--- In cybalist@..., "Piotr Gasiorowski" <gpiotr@...> wrote:
> ... and let me repeat that I really enjoyed the article. Though
Caxton's egges/eyren problem is just an example of language-internal
diversity without emotional weight attached to either
variant, "shibbolethisation" _does_ often take place between dialects
(including sociolects, genderlects, etc.) of the same language.
>
> Piotr
>
Well, Thank you! Anyway I would tend to think that especially
language-internally shibboleth allophone pairs (I should perhaps call
them) play a large role. I don't know of a language or culture that
doesn't formally or informally mock or even threaten the "wrong" half
of the pair (vaudeville skits involving dumb provicials invariably
include a reference to their pronounciation. As someone once said "A
language is dialect with an army and a navy". This can be
reformulated to say that a dialect is a language you can attack
without fear of retribution.
As you perhaps noted the woman did get rather emotional?
I know that the s-plural is associated with Northern English dialect.
But is there additional evidence to suggest that he was a Northerner
(as opposed to being someone who had learned the generalization of
that plural overseas)?
Here's more stuff that has to do with your specialty: the genesis of
the English language.
In the North there were Anglo-Saxon and Scandinavian villages. The
standard theory says English (pre-Conquest?) arose from a mixture of
their respective languages. But when and where do villagers of
different villages meet, if at all? On the market. What do they do
there? Buy and sell. From and to whom? The representatives of the
Hanse; this was the only area where the Hanse dealt directly with the
producers. Now there's a good reason for creolization; note also the
Dutch and Plattdeutsch (or "Hansa-talk"!) predilection for s-plurals.
Is this perhaps where mr. Mercer's -s plurals came from?
> Torsten