Studies in the Phonology of Colloquial

English 1st Edition K. R. Lodge

Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://textbookfull.com/product/studies-in-the-phonology-of-colloquial-english-1st-edit
ion-k-r-lodge/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Old English and the Theory of Phonology Bezalel E.

Dresher

https://textbookfull.com/product/old-english-and-the-theory-of-
phonology-bezalel-e-dresher/

Colloquial English Structure and Variation Andrew

Radford

https://textbookfull.com/product/colloquial-english-structure-
and-variation-andrew-radford/

A Contrastive Metrical Analysis of Main Word Stress in

English and Cairene Colloquial Arabic 1st Edition
Mohamed Fathy Khalifa

https://textbookfull.com/product/a-contrastive-metrical-analysis-
of-main-word-stress-in-english-and-cairene-colloquial-arabic-1st-
edition-mohamed-fathy-khalifa/

The Phonology of Chichewa 1st Edition Laura J. Downing

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-phonology-of-chichewa-1st-
edition-laura-j-downing/
The Practicalities of Early English Performance
Manuscripts Records and Staging Shifting Paradigms in
Early English Drama Studies Variorum Collected Studies
1st Edition Peter Meredith
https://textbookfull.com/product/the-practicalities-of-early-
english-performance-manuscripts-records-and-staging-shifting-
paradigms-in-early-english-drama-studies-variorum-collected-
studies-1st-edition-peter-meredith/

Rise of the Silvan 1st Edition R K Lander

https://textbookfull.com/product/rise-of-the-silvan-1st-edition-
r-k-lander/

The Pseudo Cleft Construction in English 1st Edition F.

R. Higgins

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-pseudo-cleft-construction-
in-english-1st-edition-f-r-higgins/

Guide to the English School in International Studies

1st Edition Cornelia Navari

https://textbookfull.com/product/guide-to-the-english-school-in-
international-studies-1st-edition-cornelia-navari/

American accent training a guide to speaking and

pronouncing colloquial American English 4th edition Ann
Cook

https://textbookfull.com/product/american-accent-training-a-
guide-to-speaking-and-pronouncing-colloquial-american-
english-4th-edition-ann-cook/
 ROUTLEDGE LIBRARY EDITIONS:
THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE

Volume 16

STUDIES IN THE PHONOLOGY OF

COLLOQUIAL ENGLISH
Page Intentionally Left Blank
STUDIES IN THE PHONOLOGY OF
COLLOQUIAL ENGLISH

K.R. LODGE

R Routledge
Taylor & Francis Group

LO N D O N A N D N E W YORK
First published in 1984
This edition first published in 2015
by Routledge
2 Park Square, M ilton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN
and by Routledge
711 Third Avenue, New York, N Y 10017
Routledge is an imprint o f the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
© 1984 K .R . Lodge
All rights reserved. N o part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised
in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or
hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information
storage or retrieval system, w ithout permission in writing from the publishers.
Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be tradem arks or registered
trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation w ithout intent to
infringe.
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

ISBN: 978-1-138-92111-5 (Set)

ISBN: 978-1-315-68654-7 (Set) (ebk)
ISBN: 978-1-138-90966-3 (Volume 16) (hbk)
ISBN: 978-1-315-69385-9 (Volume 16) (ebk)

Publisher’s Note
The publisher has gone to great lengths to ensure the quality of this reprint but
points out that some imperfections in the original copies may be apparent.
Disclaimer
The publisher has made every effort to trace copyright holders and would welcome
correspondence from those they have been unable to trace.
Studies in the
Phonology
of Colloquial
English
K.R. LODGE

V
CROOM HELM
London & Sydney
© 1984 K.R. Lodge
Croom Helm Ltd, Provident House, Burrell Row,
Beckenham, Kent BR3 1AT
Croom Helm Australia Pty Ltd, GPO Box 5097,
Sydney, NSW 2001, Australia

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data

Lodge, Ken
Studies in the phonology of colloquial
English.
1. English language - Conversations and
phrase books
2. English language - Slang
I. Title
427 PE3711
ISBN 0-7099-1631-0

Printed in Great Britain by

Biddles Ltd, Guildford, Surrey
CONTENTS

Acknowledgements vii
I n t r o d u c t ion 1
General conventions 26
Map 28
Chapter 1 Stockport 29
C h a p t e r 2 S h e p h e r d ’s Bush 51
Chapter 3 Peasmarsh 64
Chapter 4 Edinburgh 80
Chapter 5 Coventry 95
Chapter 6 Norwich 108
C h a p t e r 7 C o m p a r i s o n and d i s c u s s i o n 121
References 150
Index 155
W o r d Index 158

v
Page Intentionally Left Blank
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

