative CofP shared social interests which could be defined as ‘alternative’ i.e. non-mainstream, from a sub-cultural standpoint, as well as how they were perceived by their peers in the school. They enjoyed listening to (alternative) rock and (heavy) metal music, and distinguished themselves through clothing, which the other boys perceived as a 'goth' or 'emo' style. The Alternative members did share quite a positive attitude towards the school (though not aligning with the 'establishment' as much as the Schoolies).
Finally, the Sports CofP was made up of boys whose main social practices consisted of playing, watching, and discussing football and rugby. They listened to mainstream pop-music and enjoyed watching British soap operas (including EastEnders). They did not wear particularly distinctive clothing, but all members wore gold jewellery, including chains and rings, although they were quick to add that this did not mean that they were neds (pp. 233-239).
An acoustic analysis of the CAT vowel on the recorded data of the four CofPs was conducted in order to investigate the link between patterns of linguistic variation and social identity. The CAT set covers the lexical sets of TRAP/BATH/PALM, but since Scottish English does not have a distinction between minimal pairs like Pam and palm, Johnston argues for a single lexical set named CAT for specific reference to Scottish English (as cited in Lawson, 2014b, p. 207).
In the analysis of CAT, it was found that this vowel varied significantly across the four CofPs in Bannister Academy, with the biggest difference being between the Schoolie and Ned CofPs (pp. 240-45), with the Ned CofP having a fronted and lowered CAT, and the Schoolie CofP having a raised CAT. If the Ned and Schoolie CofPs are compared to the lower class and
(aspiring) middle class respectively, these results can relate to findings by Stuart-Smith (1999), who states that middle class speakers have more raised realizations compared to working class speakers. Lawson (2011) found that the most common way in which pupils at Bannister
Academy imitated 'ned speak' was through using several linguistic and phonological features that are associated with this social group:
1. Andrew: And the way they talk, 2. and their stupid swagger. 3. Neil: Aye, the swagger. 4. Andrew: ((laughs)) 5. And the way they talk. 6. ((uses ‘ned’ speak’)) 7. ‘Aw what man?
8. Aw, what’s up wi you man? 9. ((laughs))
10. That’s pure smashing man! 11. I’ll smash you!’ (pp. 246-47).
The linguistic analysis of these ned-imitations performed by two Alternative CofP members indeed demonstrates an increased raising for the CAT vowel compared to their usual speech style, suggesting that these speakers are aware of the social meaning of variables like CAT.
Working class adolescents in Glasgow use certain linguistic variations which align with their own social group. Linguistic variables that are associated with 'ned speak' are important markers of identity, used by speakers to either confirm or distance themselves from 'being a ned'. The reflects what Bucholtz called ‘negative identity practices' (as cited in Lawson, 2011, p. 227). The non-ned pupils actively seek to distance themselves from the ned identity through their clothing, behaviour and social practices, as well as through linguistic variation. This was
strongest with the Schoolie CofP, whose members are arguably aspiring middle class. This could indicate that distancing from the ned identity is also seen as necessary for upward social
mobility. For the Ned CofP on the other hand, behaving and speaking in a 'Schoolie' manner goes against their notion of 'toughness' and masculinity for which the stereotypical working class Glaswegian 'hard man' is known.
