Demonstrative adjectives and pronouns in a Devonshire dialect.
Id like to give not only the grammatical description of adjectives and pronouns in the south-western part of England, but the pronunciation of demonstrative adjectives and pronouns found in the dialect of south zeal, a village on the northern edge of Dartmoor.
Martin Harris made his research work in this field The analysis is based on a corpus of some twenty hours of tape-recorded conversation, collected in the course of work for a Ph. D. thesis, either in the form of a dialogue between two informants or of a monologue on the part of a single informant.
The principal informant, Mr George Cooper, has lived for some eighty-five years in the parish, and has only spent one night in his life outside the county of Devon. For the purposes of this chapter, only one phonological point needs to be made. The r phoneme is retroflex in final position, and induces a preceding weak central vowel ? when occurring in the environment Vr, thus V?r, when the V in question is i or å. These are the only two vowels relevant within this work The transcription used for the actual forms should not give rise to any further problems.
In the case of the illustrative examples, 1 have decided to use a quasi-orthographical representation, since the actual phonetic phonemic realization is not directly relevant to the point under discussion.
The prominent syllable s in each example are illustrated thus. We may now proceed to look at the actual forms found in the dialect Table 1 Singular adjective Simple ði z ðs ðat ði-ki First compound ði z ji r ðis ji r ðat ðår ði-ki ðår Singular pronoun Simple ðis ði z ðat ði-ki First compound ðis ji r ðat ðår Second compound ðis ji r ji r ðat ðår ðår Plural adjective Simple ðejz ði z ðej ði-ki First compound ðejz ji r ðej ðår ði-ki ðår Plural pronoun Simple only ðej The relative frequency of these forms is shown in Table 2. Adjectives Singular Plural ði z 13 ðejz 23 ðis 11 ði z 2 ði z ji r 9 ðejz ji r 7 ðis ji r 2 ði z ji r 4 ðat 15 ðej 49 ðat ðår 3 ðej ðår 2 ði-ki 43 ði-ki 10 ði-ki ðår 4 ði-ki ðår 3 100 100 Pronouns Singular Plural ðis 10 ði z 4 ðis ji r 2 ðis ji r ji r 25 ðej 100 ðat 22 ðat ðår 2 ðat ðår ðår 34 ði-ki 1 100 The paradigm as outlined in Tables 1, 2 presents few morphological problems.
The two pairs of forms ði z and ðis and ðejz and ði z do, however, need examination.
In the singular of the adjective, the two forms ði z and ðis are both frequent, being used mostly in unstressed and stressed position respectively.
However, some 30 per cent of the occurrences of each form do not follow this tendency, so it does not seem profitable to set up a stressed unstressed opposition, particularly since such a division would serve no purpose in the case of ðat and ði-ki. With the first compounds, the form ði z ji r outnumbers ðis ji r in the ratio 1 in the adjective position.
When functioning as a pronoun, ði z is rare as a simple form and never occurs at all either within a first compound although first compounds are so rare as pronouns that no generalization can usefully be made, see Table 2 or within a second compound, where only ðis ji r ji r, never ði z ji r ji r, is found.
Thus ðis seems to be more favoured as a pronoun, and ði z as an adjective this, of course, is only a tendency.
In the plural, the position is more clear-cut. The normal adjective plurals are ðejz and ðejz ji r, which outnumber ði z and ði z ji r by a large margin see Table 2 . Such cases of the latter as do occur may perhaps be ascribed to Standard English influence, since ði z is clearly used normally as a singular rather than a plural form. The absence of any reflex of ðejz as a plural pronoun is discussed below.
The other forms present little morphological difficulty. There is only one occurrence of ði-ki as a pronoun, although as an adjective it almost outnumbers ði z and ðat together, so it seems to belong primarily to the adjectival system. The normal singular pronouns are either the simple forms or the second compounds, the first compounds being most unusual.
In the plural of the adjective, the simple forms are much more frequent than their equivalent first compounds, whereas in the plural of the pronoun, there is apparently only the one form ðej. The status of this form is discussed below. The following are examples of those demonstatives which are not further discussed below. The uses of ðat as a singular adjective, of ði-ki as a singular or plural adjective, and of all the pronouns are fully exemplified in the syntactic section, and thus no examples are given here. ði z I come down here to live in this little old street.
