Moribund Dialects and The Endangerment canon: The Case of the Ocracoke Brogue | Language | Cambridge Core (original) (raw)

Abstract

Moribund dialects threatened by the encroachment of healthy varieties of the same language have been overlooked in establishing the language endangerment canon. Endangered varieties of languages as safe as even English exhibit structures not found in mainstream language varieties and so are an invaluable resource to scholars of language variation—and, indeed, of language patterning in general. Further, the insights into language variation and change that we gain from studying moribund dialects inform our study of the types of changes that characterize endangered and dying languages. Our arguments are based on the examination of Ocracoke English, a dialect of American English which is spoken on Ocracoke Island, located off the coast of North Carolina and inhabited by about 600 year-round residents. This dialect developed in relative isolation from mainstream varieties of American English but is now threatened by encroachment from mainland dialects as the island becomes more accessible to the outside world. Using the case of the Ocracoke production of the /ay/ diphthong as , we present linguistic and sociolinguistic evidence that Ocracoke English is indeed an endangered dialect. We also describe the development of a community-based preservation program that parallels the type of proactive programs that have been implemented thus far only for endangered language situations.

References

Bailey, Charles-James N. 1973. Variation and linguistic theory. Washington, DC.: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar

Baratz, Joan. 1968. Language and the economically deprived child: A perspective. ASHA 10.143–45.Google ScholarPubMed

Bernstein, Cynthia, and Gregory, Elizabeth. 1994. The social distribution of glide shortened /ai/ in LAGS. Paper presented at SECOL 50, Memphis, TN.Google Scholar

Blanton, Phyllis, and Waters, Karen (producers). 1994. The Ocracoke brogue: A video documentary. Raleigh, NC: The North Carolina Language and Life Project.Google Scholar

Campbell, Lyle, and Muntzel, Martha C. 1989. The structural consequences of languge death. Investigating obsolescence: Studies in language contraction and obsolescence, ed. by Dorian, Nancy C., 181–96. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Cedergren, Henrietta, and Sankoee, David. 1974. Variable rules: Performance as a statistical reflection of competence. Language 50.333–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Chomsky, Noam, and Halle, Morris. 1968. The sound pattern of English. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar

Christian, Donna, Wolfram, Walt; and Dube, Nanjo. 1988. Variation and change in geographically isolated communities: Appalachian English and Ozark English (Publication of the American Dialect Society 74). Tuscaloosa, AL: University of Alabama Press.Google Scholar

Dorian, Nancy C. 1981. Language death: The life cycle of a Scottish Gaelic dialect. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsyvlania Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dorian, Nancy C. (ed.) 1989. Investigating obsolescence: Studies in language contraction and obsolescence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dorian, Nancy C. 1994. Purism vs. compromise in language revitalization and language revival. Language in Society 23.479–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Farr-Whiteman, Marcia (ed.) 1980. Reactions to Ann Arbor: Vernacular Black English and education. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar

Fasold, Ralph W. 1973. The concept of earlier-later: More or less correct. New ways of analyzing variation in English, ed. by Bailey, Charles-James N. and Shuy, Roger W., 183–97. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar

Fasold, Ralph W. 1990. The sociolinguistics of language. Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar

Feagin, Crawford. 1994. ‘Long i’ as a microcosm of Southern states speech. Paper presented at NWAV 23, Stanford, CA.Google Scholar

Guy, Gregory R. 1993. The quantitative analysis of linguistic variation. American dialect research, ed. by Preston, Dennis R., 223–49. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Hale, Ken, Krauss, Michael, Watahomigie, Lucille, Yamamoto, Akira, Craig, Colette, Jeanne, LaVerne Masayesva; and England, Nora. 1992. Endangered languages. Language 68.1–42.Google Scholar

Hill, Jane H. 1989. The social functions of relativization in obsolescent and nonobsolescent languages. In Dorian, 149–66.Google Scholar

Hoenigswald, Henry M. 1989. Obsolescence and language history: Matters of linearity, leveling, loss, and the like. In Dorian, 347–54.Google Scholar

Ihalainen, Ossi. 1991. Periphrastic do in affirmative sentences in the dialect of East Somerset. Dialects of English: Studies in grammatical variation, ed. by Trud-gill, Peter and Chambers, J. K., 148–160. New York: Longman.Google Scholar