My g r a t e f u l t h a n k s are due to my nine a n o n y m o u s

i n f o r m a n t s , w ho a g r e e d to be recorded; also to
S y l v i a M a n n and V e r o n i c a Du F e u w ho a s s i s t e d in two
of the r e c o r d i n g s . I w o u l d also like to tha n k
J a c q u e s Durand, S t e v e P u l m a n and P e t e r T r u d g i l l for
t h e i r h e l p f u l c o m m e n t s on and d i s c u s s i o n of v a r i o u s
p a r t s of the book. The b o o k w o u l d never have r e a c h e d
its final form, h a d it not be e n for the u n t i r i n g and
p a t i e n t e f f o r t s of M o i r a Eagling, w ho t y p e d the w h o l e
t h i n g w i t h great e n t h u s i a s m and c o n s i s t e n c y . Any
f a u l t s in the e n d - p r o d u c t are n e v e r t h e l e s s my r e s p o n ­
sibility. Finally, I am m o s t g r a t e f u l to T i m
H a r d w i c k , of C r o o m Helm, for k e e p i n g the book g o i n g
in the right direct i o n ; I h ope his p a t i e n c e is
r e w a r d e d in th i s offering.

vii
Page Intentionally Left Blank
To Jackie
Page Intentionally Left Blank
INTRODUCTION

T h i s b o o k has two m a i n aims: one, to try to d e t e r m i n e

ho w bes t to acco u n t for b o t h the d i f f e r e n c e s and the
s i m i l a r i t i e s of p h o n o l o g i c a l v a r i a t i o n in B r i t i s h
E n g l i s h w i t h i n the g e n e r a l f r a m e w o r k of n a tive
s p e a k e r c o m p e t e n c e ; two, to e s t a b l i s h a r e l a t i v e l y
small set of p h o n o l o g i c a l p r o c e s s e s to r e l a t e d i f f e r ­
ent s t y l e s of s p e e c h w i t h i n one variety. To these
e n d s I hav e i n v e s t i g a t e d the s p e e ch of a small n u m b e r
of i n f o r m a n t s from d i s p a r a t e p a r t s of Britain, v a r y ­
ing in age a nd sex. T h i s a p p a r e n t l y h a p h a z a r d choice
of i n f o r m a n t s w a s d e t e r m i n e d by two con s i d e r a t i o n s :
g e o g r a p h i c a l distance, to e n s u r e that the s p e e c h
w o u l d s h o w up s i g n i f i c a n t di f f e r e n c e s , and m y a b i l i t y
to r e c o r d i n f o r m a n t s in as n a t u r a l a s i t u a t i o n as
p o s s i b l e , g i v e n the c o n s t r a i n t s of r e c o r d i n g on tape.
To m a k e t h i s m o s t likely, I a r r a n g e d r e c o r d i n g
s e s s i o n s e i t h e r w i t h p e o p l e w ho k n e w me well, or
i n v o l v e d a g o o d f r i e n d of my informant. The t e c h ­
n i q u e in the r e c o r d i n g s e s s i o n s w as one of ind u c i n g
n a t u r a l c o n v e r s a t i o n r a t h e r than u s i n g a q u e s t i o n -
and-answer i n t e r v i e w structure.
Since I w a n t e d to e x a m i n e v a r i a t i o n in E n g l i s h
c o l l o q u i a l speech, the a c c e n t s c h o s e n w e r e o n e s which,
at least p r i m a f a c i e , w e r e not in close cont a c t wi t h
o ne another, and w e r e d r a w n f r o m d i f f e r e n t social
b a c k g r o u n d s , b o t h u r b a n and rural. Sin c e too my m a i n
i n t e r e s t is p h o n o l o g i c a l , r a t h e r than s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c ,
I have not t r i e d to g i v e c o m p r e h e n s i v e p i c t u r e s of
the s ocial s t r a t i f i c a t i o n at e a c h of my cho s e n
l o c a l i t i e s (as is the case, for example, in T r u d g i l l ’ s
stu d y of Norwich, 1974). N o r is it my i n t e n t i o n to
p r e s e n t r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s k e t c h e s of all p o s s i b l e
v a r i e t i e s of E n g l i s h (as in the case of Wells, 1982).
T h e s p r e a d of i n f o r m a n t s is s i m p l y to e n s u r e v a r i a ­
b i l i t y in speech. A l t h o u g h I w i s h to s t r e s s the
p h o n o l o g i c a l ai m s of t h i s book, I shall n o n e t h e l e s s

