This material has been prepared only for the students taking this class.

Please do not use or distribute it outside this class!

Introduction to Linguistics
Week 11（December 11）
Class subject: Regional Variation

Dear Students,

Welcome to the eleventh class of the Introduction to Linguistics course!

The class material below consists of 2 main parts (a total of 6 pages): today’s class
subject and the related assignment for next week.

I. Regional Variation

The fourth and last section of this course addresses the study of language through its
relationship with society and culture. Today’s class material discusses regional
variation.

George Yule in his book The Study of Language (2010) addresses regional variation as
below:
Throughout this book, we have been talking about languages such as English […] as if
there was a single variety of each in everyday use. That is, we have largely ignored the fact
that every language has a lot of variation, especially in the way it is spoken. If we just look
at English, we find widespread variation in the way it is spoken in different countries such
as Australia, Brltain and the USA. We can also find a range of varieties in different parts of
those countries, with Lee Tonouchi’s account of “Trick-O-Treat” in Hawai'i as just one
example. In this chapter, we investigate aspects of language variation based on where that
language is used, as a way of doing linguistic geography. First, we should identify the
particular variety that we have normally assumed when we referred to a language as
English, Spanish or Swahili. (Yule, 2010, p. 239)

Languages tend to have geographical variations, or in other words regional dialects. The
question is how they are related to each other. Yule discusses this question from the
point of view of the standard language in the following way:
When we talked about the words and structures of a language in earlier chapters, we were
concentrating on the features of only one variety, usually called the standard language.
This is actually an idealized variety, because it has no specific region. It is the variety
associated with administrative, commercial and educational centers, regardless of region. If
we think of Standard English, it is the version we believe is found in printed English in
newspapers and books, is widely used in the mass media and is taught in most schools. It is
the variety we normally try to teach to those who want to learn English as a second or
foreign language. It is clearly associated with education and broadcasting in public contexts
and is more easily described in terms of the written language (i.e. vocabulary, spelling,
grammar) than the spoken language.
If we are thinking of that general variety used in public broadcasting in the United States,
we can refer more specifically to Standard American English or, in Britain, to Standard
British English. In other parts of the world, we can talk about other recognized varieties
such as Standard Australian English, Standard Canadian English or Standard Indian
English. (Yule, 2010, p. 240)

1
This material has been prepared only for the students taking this class.
Please do not use or distribute it outside this class!

The so-called standard form of a language may seem to be somehow ‘superior’ to or

‘more correct’ than other regional variations of the same language. This type of
judgement is based on the normative approach to language that focuses on how a
specific language should be spoken (see the class material of Week 5). For example, the
so-called Standard Japanese, called hyōjungo, is actually based on the Yamanote dialect
spoken by the old upper class in the Yamanote area in Tokyo that emerged during the
Edo Period (1603–1868). The Yamanote dialect was then arbitrarily chosen as the
national standard form of the Japanese language by the new political elite in the Meiji
Period (1868–1912) as part of the Meiji government’s plan for the modernisation of the
country. The Yamanote dialect was just one of the many dialects spoken in premodern
Japan, and there was nothing special about this dialect from a linguistic point of view
that could have explained why this dialect had to be chosen as the national standard
form of the Japanese language. The decision for the Yamanote dialect was a pure
political decision, probably because this dialect was spoken by the old upper class
residing in Tokyo, the capital city of modern Japan. This dialect then was used and
popularised through the media and school education with the result that the hyōjungo,
based on the Yamanote dialect, gives the false impression as if it were the most ‘correct’
form of the Japanese language. The descriptive approach to language however suggests
that there is no superior or inferior variation of a language (see the class material of
Week 5). As long as the speakers can understand each other the language functions
well.
From a linguistic point of view it seems to be much more important to ask what is the
borderline between ‘language’ and ‘dialect’. In order words, what is the criterion for
deciding whether two variations are close enough to call them ‘dialects’, or in an
opposite case, to view them as two ‘languages’. Yule discusses this problem in the
following way;
Despite occasional difficulties, there is a general impression of mutual intelligibility
among many speakers of different dialects of English. This is one of the criteria used in the
study of dialects, or dialectology, to distinguish between two different dialects of the same
language (whose speakers can usually understand each other) and two different languages
(whose speakers can’t usually understand each other). This is not the only, or the most
reliable, way of identifying dialects, but it is helpful in establishing the fact that each
different dialect, like each language, is equally worthy of analysis. It is important to
recognize, from a linguistic point of view, that none of the varieties of a language is
inherently “better” than any other. They are simply different.
From a social point of view, however, some varieties do become more prestigious. in fact,
the variety that develops as the standard language has usually been one socially prestigious
dialect, originally associated with a center of economic and political power (e.g. London for
British English and Paris for French). Yet, there always continue to be other varieties of a
language spoken in different regions. (Yule, 2010, p. 241)