Well this year, I done a bit lighter. Now this season, tis over. This was coming this way. ðis ji r Theres all this here sort of jobs going on to day. I was down there where this here plough was up here. Iðejzl These places be alright if you know where youm going to. They got to pay the wages to these people.
I do a bit of gardening and likes of all these things. ðej What makes all they hills look so well? Where Jim was sent to, they two met. They wont have all they sort of people up there. Tell Cooper to shift they stones there. We may now turn to the functions of those forms whose uses are identifiably different from those of Standard English. The most striking feature of the demonstrative system is that, in the singular adjective system at least, there is apparently a three-term opposition ði z ðat ði-ki, in contrast with the two-term system of Standard English.
It seems fair to say that the role of ði z is similar to that of this in Standard English but see note on ði z ji r below, but any attempt to differentiate ðat and ði-ki proves extremely difficult. There are a number of sentences of the type If you was to put that stick in across thicky pony where the two forms seem to fill the same function. The virtual absence of ði-ki from the pronoun system, together with the fact that ði-ki is three times as frequent as ðat as an adjective, would suggest that ði-ki is the normal adjectival form in the dialect, and that ðat has a greater range, having a function which is basically pronominal but in addition adjectival at times.
This is further supported by the fact that when presented with sentences of the type He turned that hare three times and he caught it. the informant claimed that ði-ki would be equally acceptable and could indicate no distinction.
Thus there are pairs of sentences such as I used to walk that there two mile and half. You d walk thicky nine mile. or again That finished that job. I wouldnt have thicky job. There are certain cases where either one form or the other seems to be required. In particular, ðat is used when actually indicating a size with the hands Go up and see the stones that length, that thickness. while ði-ki is used in contrast with t ðr, where Standard English would normally use one or the one. Soon as they got it thicky hand, theyd thruck ? it away with the tother.
In the adjective plural, the contrast between ði-ki and ðej is not a real one, since ði-ki is found only with numerals. I had thicky eighteen bob a week. I expect thicky nine was all one mans sheep. When presented with ði-ki before plural nominals, the informant rejected them. It would therefore be preferable to redefine singular and plural in the dialect to account for this, rather than to consider ði-ki as a plural form this would accordingly neutralize in the plural any ði-ki ðat opposition which may exist in the singular. In the pronominal system, there is only one occurrence of ði-ki My missis bought thicky before her died a radio. It is true that most of the occurrences of ðal as a pronoun do not refer to a specific antecedent, e.g. I cant afford to do that, but there are a number of cases where ðat does play a role closely parallel to ði-ki above.
As I was passing that, and that was passing me a dog. As there are no other examples of ði-ki as a singular pronoun, either simply or as part of a first or second compound, and no cases at all in the plural, it seems fair to say that any ðat ði-ki opposition is realized only in the singular adjective, and that here too it is difficult to see what the basis of any opposition might be. A list of representative examples of ðat, ðat ðår, ði-ki and ði-ki ðår is given below, in their function as singular adjectives, so that they can easily be compared. ðat All they got to do is steer that little wheel a bit. Youd put in dynamite to blast that stone off. Usd go in that pub and have a pint of beer. ðat ðår I used to walk that there two mile and half. Good as gold, that there thing was. ði-ki All of us be in thicky boat, you see. Thicky dog, he said, been there all day? Stairs went up there, like, thicky side, thicky end of the wall. Thicky place would be black with people I travelled thicky old road four year Whats thicky little place called, before you get up Yelverton? Thicky field, theyd break it, they called it. He was going to put me and Jan up thicky night.
Never been through thicky road since. ði-ki ðår Jim Connell carted home thicky there jar of cyder same as he carted it up. We got in thicky there field The morphological status of ði z and ðis as singulars, and of ðejz and ði z as plurals has already been discussed.
Syntactically, their use seems to correspond to Standard English closely, except in one important respect the first compound forms are used in a way similar to a non-standard usage which is fairly widespread, in the sense of a or a certain. ði z ji r Hed got this here dog. Youd put this here great crust on top. The first compound is never used as an equivalent to Standard English this, being reserved for uses of the type above, although there is another form ði z ji r, which is occasionally used where Standard English would show this, eg Between here and this village here like. In the plural, an exactly parallel syntactic division occurs between ðejz cf Standard English these and ðejz ji r. These here maidens that was here I used to put them in front of these here sheds.