1
c o n s i d e r c e r t a i n p r o b l e m s of v a r i e t y f rom a s o c i a l
p o i n t of v i e w lat e r in the I n t r o d u c t i o n .
T h e d e c i s i o n to i n v e s t i g a t e n a t u r a l c o l l o q u i a l
l a n g u a g e also has two c o n c e r n s u n d e r l y i n g it. If
l i n g u i s t s are a t t e m p t i n g to e s t a b l i s h a m o d e l of
n a t i v e s p e a k e r c o m p e t e n c e w h i c h is c o n c e r n e d w i t h the
r e g u l a r p a t t e r n s of speech, then it is on l y r e a s o n ­
able to t e s t h y p o t h e s e s on all r e g u l a r p a t t e r n i n g s
in all t y p e s of speech. T he e m p h a s i s has for a long
t im e b e e n on w o r d - a n d / o r m o r p h e m e - b a s e d p a t t e r n s (as
e x e m p l i f i e d by the p r e g e n e r a t i v e s t r u c t u r a l i s t s , e.g.
H o c k e t t , 1958, and T r a g e r a nd Smith, 1951, a nd by the
d o m i n a n t T G a p p r o a c h of C h o m s k y and Halle, 1968), and
e v e n t h o s e i n t e r e s t e d in d i f f e r e n t tem p i te n d to use
o n e - or t w o - w o r d e x a m p l e s (e.g. Stampe, 1979). More
t h o r o u g h i n v e s t i g a t i o n of wh a t D r e s s i e r (1975) c a l l s
’’a l l e g r o r u l e s ” is n e c e s s a r y to add to the b a t t e r y
of w o r d - b a s e d d a t a a l r e a d y availa b l e . T h i s b o o k is
a c o n t r i b u t i o n to the p r e s e n t a t i o n a nd d i s c u s s i o n of
c o n v e r s a t i o n - b a s e d d a t a in the e x p a n s i o n of the m o d e l
of n a t i v e s p e a k e r c o m p e t e n c e . It is for t h i s reason,
too, that I h a v e p r e s e n t e d e x t r a c t s f rom my r e c o r d e d
m a t e r i a l in f a i r l y n a r r o w t r a n s c r i p t i o n , so that any
c l a i m s I m a k e can be c h e c k e d by the r e a d e r d i r e c t l y
(given that m y t r a n s c r i p t i o n is a r e l i a b l e r e p r e s e n t ­
a t i o n of the speech).
The s e c o n d c o n s i d e r a t i o n f o l l o w s fr o m the first:
do th e p h o n o l o g i c a l p r o c e s s e s w h i c h a re we l l d e s c r i b e d
in the w o r d - b a s e d a n a l y s e s a lso o c c u r in c o n t i n u o u s
conversation? Indeed, to put the q u e s t i o n in a m o r e
e x t r e m e form, are w o r d - b o u n d a r i e s r e l e v a n t in r a p i d
c o l l o q u i a l speech, w h e r e they q u i t e c l e a r l y u n d e r g o
c o n s i d e r a b l e a l t e r a t i o n (see, for example, Z w i c k y ’ s
b r i e f d i s c u s s i o n of Welsh, 1 9 7 2 ) ? We n e e d to d i s c o v e r
w h e t h e r or not the p h o n o l o g i c a l p r o c e s s e s d i s c e r n i b l e
in r a p i d s p e e c h are f u n d a m e n t a l l y d i f f e r e n t f r o m t h o s e
of slow, c a r e f u l speech. The m a i n d i f f e r e n c e m a y be
that in s l o w s p e e c h any p r o c e s s e s that o c c u r are for
t he m o s t part o b l i g a t o r y , w h e r e a s in r a p i d s p e e c h th e y
ar e o p t i o n a l . For example, in all v a r i e t i e s of
E n g l i s h -pleasure, which, we will assume, h a s an u n d e r ­
l y i n g / - zj-/, u n d e r g o e s a ’ ’
p a l a t a l i z a t i o n ” p r o c e s s so
tha t it is p r o n o u n c e d w i t h a m e d i a l [ 3 ]. O n the o t h e r
hand, as you in r a p i d s p e e c h can be p r o n o u n c e d e i t h e r
[ 9z js] or [ 9 3 a], a l t h o u g h the l a t t e r is m o r e likely.
T h i s m e a n s that we shall h a v e to d i f f e r e n t i a t e b e t w e e n
i n s t a n c e s w h e r e a r u l e is a p p l i e d o b l i g a t o r i l y and
i n s t a n c e s w h e r e the same r ule is a p p l i e d o p t i o n a l l y .
T h i s is a t o p i c to w h i c h I sha l l r e t u r n in the f i nal
chapter.

