David Durian - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

20th century vowel variation in columbus oh a new perspective or the canadian shift in columbus n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
David Durian PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
David Durian

play fullscreen
1 / 78
David Durian
127 Views
Download Presentation
maisie
Download Presentation

David Durian

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. 20th Century Vowel Variation in Columbus, OH: A New Perspective (or, the Canadian Shift in Columbus?) David Durian Department of LinguisticsThe Ohio State UniversityThe Century of Language Change in Columbus, OH (CLCC) Project

  2. Goals of Today’s Study • Document patterns of vocalic variation and change over the course of the 20th Century in Columbus, OH • Document these patterns in the speech of blue collar and white collar speakers to determine what impact social class has had on the patterns over time • Add to the growing body of research involving instrumental analyses of historical patterns of vowel variation and change in North American Midland Cities

  3. Previous Studies of Columbus /Central Ohio Vowel Variation • Thomas ([1989]/1993); (2001); (2004); (2006) • Labov, Ash & Boberg (2006) • Hartman-Keiser, et al. (1997) • Durian & Smith (2005) • Durian, Dodsworth & Schumacher (in press) • Durian, Schumacher & Reynard (2007) • Frazer (1978)--Impressionistic Analysis • Kurath (1930)--Impressionistic Analysis • Dodsworth (2005)--Worthington, OH Results • Thomas (1996)--Johnstown, OH Results • Clopper, Pisoni & de Jong (2005)--Midland speech

  4. Three Issues Remaining Unresolved in Previous Studies • 1) Lack of sufficient audio recorded data from informants born before 1930 to facilitate robust comparative instrumental analysis of patterns of vowel variation over time • Bulk of previous instrumental studies have focused on speakers born 1930-1985 • 2) Data have been obtained from speakers of different social class backgrounds in different studies, making systematic comparisons on the impact of class challenging

  5. Three Issues Remaining Unresolved in Previous Studies • 3) In instrumental analyses, different researchers have used different approaches to obtaining measurements of vowel variation

  6. Resolving The Issues • Analyze and instrumentally compare patterns of vowel variation obtained from speakers born throughout the 20th Century using audio recorded data • Analyze and compare data obtained from speakers of both blue and white collar backgrounds • Obtain measurements from similar points in the vowels analyzed to facilitate direct comparisons among speakers

  7. Variables to Be Discussed Today • Raising and lowering of the nucleus of /ae/ in non-pre-nasal and non-pre-velar environments (BAT) • Retraction of the nucleus of /E/ in non-pre-nasal environments (BET) • Retraction of the nucleus of /I/ in non-pre-nasal environments (BIT) (Are the three covariantly interrelated in Columbus?)

  8. Study Population • 22 representative vowel systems obtained from 22 European American informants • All native English speaking, lifelong Columbus residents • All save 5 raised in the Columbus Central City Area • One informant (born 1896) raised in a non-suburban “periphery” portion of the larger Columbus metropolitan area • Remaining 4 informants (all born 1983-1985) raised in Central City area until later childhood years (ages 8-12), then moved to geographically close surrounding suburbs

  9. Central City Columbus and Close Surrounding Suburbs (Definition of Central City Columbus Based on Description Provided in Hunker, 2001) = Central City = “Periphery Area” = Suburbs Canal Winchester

  10. Study Population *Conversational portions of Dictionary of American Regional English interviews used for the purposes of this analysis.

  11. Operationalization of “Collar Color” • 10 blue collar speakers; 12 white collar speakers • Social class defined using emergent categorization schema, based on speaker perceptions of “color color” as elicited from speakers during the course of the study • Objective quantification of “collar color” in the study determined using the following measures: • Occupation of informant • Occupation of informant’s parents and grandparents (if known) • Highest level of education completed by informant and their parents (if known) • If above information not discussed during an interview • Average income level of residents, and property value for homes owned by residents, for the area in which the speaker was raised during their formative years • Blue collar occupations (e.g., factory worker, HVAC repair person, food service employee) • White collar occupations (e.g., administrative secretary, librarian, lawyer, college dean)