King, Ruth. 1989. On the social meaning of linguistic variability in language death situations: Variation in Newfoundland French. In Dorian, 139–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kurath, Hans. 1939. Handbook of the linguistic geography of New England. Providence, RI: Brown University.Google Scholar

Labov, William. 1969. The logic of nonstandard English. Georgetown monographs on language and linguistics 22, ed. by Alatis, James, 1–44. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar

Labov, William. 1972. Some principles of linguistic methodology. Language in Society 1.97–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Labov, William. 1982. Objectivity and commitment in linguistic science. Language in Society 11.165–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Labov, William. 1991. The three dialects of English. Quantitative analyses of sound change in progress, ed. by Eckert, Penelope, 1–44. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Labov, William. 1994. Principles of linguistic change: Internal factors. Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar

Milroy, Lesley. 1980. Language and social networks. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar

Robins, Robert H., and Uhlenbeck, Eugenius M. (eds.) 1991. Endangered languages. Oxford: Berg.Google Scholar

Sankoff, David, and Labov, William. 1979. On the uses of variable rules. Language in Society 8.189–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schilling-Estes, Natalie. 1995. Production, perception, and patterning: ‘Performance’ speech in an endangered dialect variety. Penn Review of Linguistics 18. to appear.Google Scholar

Schilling-Estes, Natalie, and Wolfram, Walt. 1994. Convergent explanation and alternative regularization patterns: Were/weren't leveling in a vernacular English variety. Language Variation and Change 6.273–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schmidt, Albert. 1985. Young people's Dyirbal: An example of language death from Australia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Smitherman, Geneva (ed.) 1981. Black English and the education of black children and youth: Proceedings of the National Invitational Symposium on the King decision. Detroit, MI: Wayne State University Press.Google Scholar

Thomas, Erik. 1995. Phonetic factors and perceptual reanalysis in sound change. Austin, TX: University of Texas dissertation.Google Scholar

Thomas, Erik, and Bailey, Guy. 1994. The origins of monophthongal /ai/ in Southern speech. Paper presented at SECOL 50, Memphis, TN.Google Scholar

Trudgill, Peter, and Chambers, J. K. (eds.) 1991. Dialects of English: Studies in grammatical variation. New York: Longman.Google Scholar

Tsitsipis, Lukas D. 1989. Skewed performance and full performance in language obsolescence: The case of an Albanian variety. In Dorian, 139–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Weinreich, Uriel, Labov, William; and Herzog, Marvin. 1968. Empirical foundations for a theory of sound change. Directions for historical linguistics, ed. by Lehmann, Winfred P. and Malkiel, Yakov, 95–198. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar

Wolfram, Walt. 1970. Sociolinguistic premises and nature of nonstandard dialects. The Speech Teacher (September). 176–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wolfram, Walt. 1988. Reconsidering the semantics of a- prefixing. American Speech 63.247–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wolfram, Walt. 1993a. Identifying and interpreting variables. American dialect research, ed. by Preston, Dennis R., 193–222. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wolfram, Walt. 1993b. Ethical considerations in language awareness programs. Issues in Applied Linguistics 4.225–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wolfram, Walt, and Christian, Donna. 1976. Appalachian speech. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar

Wolfram, Walt, and Schilling-Estes, Natalie. 1995. On the social basis of phonetic resistance. The NWAV Proceedings. Stanford, CA: Center for the Study of Information and Linguistics.Google Scholar

Wolfram, Walt, and Schilling-Estes, Natalie. 1996. Hoi Toide on the Outer Banks: The story of the brogue. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. to appear.Google Scholar

Wolfram, Walt, Schilling-Estes, Natalie; and Hazen, Kirk. 1995. Dialects and the Ocracoke brogue. An eighth-grade curriculum. Raleigh, NC: The North Carolina Language and Life Project.Google Scholar

Wolfram, Walt, Schilling-Estes, Natalie; and Craig, Chris. 1996. The sociolinguistic complexity of quasi-isolated southern coastal communities. Language variation in the South revisited, ed. by Bernstein, Cynthia, Nunnally, Tom, and Sabino, Robin. University, AL: University of Alabama Press. to appear.Google Scholar

Woodbury, Anthony C. 1993. A defense of the proposition ‘When a language dies, a culture dies’. Texas Linguistic Forum 33: Proceedings of the first annual symposium on language in society, Austin, TX.Google Scholar