2
THE TERM "PHONOLOGY"
As can be s e e n from w h a t has a l r e a d y b e e n said, my
g e n e r a l a p p r o a c h to p h o n o l o g y is ’ ’g e n e r a t i v e ”, that is
to say, I am c o n c e r n e d w i t h c a p t u r i n g (part of) the
tacit k n o w l e d g e of the v a r i o u s i n f o r m a n t s I ha v e r e c o r ­
ded w i t h r e g a r d to t h eir p h o n o l o g i c a l systems. T he
k n o w l e d g e of e a c h i d e a l i z e d s p e a k e r / h e a r e r is not n e c ­
e s s a r i l y r e p r e s e n t e d by s o m e t h i n g that r e s e m b l e s formal
s t a n d a r d s p o k e n English. I s h a l l d i s c u s s the d e t a i l s
of the p h o n o l o g i c a l c o m p o n e n t in the last chapter, w h e n
I t r y to f o r m u l a t e the p r o c e s s e s in rule form, but some
g e n e r a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s can u s e f u l l y be dealt w i t h here.
F o r the b a s i c e l e m e n t of p h o n o l o g i c a l descri p t i o n ,
I s h a l l use the s e g m e n t w i t h o u t e n t e r i n g into any d i s ­
c u s s i o n of o t h e r p o s s i b l e a l t e r n a t i v e s (e.g. the
u n d o u b t e d s y n t a g m a t i c or ’ ’
p r o s o d i c ” n a t u r e of c e r t a i n
f e a t u r e s of speech, as d i s c u s s e d by Lyons, 1962; Palmer,
1970; Hyman, 1975: 233-38; Gol d s m i t h , 197 6 a & b; L i b e r -
m a n n an d P r ince, 1977, and others); nor s h all I p u r s u e
h e r e the n o t i o n that s e g m e n t s can be h i e r a r c h i c a l l y
m o d e l l e d , as p r o p o s e d by d e p e n d e n c y p h o n o l o g y (see
A n d e r s o n a n d Jones, 1977; A n d e r s o n and Ewen, 1980;
Ewen, 1980; Lodge, 1981; A nderson , ms). However, in
the final c h a p t e r I s h a l l c o n s i d e r c e r t a i n p h e n o m e n a
w h i c h s u g g e s t that s ome form of n o n - l i n e a r a p p r o a c h to
p h o n o l o g y is a p p r o p r i a t e . T h r o u g h o u t the bo o k I shall
w o r k w i t h the n o t i o n of p h o n e t i c a l l y b a s e d p h o n o l o g i c a l
p r o c e s s e s as a b a s i c f e a t u r e of p h o n o l o g i c a l s y s t e m s
(cf. Stampe, 1979). I sha l l d i s c u s s the m o s t c o m m o n
of these in B r i t i s h E n g l i s h in the next section.
S i n c e m y m a i n i n t e r e s t is in the p h o n e t i c a l l y
m o t i v a t e d p r o c e s s e s , I s h a l l not be c o n c e r n e d w i t h
the p h o n o l o g i c a l as p e c t s of m o r p h o l o g i c a l a l t e r ­
n a t i o n s of the serene - s e r e n i t y or e l e c t r i c - e l e c ­
t r i c i t y type (cf. C h o m s k y and Halle, 1968; Fudge,
1969b). Ho wever, s i n c e this is an i m p o r t a n t t h e o r ­
e t i c a l issue, a b r i e f d i s c u s s i o n of it is in o r d e r
here. In the m o d e l p r o p o s e d in SPE the lexi c a l
e n t r i e s are all m o r p h e m e s w i t h a s i ngle s p e c i f i c a t i o n
of f e a t u r e s fr o m w h i c h all a l t e r n a n t s u r f a c e r e a l i ­
z a t i o n s are d e r i v e d by rules. (These le x i c a l e n t r i e s
are a l s o fu l ly s p e c i f i e d in terms of f e a t u r e s at the
s y s t e m a t i c p h o n e m i c level, a p o i n t I shall r e t u r n to
in the f i n a l chapt e r . ) A c o n s i d e r a b l e amount of the
a r g u m e n t in favour of this a p p r o a c h r e v o l v e s r o und
the L a t i n a t e v o c a b u l a r y of E n g l i s h ( serene - s e r e n i t y ,