An analysis of TH-fronting and [θ] variation (i.e. [θ], [f], or [h] in e.g. think) and how these three variants are used among these different groups of working-class adolescents provides a more detailed account of the construction of a social identity and further explores the concept of 'toughness' and masculinity in Glasgow. Similar to 'new' L-vocalization, TH-fronting ([f] for [θ] in e.g. think) is a typical feature of London English, and has been noted, alongside new L-vocalization, to be spreading rapidly among immobile, working-class Glaswegian adolescents in recent years (Stuart-Smith et al., 2013). The variant [f] now exists alongside the more established variants [θ] and [h], which represent a standard and non-standard variant respectively (Lawson, 2014a, p. 70). Lawson (2014a), elaborating on his previous research on adolescent working class males at Bannister Academy, analysed the patterns of [θ] variation, focusing only on the
The analysis confirms the increased usage of [f] among working-class adolescent Glaswegians at the expense of [θ], while [h] seems to remain relatively stable for this group of speakers. Within this group, it was found that generally the Ned CofP was (unsurprisingly) the most non-standard, the Alternative CofP the most standard, and the Sports CofP lay somewhat between standard and non-standard (p. 85). Previous research (e.g. Trudgill, 1972; Macafee, 1983) has found that the use of [h] is a stigmatized variant (both in Glasgow and in Scotland generally) strongly associated with the Glaswegian working class, and was found here to be used almost categorically by the Ned CofP (Lawson, 2014a, p. 86). The highest use of [θ] was found in the members of the Alternative CofP, who almost completely rejected the use of [h] in favour of [f] and [θ]. The latter variant is heavily associated with 'poshness' (especially among the Ned CofP, with one of the members commenting that “only posh people say think” with [θ] rather than [f] or [h] (p. 88)). This corresponds with the observation that members of the Alternative CofP “enjoyed coming to school and recognised the importance of education in securing well-paid employment” (p. 88). The findings show that the Sports CofP used all three variants simultaneously, with more use of [h] and less use of [θ] compared to the Alternative CofP.
The use of linguistic variation in the CAT vowel and [θ] has to be seen in the context of Glasgow and the historical and socioeconomical realities of the city. Lawson (2014a) suggests that the use of stigmatized variants such as [h] and [f] is an important tool for young Glaswegian males in constructing an identity of a Glaswegian 'hard man'. By adopting a way of speaking that is associated with 'toughness', speakers do not have to rely on other, more socially-risky,
practices such as fighting to present oneself as masculine. “Thus, if a speaker can convince a second party that they are capable of violent physical action without actually doing so, the potential social cost is much lower” (p. 87). In order for a speaker to come across as 'tough', it is
important to use 'valid' linguistic variations associated with 'toughness', in this case non-standard variants associated with the local subculture, which is in opposition to the 'establishment' e.g. the school (p. 87). It would therefore be unusual for a 'Ned' speaker to use [θ] instead of [h] or [f] in certain contexts, because [θ] is a variant associated with the middle class and 'poshness', similar to [x] in loch (see Stuart-Smith et al., 2007, p. 252). The variation [f] in this respect is neither 'local' nor 'traditional', and appears to be used in all three CofPs (although most noticeably the Ned CofP, suggesting at least some association with 'toughness'). This could explain why there seem to be substantial usage of [f], together with [θ], in the Sports and Alternative CofPs, who do not necessarily construct their identity as being 'anti-establishment' the way the Ned CofP does. Although these CofPs do not seem to explicitly want to present themselves as 'hard men' as much as the Ned CofP, the Glaswegian interpretation of tough masculinity, and distancing from 'posh people' is still important to them to some extent. It could be hypothesized that the
simultaneous use of non-standard [f] and standard [θ] in these CofPs serves as a way to
compromise between 'establishment' and 'subcultural' contexts. The Alternative CofP tended to reject most mainstream social practices, but felt positive towards school and had ambitious plans for the future. The Sports CofP was more attracted to the local subculture, similar to the Neds, but still invested in their education, and never explicitly stated that they disliked school. Lawson (2014a) argues that
the simultaneous use of [θ] and [f] among the Sports and the Alternative CofPs is a way for these speakers to straddle the divide between the ‘anti-establishment’ and
‘establishment’ cultures; as ways for these speakers to meet a range of conflicting social demands (p. 89).
This case study demonstrates that young working-class speakers in Glasgow use linguistic variables which align with CofP membership to either conform to or distance
themselves from a Glaswegian 'ned identity'. The local, non-standard features of the Glaswegian dialect are closely linked to 'ned speak', and although most pupils outside of the Ned CofP at Bannister Academy emphasized that they did not want to be associated with neds, many did use non-standard features in their speech alongside standard features. This suggests that 'ned speak' carries at least some covert prestige for the other CofPs, save for the Schoolie CofP, due to its association with 'toughness', masculinity, and being anti-establishment. Non-standard features can be exploited by speakers to construct a 'tough', masculine identity, whereas the simultaneous usage of both standard and non-standard features is a way for speakers to “negotiate the ‘grey area’ between ‘establishment’ and ‘subcultural’ contexts” (Lawson, 2014a, p. 90).