Mutual intelligibility can be used as the criterion for distinguishing between ‘language’
and ‘dialect’ indeed. However, as Yule suggests, this is not necessarily a reliable
approach. The problem refers to that the degree of mutual intelligibility varies in
different cases. In certain cases speakers of two different variations can understand each
other 80%, whereas in other cases the degree of mutual intelligibility can be just as low
as 20%, without learning each other’s language variation. The question is what should
be the borderline. Should it be for example 50%? That is to say, should we say that if

2
This material has been prepared only for the students taking this class.
Please do not use or distribute it outside this class!

mutual intelligiblity is over 50%, then we can speak about ‘dialects’ of the same
language, whereas if it is below 50%, then we should view those two forms as two
different languages? Such a criterion would be very arbitrary and lack any convincing
linguistic explanation. In fact, there is no agreement about this in the field of linguistics.
Besides the linguistic dimension above, the same question has a political dimension
too, i.e. political interests decide whether variations are viewed as different ‘languages’
or just different ‘dialects’. If we follow the priniciple of mutual intelligibility strictly,
then for example the various ‘dialects’ of the Chinese language should be viewed as
different ‘languages’ due to the very low degree of mutual intelligibility between their
speakers, especially in the case of ‘dialects’ in South China. In contrast, whereas the
speakers of Swedish and Norwegian can understand each other with no particular
problem, both stress that Swedish and Norwegian are not ‘dialects’, but ‘languages’, in
order to express different cultural identities. The same goes for the speakers of Serbian
and Croatian in Southern Europe. These examples can give a glimpse into how the
distinguishment between ‘language’ and ‘dialect’ can be used for expressing cultural
orientation.
‘True’ regional dialects, i.e. in the case of language variations where the speakers can
understand each other without any difficulties, can show differences in their vocabulary,
grammar or accent. The geographical boundary between regional dialects can take two
different forms basically:
We can look at some examples of regional variation found in a survey that resulted in the
Linguistic Atlas of the Upper Midwest of the United States. One of the aims of a survey of
this type is to find a number of significant differences in the speech of those living in
different areas and to be able to chart where the boundaries are, in dialect terms, between
those areas. If it is found, for example, that the vast majority of informants in one area say
they carry things home from the store in a paper bag while the majority in another area say
they use a paper sack, then it is usually possible to draw a line across a map separating the
two areas, as shown on the accompanying illustration. This line is called an isogloss and
represents a boundary between the areas with regard to that one particular linguistic item.
If a very similar distribution is found for another two items, such as a preference for pail
to the north and bucket to the south, then another isogloss, probably overlapping the first,
can be drawn on the map. When a number of isoglosses come together in this way, a more
solid line, indicating a dialect boundary, can be drawn. (Yule, 2010, p. 242)

In the example above the dialect boundary can be imagined as a more or less sharp line
between two geographical regions. This sharp line might be caused by a large river or
mountain that function as natural obstacle for having constant communication between
the people living on the two sides of that geographical obstacle. The reason for the
formation of regional variations of a language is mainly a significant decrease in, or
even lack of, the interaction between the speakers of two geographical regions. Due to
this decrease in interaction, the speakers living in the two regions separated by a
geographical obstacle will not be able to follow each other’s language change in terms
of word formation etc. (see the class material of Week 6). The geographical boundary
however is not always represented by a sharp line:
Another note of caution is required with regard to dialect boundaries. The drawing of
isoglosses and dialect boundaries is quite useful in establishing a broad view of regional
dialects, but it tends to obscure the fact that, at most dialect boundary areas, one dialect or
language variety merges into another. Keeping this in mind, we can view regional variation
as existing along a dialect continuum rather than as having sharp breaks from one region

3
This material has been prepared only for the students taking this class.
Please do not use or distribute it outside this class!

to the next.
A very similar type of continuum can occur with related languages existing on either side
of a political border. As you travel from Holland into Germany, you will find
concentrations of Dutch speakers giving way to areas near the border where “Dutch” may
sound more like “Deutsch” because the Dutch dialects and the German dialects are less
clearly differentiated. Then, as you travel into Germany, greater concentrations of distinctly
German speakers occur.
Speakers who move back and forth across this border area, using different varieties with
some ease, may be described as bidialectal (i.e. “speaking two dialects”). Most of us grow
up with some form of bidialectalism, speaking one dialect “in the street” among family and
friends, and having to learn another dialect “in school.” However, in some places, there are
different languages used in the street and in school. When we talk about people knowing
two distinct languages, we describe them as bilingual. (Yule, 2010, p. 244)

