Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T05:43:27.489Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The apparent time construct

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Guy Bailey ,
Tom Wikle ,
Jan Tillery  and
Lori Sand
Guy Bailey
Affiliation:
Oklahoma State University
Tom Wikle
Affiliation:
Oklahoma State University
Jan Tillery
Affiliation:
Oklahoma State University
Lori Sand
Affiliation:
Oklahoma State University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The use of apparent time differences to study language change in progress has been a basic analytical construct in quantitative sociolinguistics for over 30 years. The basic assumption underlying the construct is that, unless there is evidence to the contrary, differences among generations of similar adults mirror actual diachronic developments in a language: the speech of each generation is assumed to reflect the language more or less as it existed at the time when that generation learned the language. In providing a mirror of real time change, apparent time forms the basis of a conceptual framework for exploring language change in progress. However, the basic assumptions that underlie apparent time have never been fully tested. This article tests those assumptions by comparing apparent time data from two recent random sample telephone surveys of Texas speech with real time data from the Linguistic Atlas of the Gulf States, which was conducted some 15 years before the telephone surveys. The real time differences between the linguistic atlas data and the data from the telephone surveys provide strong support for the apparent time construct. Whenever apparent time data in the telephone surveys clearly suggest change in progress, the atlas data show substantially fewer innovative forms. Whenever the apparent time data suggest stable variation, the atlas data are virtually identical to that from the more recent surveys. Whenever the relationships between real and apparent time data are unclear, sorting out mitigating factors, such as nativity and subregional residence, clarifies and confirms the relationships. The results of our test of the apparent time construct suggest that it is unquestionably a valid and useful analytical tool.

Type
Research Article
Information
Language Variation and Change , Volume 3 , Issue 3 , October 1991 , pp. 241 - 264
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1991

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bailey, Guy & Bernstein, Cynthia. (1989). Methodology for a phonological survey of Texas. Journal of English Linguistics 22:6–16.Google Scholar
Bailey, Guy & Dyer, Margie. (1992). An approach to sampling in dialectology. American Speech 67:1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bailey, Guy & Tillery, Jan. (forthcoming). The social status of two southernisms. Journal of English Linguistics.Google Scholar
Bailey, Guy, Wikle, Tom, Tillery, Jan & Sand, Lori, (forthcoming). Methodology for a Survey of Oklahoma Dialects. Proceedings of the Mid-America Linguistics Conference.Google Scholar
Bernstein, Cynthia. (1990, 07). A phonological survey of Texas: Cluster analysis of Texas poll data. Paper presented at the International Congress of Dialectologists,Bambery.Google Scholar
Bernstein, Cynthia. (1991, 04). Measuring social causes of phonological variation. Paper presented at the Southeastern Conference on Linguistics,Knoxville.Google Scholar
Chambers, J. K. & Trudgill, Peter. (1980). Dialectology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gauchat, Louis. (1905). L'unité phonétique dans le patois d'une commune. In Aus Romanischen Sprachen und Literaturen: Festschrift Heinrich Mort. Halle: Max Niemeyer. 175–232.Google Scholar
Hermann, M. E. (1929). Lautveränderungen in der Individualsprache einer Mundart. Nachrichten der Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen, Philosophisch-historische Klasse 11:195–214.Google Scholar
Hockett, Charles F. (1958). A course in modern linguistics. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Labov, William. (1963). The social motivation of a sound change. Word 19:273–309.Google Scholar
Labov, William. (1966). The social stratification of English in New York City. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
Labov, William. (1972). Sociolinguistic patterns. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Labov, William. (1981). What can be learned about change in progress from synchronic descriptions. In Sankoff, David & Cedergren, Henrietta (eds.), Variation omnibus. Edmonton: Linguistic Research, Inc.Google Scholar
Pederson, Lee, Leas, Susan, Bailey, Guy & Bassett, Marvin. (1981). LAGS: The basic materials. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms.Google Scholar
Pederson, Lee, Leas, Susan, Bailey, Guy & Bassett, Marvin. (1986). Linguistic Atlas of the Gulf States, Vol. 1: Handbook. Athens: University of Georgia Press.Google Scholar
Thibault, Pierrette & Daveluy, Michelle, (1989). Quelques traces du passage du temps dans le parler des Montréalais, 1971–1984. Language Variation and Change 1:19–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, Erik & Bailey, Guy. (1990, 10). A phonetic description of monophthongal /ai/. Paper presented at the NWAVE XIX,Philadelphia.Google Scholar