4. Discussion 4.1 The Covert Prestige-Factor in Glasgow
When looking at the contributory factors for dialect change that have been discussed, i.e. mobility, media influence, and local identity, it seems that in Glasgow, each factor is inextricably linked with the Glaswegian dialect's covert prestige. Glasgow's descend into deprivation after the decline of the city's major industries have shaped the city's highly stereotyped image which still persists today. The attitudinal findings have shown that it is due to these negative stereotypes surrounding Glasgow and Glaswegian that many working-class speakers experience feelings of linguistic insecurity, but more importantly, also show an indignant sort of pride of their city and their local dialect.
The Glaswegian sound changes that have been discussed fall into two categories: those representing southern English features (i.e. new L-vocalization, onset 'clear' /l/, and
TH-fronting), and local changes to the Glaswegian dialect (i.e. T-glottaling, Scots L-vocalization, onset 'dark' /l/, and [h]). It has historically been important for working-class speakers to distance themselves linguistically from the much-resented middle-class, to signal working-class
solidarity. Research has confirmed that Glaswegians in general, and the working-class especially, maintain a strong sense of local Glaswegian identity. This explains why some local Glaswegian features are so firmly retained, since these linguistic forms are associated with covert prestige. It turns out that the southern English features (save for onset 'clear' /l/) are not perceived as
'southern English' by working-class speakers. Although they may have originated from the south, these features have been part of the local dialect for a considerable amount of time, and have seemingly lost their association with South-East English. This brings us to the next point of discussion: the influence of spoken media, which was initially held responsible for the spread of these South-East English features into Glaswegian.
4.2 Spoken Media and Dialect Change
It has been made clear that working-class speakers in Glasgow have not simply copied southern, 'Cockney' features from TV directly and brought them into their own dialect. The findings from Stuart-Smith et al. (2013) have shown a link between active engagement with
EastEnders and the use of non-standard features, suggesting that television can accelerate
ongoing changes in the Glaswegian dialect. Cockney speech of working-class, or 'hard-man' characters in EastEnders may carry at least some sort of covert prestige, although the interview data does not support this, since the participants described instances of this type of speech as 'posh' and 'pure English', and expressing that they neither could, nor wanted to speak like that. Stuart-Smith et al. (2013) suggest that perhaps there exist some subconscious, or covert attitudes towards media-Cockney, which could partially explain the spread of these features (p. 530).
Whatever the influence of TV might be, it is apparently limited to only a few specific features, and was shown to be much weaker than actual social practices and social meanings associated with these features. This leads to the next point of discussion, which involves the construction of social identities among speakers in Glasgow.
4.3 Masculinity and 'Toughness' in Glasgow
The Glaswegian dialect is covertly prestigious to working-class Glaswegians due to its association with 'roughness', 'toughness', 'being anti-establishment' and 'not posh'. These terms are almost synonymous with the Glasgow ned identity. Neds are the epitome of being anti-establishment, and show the highest usage of local linguistic and phonetic realizations, resulting in a thoroughly local type of speech which has been labelled 'ned speak'. Lawson (2011, 2014a) has shown that among working-class adolescent males in Glasgow, linguistic variation is closely linked to Community of Practice membership. Although most pupils did not want to be explicitly labelled as 'neds', many did want to distance themselves to some extent from the mainstream and establishment. Lawson (2011, 2014a) demonstrates that this can be achieved through linguistic variation, in this case [θ] variation, where a more frequent use of stigmatized local variants, i.e. [f] and [h] corresponds with a move towards the 'ned identity', and the use of the standard variant [θ] signals a move away from this identity. Except for the aspiring middle-class Schoolie CofP, all pupils at Bannister Academy wanted to distance themselves from the establishment to at least some degree, which could be achieved by using standard and non-standard variables
simultaneously.
It is interesting to note that certain local and stigmatized working-class features appear to be climbing up the social scale, seeing as middle-class male speakers are using them more frequently, e.g. T-glottaling, as well as postvocalic, non-rhotic /r/ (see Lawson, Stuart-Smith, &
Scobbie, 2008). Research on speech in Glasgow has largely ignored middle-class speech, and this leaves some questions unanswered. Could the increase of stigmatized features by this group mean that the Glaswegian dialect's prestige is becoming less covert? Or do middle-class males to some degree want to present themselves (linguistically) as tough and masculine as well? Most Glaswegians, both working-class and middle-class, expressed positive attitudes towards
Glasgow, which is apparently becoming less violent and less degenerate. It may be the case that these middle-class males demonstrate that the stigmas surrounding Glasgow are slowly eroding, although without its stigmas, the Glaswegian dialect would lose its prestige of the covert sort.