Becoming bidialectal or bilingual is an interesting outcome of specific regional

conditions such as dialect continuum, though it must be noted that regional conditions
are not the only possible reason for one to become bidialectal or bilingual. For example,
the peaceful coexistence of various ethnic groups in the same region can also result in
bilingualism or even multilingualism through constant interactions between them, just
like in certain regions of the former Austria-Hungarian Empire where it was not rare to
see people being able to speak both German, Hungarian and Slovakian.
Besides ‘bidialectal’ and ‘bilingual’, there is however another interesting
manifestation of language variation in terms of pidgins and creoles:
In some areas, the standard chosen may be a variety that originally had no native speakers
in the country. For example, in Papua New Guinea, a lot of official business is conducted in
Tok Pisin. This language is now used by over a million people, but it began many years
earlier as a kind of “contact” language called a pidgin. A pidgin is a variety of a language
that developed for some practical purpose, such as trading, among groups of people who
had a lot of contact, but who did not know each other’s languages. As such, it would have
no native speakers. The origin of the term “pidgin” is thought to be from a Chinese version
of the English word “business.”
A pidgin is described as an “English pidgin” if English is the lexifier language, that is,
the main source of words in the pidgin. It doesn’t mean that those words will have the same
pronunciation or meaning as in the source. For example, the word gras has its origins in the
English word “grass,” but in Tok Pisin it also came to be used for “hair.” It is part of
mausgras (“moustache”) and gras bilong fes (“beard”).
There are several English pidgins still used today. They are characterized by an absence
of any complex grammatical morphology and a somewhat limited vocabulary. Inflectional
suffixes such as -s (plural) and -’s (possessive) on nouns in Standard English are rare in
pidgins, while structures like tu buk (“two books”) and di gyal place (“the girl’s place”') are
common. Functional morphemes often take the place of inflectional morphemes found io
the source language. For example, instead of changing the form of you to your, as in the
English phrase your book, English based pidgins use a form like bilong, and change the
word order to produce phrases like buk bilong yu. (Yule, 2010, p. 247)

Whereas a pidgin functions as a simplified language between people who do not

understand each other’s native languages, creole refers to the descendants of the users of
a pidgin:
There are believed to be between six and twelve million people still using pidgin languages
and between ten and seventeen million using descendants from pidgins called “creoles.”

4
This material has been prepared only for the students taking this class.
Please do not use or distribute it outside this class!

When a pidgin develops beyond its role as a trade or contact language and becomes the first
language of a social community, it is described as a creole. Tok Pisin is now a creole.
Although still locally referred to as “Pidgin,” the language spoken by a large number of
people in Hawai’i is also a creole, technically known as Hawai’i Creole English. A creole
initially develops as the first language of children growing up in a pidgin-using community
and becomes more complex as it serves more communicative purposes. Thus, unlike
pidgins, creoles have large numbers of native speakers and are not restricted at all in their
uses. A French creole is spoken by the majority of the population in Haiti and English
creoles are used in Jamaica and Sierra Leone.
The separate vocabulary elements of a pidgin can become grammatical elements in a
creole. The form baimbai yu go (“by and by you go”) in early Tok Pisin gradually
shortened to bai yu go, and finally to yu bigo, with a grammatical structure not unlike that
of its English translation equivalent, “you will go.” (Yule, 2010, p. 248)

As the next stage of creolisation, there is also another process called decreolisation:
In many contemporary situations where creoles evolved, there is usually evidence of
another process at work. Just as there was development from a pidgin to a creole, known as
creolization, there is now often a retreat from the use of the creole by those who have
greater contact with a standard variety of the language. Where education and greater social
prestige are associated with a “higher” variety (e.g. British English in Jamaica), a number
of speakers will tend to use fewer creole forms and structures. This process, known as
decreolization, leads at one extreme to a variety that is closer to the external standard
model and leaves, at the other extreme, a basic variety with more local creole features.
Between these two extremes may be a range of slightly different varieties, some with many
and some with fewer creole features. This range of varieties, evolving after (= “post”) the
creole has come into existence, is called the post-creole continuum.
So, in Jamaica, one speaker may say a fi mi buk dat, using the basic creole variety,
another may put it as iz mi buk, using a variety with fewer creole features, and yet another
may choose it’s my book, using a variety with only some pronunciation features of the
creole, or a “creole accent.” It is also very common for speakers to be able to use a range of
varieties in different situations.
We would predict that these differences would be tied very much to social values and
social identity. In the course of discussing language varieties in terms of regionai
differences, we have excluded, in a rather artificial way, the complex social factors that are
also at work in determining language variation […] (Yule, 2010, pp. 248–249)

II. Assignment (the deadline for submission is 16:20 December 18th)

Explain in 300 words the regional variations of a specific language (this could be
either English or another language), by taking concrete examples from that language in
terms of either vocabulary, grammar or accent. You will find the folder designated for
submission called Assignment Week 11 – Regional Variation in the Assignments on
Manaba!

＊Please note that the next Class Meeting will be held on Deember 18th!!

＊Term Report Assignment and Essay-Type Test Paper

The instructions for the Term Report Assignment and Essay-Type Test Paper are
uploaded to the Resources on Manaba. Read them carefully!

5
This material has been prepared only for the students taking this class.
Please do not use or distribute it outside this class!

＊Guidelines for Writing Papers

A file called Guidelines for Writing Papers (“202411_Must-Do's When Writing Report
Examinations Graduation Thesis”) is uploaded to the Resources on Manaba. Please read
it carefully!!

Feel free to contact me if you have any questions!

Kind regards,
Prof. Zsombor Rajkai
[email protected]