They got these here hay-turners In all the above examples, the first compounds, both singular and plural, refer to items which have not been mentioned before, and which are not adjacent to the speaker they are thus referentially distinct from the normal use of Standard English this. Although we can fairly say that ði z and ðejz are syntactically distinct from their equivalent first compounds, what of the other adjective compounds ðat ðår, ði-ki ðår and ðej ðår ? There seems to be no syntactic division in these cases between them and their equivalent simple forms, so it is perhaps not surprising that Table 2 shows them to be without exception much less common than ði z ji r and ðejz ji r, which have a distinct syntactic role. Forms such as Us got in thicky there field and Good as gold, that there thing was. do not seem any different from Us mowed thicky little plat and He turned that hare three times There is certainly no apparent correlation with any notional degree of emphasis.
In the case of the singular pronouns, the first compounds are extremely rare, cf. He done well with that there. ðat ðår He went out broad, this here whats dead now. ði z ji r. The basic opposition here is between the simple forms and the second compounds ðis ji r ji r and ðat ðår ðår. Here the syntactic division is fairly clear the second compounds are used in certain adverbial phrases, particularly after like, where the demonstrative refers to no specific antecedent Tis getting like this here here. Ive had to walk home after that there there. and also, with reference to a specific antecedent, when particular emphasis is drawn to the item in question. Ive had the wireless there, this here here, for good many years.
One of these here crocks, something like that there there.
In all other cases, the simple forms are used. This was coming this way. Then he did meet with this. Thats one bad job, that was. ðat is used particularly frequently in two phrases, likes of that and and that. He doed a bit of farmering and likes of that. I got a jumper and that home now. The last question is one of the most interesting.
Is there really only one form ðej functioning as a plural pronoun? At first sight, this would seem improbable, given that there is a plural adjective form ðejz and that the this that opposition is maintained elsewhere in the system.
However, all attempts to elicit such a form failed, and there is at least one spontaneous utterance where, if a form ðejz did exist as a pronoun, it might be expected to appear Theres thousands of acres out there would grow it better than they in here grow it. Taking all these factors together, we tentatively suggest that the opposition this that is neutralized in this position, even though this seems rather unlikely, given the adjectival system.
But there is another point.
It is in fact difficult to identify occurrences of ðej as demonstratives with any certainty, because the form is identical with that of the personal pronoun ðej Standard English they or them. We may observe at this point that in the dialect, the third plural personal pronoun forms are ðej and ?m. The first form is used in all stressed positions and as unstressed subject except in inverted Q-forms the second is used as the unstressed non-subject, and as the unstressed subject in inverted Q-forms.
Thus we find ðej I had to show the pony but they winned the cups. I could chuck they about.
Thats up to they, they know what theym a bout of. Theyd take em back of your door for half-a-crown. ?m They expect to have a name to the house, dont em? Where do em get the tools to? That was as far as ever they paid em. I stayed there long with em for more than a year. When considering ðej, we find a series of utterances such as the following in which a division between personal and demonstrative pronouns would be largely arbitrary.
I could throw em. chuck they about. They in towns, they go to concerts, Us finished up with they in They do seven acres a day, now, with they. There is they that take an interest in it. I could cut in so straight as some of they that never do it. Although, following the system of Standard English, we have so far differentiated between ðej as a stressed personal pronoun and ðej as a demonstrative pronoun, it is clearly more economical, in terms of the dialectal material, to consider the two functions as coalescing within one system STRESSED ðej UNSTRESSED ?m. This system would operate in all positions where Standard English would show either a third person plural personal pronoun, or a plural demonstrative pronoun.
Similarly, there is a dialectal system STRESSED ðat UNSTRESSED it in the third person singular, where the referent is abstract or non-specific, in that ðat never occurs unstressed nor it stressed.