5. Conclusion
The aim of this paper has been to demonstrate the importance of covert prestige in Glaswegian dialect change. It has been confirmed that there are a number of sound changes in progress in Glasgow, with working-class adolescents being the main 'motor' behind this process of 'regional dialect levelling'. The relative geographical and social immobility which
characterizes this group of speakers suggests that levelling on a local level is more influential in Glaswegian dialect change than geographical diffusion. This type of levelling is in turn
influenced by a combination of extralinguistic factors such as mobility, media influences, and local identity. A closer look at some particular sound changes supports the hypothesis that this dialect's covert prestige is a key factor in the overall process of dialect change in Glasgow.
The first case study investigated the possible influences of spoken media in spreading a new type of L-vocalization. Although these influences were shown to be relatively weak, a possibly subconscious association of media-Cockney with 'tough' working-class speech can possibly accelerate the spread of this feature. Actual social practices and the social meanings
associated with local features was shown to be the strongest extralinguistic factor for the spread of L-vocalization.
The next case study confirmed the continuing spread of T-glottaling in Glasgow and showed the appearance of 'clear' /l/ into the speech of mostly middle-class females. The results have also confirmed the strong sense of local identity among Glaswegians in general, although they could only hint at a direct link between this high level of local identity and the use of non-standard, local features due to the low level of participants in the studies it was based on. The results did demonstrate a move towards a higher usage of local features for middle-class males, and a move away from local features by middle-class females, who had appeared to have taken up a standard British feature: initial 'clear' /l/ in favour of the local realization 'dark' /l/.
The final case study showed a clear link between phonetic and linguistic variation and Community of Practice membership among working-class adolescents in Glasgow, and has further explored the concept of the Glaswegian 'ned identity'. Speakers were shown to use standard and non-standard varieties of [θ] to construct locally embedded social identities.
This paper has contributed to the discussion regarding dialect change in Glasgow, and in doing so attempted to demonstrate the intrinsic link between the extralinguistic factors and the dialect's covert prestige. Although some claims may still be speculative, this research allows a movement towards a more complete account of the mechanisms of covert prestige in the construction of local identity and dialect change in Glasgow. There are some considerable gaps in the literature regarding middle-class adolescent speech and attitudes towards the Glaswegian dialect, and in light of the studies indicating that local features are creeping into middle-class speech, this warrants further study. Regarding media influences on dialect change, it appears that some of the most popular and influential media products in Scotland in the last few years have
been inspired by and created by people from Glasgow, e.g. Limmy’s Show, Still Game, Chewin'
the Fat, Kevin Bridges, Frankie Boyle etc., which all feature Glaswegian accents. It would be
interesting to investigate to what extent the dominance of Glasgow in the Scottish cultural media contributes to the dialect’s resilience and spreading influence amongst young working-class Scots outside of Glasgow.
References
Aitken, A.J. (1984). Scottish accents and dialects. In P. Trudgill (Ed.), Language in the British Isles (pp. 94-114). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Braber, N. (2009). “I'm not a fanatic Scot, but I love Glasgow”: Concepts of local and national identity in Glasgow. Identity, 9(4), 307-322.
Braber, N., & Butterfint, Z. (2008). Local identity and sound change in Glasgow: A pilot study. Leeds Working Papers in Linguistics and Phonetics 13, 22–43.
Charkova, K. D. (2007). A language without borders: English slang and Bulgarian learners of English. Language Learning, 57(3), 369-416.
Clopper, C. G., & Bradlow, A. R. (2008). Perception of dialect variation in noise: intelligibility and classification. Language and Speech, 51(3), 175-198.
Foulkes, P., & Docherty, G. J. (1999). Urban voices: Accent studies in the British Isles. London: Arnold.