  12. Methods • All tokens extracted from casual interview style speech • Typical interview length 60 minutes, although some were shorter and some longer (Range: 15 minutes to 75 minutes) • 10 tokens of each vowel class extracted from each speaker • All vowels measured from tokens occurring in environments which: • Did not occur before a nasal or /r/ or /l/ • Did not occur following /l/ or /r/ • Tokens included in the BAT class also exclude following velars • Data first transformed to BARK using the formula provided by Tranmuller (1990) • Data then normalized using the z-score technique (Lobanov, 1971) • Mean of the 10 tokens’ normalized values used as plot points in all plots

  13. Vowel Plots In our plots: • Vowels classes presented as diphthongs use: • A point extracted at 25% of the vowel’s duration to represent nuclei targets • A point extracted at 75% of the vowel’s duration to represent glide targets • Vowels classes presented as monophthongs use: • A point extracted at 50% of the vowels duration to represent nuclei (equivalent to using measurements taken at steady state) • Normalized values are plotted in z-score units (z-score as in standard deviation, not to be confused with “Z” as in BARK units)

  14. SexGeneration 1 2 3 4 =female white collar = male blue collar Generation 1 2 3 4 White Collar Blue Collar Younger Older Nucleus Color

  15. SexGeneration 1 2 3 4 =female white collar = male blue collar Female Male Nucleus Shape

  16. BAT, BAN, and BAG in Columbus • As discussed in previous studies (e.g., Thomas, [1989]/1993, 2001; Hartman-Keiser, et al., 1997; Labov, Ash & Boberg, 2006) /ae/ shows raising pre-nasally (BAN) in Columbus • Although not shown in the plots today, all informants (continue to) show some degree of raising for BAN, regardless of generational group • With the exception of speakers showing continuous /ae/ systems, BAG typically shows similar raising or lowering behavior to BAT (see Labov, Ash & Boberg, 2006 for more details) • As with BAN, BAG is not shown in the following plots

  17. SexGeneration 1 2 3 4 =female white collar = male blue collar

  18. SexGeneration 1 2 3 4 =female white collar = male blue collar Generation 1 Trends: a) “Falling Diphthong*” Higher Nucleus/ Lower and Downward Inglide * [ɛæ] in more strongly diphthongal realizations [æ] in more strongly monophthongal realizations

  19. SexGeneration 1 2 3 4 =female white collar = male blue collar Generation 1 Trends: a) “Falling Diphthong” Higher Nucleus/ Lower and Downward Inglide

  20. SexGeneration 1 2 3 4 =female white collar = male blue collar

  21. SexGeneration 1 2 3 4 =female white collar = male blue collar Generation 2 Trends: a) Continued “Falling Diphthong”Realizations

  22. SexGeneration 1 2 3 4 =female white collar = male blue collar Generation 2 Trends: a) Continued “Falling Diphthong”Realizations b) Blue Collar Woman ShowsContinuous System

  23. SexGeneration 1 2 3 4 =female white collar = male blue collar Generation 2 Trends: a) Continued “Falling Diphthong”Raising (with Some Breaking) b) Blue Collar Woman ShowsContinuous Raising Generation 3 Trends: a) Continued “Falling Diphthong” Realizations

  24. SexGeneration 1 2 3 4 =female white collar = male blue collar Generation 2 Trends: a) Continued “Falling Diphthong”Raising (with Some Breaking) b) Blue Collar Woman ShowsContinuous Raising Generation 3 Trends: a) Continued “Falling Diphthong” Realizations b) Retraction of the Nucleus among Some Speakers (towards BOT)

  25. SexGeneration 1 2 3 4 =female white collar = male blue collar Generation 2 Trends: a) Continued “Falling Diphthong”Raising (with Some Breaking) b) Blue Collar Woman ShowsContinuous Raising Informant born 1956 Generation 3 Trends: a) Continued “Falling Diphthong” Realizations b) Retraction of the Nucleus among Some Speakers (towards BOT)

  26. SexGeneration 1 2 3 4 =female white collar = male blue collar Generation 2 Trends: a) Continued “Falling Diphthong”Raising (with Some Breaking) b) Blue Collar Woman ShowsContinuous Raising Informants born 1962 and 1967 Generation 3 Trends: a) Continued “Falling Diphthong” Realizations b) Retraction of the Nucleus among Some Speakers (towards BOT) c) Mild “Rising Diphthong**” Realizations among White Collar Men (Lower Nucleus/ Higher and Rising Inglide) ** [æɛ] in more strongly diphthongal realizations; [æ] with variable retraction toward BOT in more strongly monophthongal realizations