Thus in contrast to the last example above, we find I seed some of em that never walked a mile in their lives, where the form ?m is unstressed. Such unstressed examples are much rarer than stressed examples in positions where Standard English would show a demonstrative pronoun simply because those is normally stressed in Standard English. We should note finally, however, that this analysis of the material does not in any way explain the absence of a plural pronoun ðejz, any more than the linking of ðat with it precludes the existence of a singular demonstrative pronoun ði z. The non-existence of ðejz as a pronoun seems best considered as an accidental gap in the corpus. 18, p.20 3.6 Verbs In the south-western dialects in the singular and in the plural in Present Indefinite the ending -s or -es is used, if the Subject is expressed as a noun. e.g. Boys as wants more mun ask. The other ehaps works hard In Devonshire -th ð is added to verbs in the plural in Present Indefinite The form am m of the verb to be is used after the personal pronouns e.g. We wem we are Somersetshire you, they - After the words if, when, until, after Future Indefinite sometimes used The Perfect form in affirmative sentences, in which the Subject is expressed as a personal pronoun, is usually built without the auxiliary verb have e.g. We done it. I seen him. They been and taken it The negation in the south-western dialects is expressed with the adding of the negative particle not in the form -na to the verb. e.g. comesna comes not winna will not sanna shall not canna cannot maunna must not sudna should not dinna do not binna be not haena have not daurna dare not - It is typical to the south-western dialects to use too many nigotiations in the same phrase e.g. I yint seen nobody nowheres.
I dont want to have nothing at all to say to you. I didnt mean no harm. Yell better jist nae detain me nae langer The negative and interrogative forms of the modal verbs are built with the help of the auxiliary verb do. e.g. He did not ought to do it. You do not ought to hear it Some verbs which are regular in the Standard language become irregular in the south-western dialects e.g. dive - dave, help - holp - Sometimes the ending -ed is added to some irregular verbs in the Past Simple e.g. bear - borned, begin - begunned, break - broked, climb - clombed, dig - dugged, dive - doved, drive - droved, fall - felled, find - funded, fly - flewed, give - gaved, grip - grapped, hang - hunged, help - holped, hold - helded, know - knewed, rise - rosed, see - sawed, shake - shooked, shear - shored, sing - sunged, sink - sunked, spin - spunned, spring - sprunged, steal - stoled, strive - stroved, swear - swored, swim - swammed, take - tooked, tear - tored, wear - wored, weave - woved, write - wroted But some irregular verbs in the Past Simple Tense are used as regular e.g. begin - beginned Western Som Dev. bite - bited W. Som. blow - blowed Dev. drink - drinked W. Som. drive - drived Dev. fall - falled W. Som Dev. fight - fighted W. Som. fall - falled Som Dev. go - gade Dev. grow - growed W. Som. hang - hanged W. Som. lose - losed W. Som Dev. ring - ringed W. Som. speak - speaked Som. spring - springed W. Som Dev Many verbs form the Past Participle with the help of the ending -n. e.g. call - callen catch - catchen come - comen - In some cases in the Past Participle a vowel in the root is changed, and the suffix is not added. e.g. catch - k t? hit - a t lead - la d - In the south-western dialects intransitive verbs have the ending -y ý In Western Somersetshire before the infinitive in the function of the adverbial modifier of purpose for is used e.g. Hast gotten a bit for mend it with? Have you got anything to mend it with? 3.7 Adverbs In the south-western dialects an adjective is used instead of the adverb. e.g. You might easy fall To build the comparative degree far is used instead of further laster instead of more lately The suparative degree farest lastest likerest rathest. a The adverbs of place abeigh ?býx - at some distance abune, aboon - above ablow - under ben, benn - inside outbye utbaý - outside aboot - around hine, hine awa - far ewest - near b The adverbs of the mode of action hoo, foo - how weel - great richt - right ither - yet sae - so c The adverbs of degree much e.g. How are you today Not much, thank you. much is also used in the meaning of wonderfully e.g. It is much you boys cant let alone they there ducks. It was much he hadnt a been a killed. rising rising is often used in the meaning of nearly e.g. How old is the boy Hes rising five fell, unco, gey, huge, fu, rael are used in the meaning of very ower, owre aur - too - maist - nearly - clean - at all - that - so - feckly - in many cases - freely - fully - naarhan, nighhan - nearly - han, fair - at all d Adverbs of time whan, fan - when belive, belyve - now yinst - at once neist - then fernyear - last year afore before e.g. Us can wait avore you be ready, sir. next - in some time e.g. next day the day after tomorrow while till, if e.g. Youll never make any progress while you listen to me. You have to wait while Saturday. 3.8