Glasgow ranked UK's most violent area. (2013, April 24). BBC News. Retrieved from http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-22276018
Johnston, P. (1985). The rise and fall of the Morningside/Kelvinside accent. In M. Görlach (Ed.),
Focus on: Scotland (pp. 37-56). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Kerswill, P. E. (1984). Social and linguistic aspects of Durham. Journal of the International
Phonetic Association, 14(01), 13-34.
Kerswill, P.E. (2003). Dialect levelling and geographical diffusion in British English. In D. Britain & J. Cheshire (Eds.), Social dialectology. In honour of Peter Trudgill (pp. 223-243). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Kerswill, P., & Williams, A. (2000). Mobility and social class in dialect levelling: evidence from new and old towns in England. In K. Mattheier (Ed.), Dialect and migration in a
changing Europe (pp. 1–13). Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
Lawson, E., Stuart-Smith, J., & Scobbie, J. (2008). Articulatory insights into language variation and change: preliminary findings from an ultrasound study of derhoticization in Scottish English. Working Papers in Linguistics, 14(02), 100-110.
Lawson, R. (2011). Patterns of linguistic variation among Glaswegian adolescent males. Journal
of Sociolinguistics, 15(2), 226-255.
Lawson, R. (2014a). ‘Don’t even [θ/f/h]ink aboot it’: An ethnographic investigation of social meaning, social identity and (θ) variation in Glasgow. English World-Wide, 35(1), 68-93. Lawson, R. (2014b). What can ethnography tell us about sociolinguistic variation over time?
some insights from Glasgow. In R. Lawson (Ed.), Sociolinguistics in Scotland (pp. 197-219). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Llamas, C. (2007). “A place between places”: Language and identities in a border town.
Language in Society, 36(04), 579-604.
Macafee, C. (1983). Glasgow. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Macfarlane, A. E., & Stuart-Smith, J. (2012). ‘One of them sounds sort of Glasgow Uni-ish’. Social judgements and fine phonetic variation in Glasgow. Lingua, 122(7), 764-778. Menzies, J. (1991). An investigation of attitudes to Scots and Glasgow dialect among secondary
school pupils. Scottish Language, 10, 30-46.
Milroy, L. (2002). Introduction: Mobility, contact and language change - Working with contemporary speech communities. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 6(1), 3-15.
Milroy, J., & Milroy, L. (1999). Authority in language: Investigating standard English. London: Routledge.
Milroy, J., Milroy, L., Hartley, S., & Walshaw, D. (1994). Glottal stops and Tyneside
glottalization: Competing patterns of variation and change in British English. Language
Variation and Change, 6(03), 327-357.
Pichler, H., & Watt, D. (2004). 'We're all Scottish really': Investigating the tension between claimed identity and linguistic behaviour in Berwick-upon-Tweed. Paper presented at
The influence of the languages of Ireland and Scotland on linguistic northern varieties of Northern England, University of Aberdeen, 28 June 2004.
viewing. Child Development, 59(2), 420-429.
Stuart-Smith, J. (1999). Glasgow: accent and voice quality. In Foulkes, P. & Docherty, G.J. (Eds.), Urban voices: Accent studies in the British Isles (pp. 201-222). London: Arnold Stuart-Smith, J., Pryce, G., Timmins, C., & Gunter, B. (2013). Television can also be a factor in
language change: Evidence from an urban dialect. Language, 89(3), 501-536. Stuart-Smith, J., Timmins, C., & Tweedie, F. (2006). Conservation and innovation in a
traditional dialect: L-vocalization in Glaswegian. English World-Wide, 27(1), 71-87. Stuart-Smith, J., Timmins, C., & Tweedie, F. (2007). 'Talkin' Jockney?' Variation and change in
Glaswegian accent. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 11(2), 221-260.
The world’s friendliest cities – as voted by you. (2014). Retrieved June 11, 2016, from http://www.roughguides.com/gallery/the-worlds-friendliest-cities-as-voted-by-you/#/0 Thomas, S., & Scobbie, J. M. (2015). Mixed accents: Scottish children with English parents. In J.
A. Mompean & J. Fouz-González. (Eds.), Investigating English pronunciation (pp. 83-104). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Trudgill, P. (1972). Sex, covert prestige and linguistic change in the urban British English of Norwich. Language in Society, 1(02), 179-195.