  27. SexGeneration 1 2 3 4 =female white collar = male blue collar Generation 4 Trends: a) “Rising Diphthong” Realizations among Almost All Speakers

  28. SexGeneration 1 2 3 4 =female white collar = male blue collar Generation 4 Trends: a) “Rising Diphthong” Realizations among Almost All Speakers b) Residual “Falling Diphthong” Realizations Found Only among Blue Collar Speakers

  29. SexGeneration 1 2 3 4 =female white collar = male blue collar Generation 4 Trends: a) “Rising Diphthong” Realizations among Almost All Speakers b) Residual “FallingDiphthong” Realizations Found Only among Blue Collar Speakersc) Some Nucleus Retraction

  30. SexGeneration 1 2 3 4 =female white collar = male blue collar

  31. SexGeneration 1 2 3 4 =female white collar = male blue collar

  32. SexGeneration 1 2 3 4 =female white collar = male blue collar

  33. SexGeneration 1 2 3 4 =female white collar = male blue collar Trends: a) Nucleus Lowering and Retraction among Generation 3 Women

  34. SexGeneration 1 2 3 4 =female white collar = male blue collar Trends: a) Nucleus Lowering and Retraction among Generation 3 Women

  35. SexGeneration 1 2 3 4 =female white collar = male blue collar Trends: a) Nucleus Lowering and Retraction among Generation 3 Women

  36. SexGeneration 1 2 3 4 =female white collar = male blue collar Trends: a) Nucleus Lowering and Retraction among Generation 3 Women b) Stronger Retraction among White Collar Women

  37. SexGeneration 1 2 3 4 =female white collar = male blue collar Trends: a) Mild Nucleus Raising and Fronting among Generation 4 Women

  38. SexGeneration 1 2 3 4 =female white collar = male blue collar Trends: a) Mild Nucleus Raising and Fronting among Generation 4 Women b) Stronger Raising among White Collar Women

  39. SexGeneration 1 2 3 4 =female white collar = male blue collar Trends: a) Nucleus Raising and Fronting among Generation 4 Women b) Stronger Raising among White Collar Women

  40. SexGeneration 1 2 3 4 =female white collar = male blue collar Trends: a) Nucleus Raising and Fronting among Generation 4 Women b) Stronger Raising among White Collar Women Trends: a) BET shows very mild retraction for White Collar Generation 2 Male

  41. SexGeneration 1 2 3 4 =female white collar = male blue collar Trends: a) Nucleus Raising and Fronting among Generation 4 Women b) Stronger Raising among White Collar Women Trends: a) BET shows very mild retraction for White Collar Generation 2 Male

  42. SexGeneration 1 2 3 4 =female white collar = male blue collar Trends: a) BET remains cardinal for Blue Collar Generation 1, 2, and 3 Males

  43. SexGeneration 1 2 3 4 =female white collar = male blue collar Trends: a) BET remains cardinal for Blue Collar Generation 1, 2, and 3 Males

  44. SexGeneration 1 2 3 4 =female white collar = male blue collar Trends: a) BET remains cardinal for Blue Collar Generation 1, 2, and 3 Males

  45. SexGeneration 1 2 3 4 =female white collar = male blue collar Trends: b) Retraction among Generation 3 White Collar Men

  46. SexGeneration 1 2 3 4 =female white collar = male blue collar Trends: a) Further Retraction among Generation 4 White Collar Men

  47. SexGeneration 1 2 3 4 =female white collar = male blue collar Trends: a) Further Retraction among Generation 4 White Collar Men b) Mild Raising and Some Retraction among Blue Collar Men

  48. SexGeneration 1 2 3 4 =female white collar = male blue collar Man with raised BAT nucleus Men with “Rising Diphthong” BAT (with retracted nuclei)

  49. BET in Relationship to BAT among Generation 4 (b. 1976-1985) BET (raised and mildly fronted nucleus) Women [White Collar Speakers Lead] BAT (“rising diphthong” with retracted nucleus) BET (retracted nucleus) Men [White Collar Speakers Lead] BAT (“rising diphthong” with retracted nucleus)

  50. SexGeneration 1 2 3 4 =female white collar = male blue collar Trends: a) Trend toward some retraction of BIT across time for White Collar Females through Generation 3