etc.), bu t w o r d s w h i c h e n t e r i nto o t h e r a l t e r n a t i o n s ,
su c h as tck e - took, and tho s e w h i c h ha v e no a l t e r ­
natio n s , e.g, f a d e , are t r e a t e d in the s a m e way.
Thus, s a n e , take and fade all ha v e u n d e r l y i n g /*/ as
t h e i r v o w e l in the l e x i c a l entries. T h e r e are two
c l a i m s m a d e by this a p p r o a c h w h i c h n e e d p a r t i c u l a r
3
me n t i o n : one, that t h e s e v o w e l a l t e r n a t i o n s are p a r t
of a n a t i v e E n g l i s h s p e a k e r ' s c o m p e t e n c e , a nd two,
t h e y s h o u l d be h a n d l e d by p h o n o l o g i c a l p r o c e s s rule-s.
T h e f i rst c l a i m is d i f f i c u l t to p r o v e or d i s p r o v e in
r e l a t i o n to all s p e a k e r s of E n g l i s h , It is no doubt
t r u e that e d u c a t e d people, w h o come into c o n t a c t w i t h
L a t i n a t e v o c a b u l a r y a g r e a t deal, w o u l d c o n s i d e r
t h e s e a l t e r n a t i o n s to be a p r o d u c t i v e part of the i r
l i n g u i s t i c system. If they came a c r o s s a L a t i n a t e
w o r d p r e v i o u s l y u n k n o w n to them, or w e r e g i v e n a
m a d e - u p one, e.g. o b l a t i l e , they w o u l d be able to
p r o v i d e t h e a p p r o p r i a t e a l t e r n a n t ( s ), e.g. o b l a t i l i t y ,
in t h i s cas e w i t h the a l t e r n a t i o n [ai] - [i], as in
d i v i n e - d i v i n i t y . Howev e r , it is m u c h m o r e d i f f i c u l t
to m a k e c l a i m s of this sort for less s o p h i s t i c a t e d
s p e a k e r s of E nglish, w h o m a y w e l l come a c r o s s s u c h
ite m s of v o c a b u l a r y o n l y rarely. For t h e m s u c h w o r d s
do not f o r m a s u b s t a n t i a l p art of t h e i r lexicon, and
m a y h a v e b e e n learnt p i e c e m e a l ( J ).
T h e s e c o n d c l a i m has b e e n a r g u e d about s i n c e S P E ,
a nd is r e l a t e d to the p r o b l e m of a b s t r a c t n e s s of
phonological representations. T i e r s m a (1983) g i v e s
a n u m b e r of a r g u m e n t s a g a i n s t a s o l e l y m o r p h e m e - b a s e d
m o d e l of the lexicon. A l t h o u g h he us e s r a t h e r m o r e
s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d m a t e r i a l f r o m Fri si a n , in that it can
be m o r e e a s i l y d e m o n s t r a t e d that the a l t e r n a t i o n s in
q u e s t i o n are n o n - p r o d u c t i v e and b e c o m i n g f o s s i l i z e d ,
his a r g u m e n t s can be a p p l i e d to the L a t i n a t e v o c a b u ­
lary of E n g l i s h . O n e a r g u m e n t he p u t s f o r w a r d is
that e a c h m e m b e r of the a l t e r n a t i n g p a i r s is d i s t i n c t ­
ive e l s e w h e r e in the l e x i c o n (1983: 71). This
c e r t a i n l y a p p l i e s to the E n g l i s h forms too: f a d e / f e d 3
r e e d / r e d 3 fi ne/fin. H o w ever, s i n c e the b i u n i q u e n e s s
c o n d i t i o n is d e m o n s t r a b l y u n h e l p f u l in m a k i n g p h o n o ­
l o g i c a l s t a t e m e n t s (cf. Hyman, 1975: 6 8 - 6 9 and 90-91),
t h i s a r g u m e n t can o n l y be u s e d a g a i n s t i d e n t i f y i n g
all o c c u r r e n c e s of an a l t e r n a t i n g p a i r w i t h the sa m e
u n d e r l y i n g element, w h e t h e r t h e r e are any a l t e r n a t i o n s
o r not. T h a t is to say, t he [i] in the s t r e s s e d
s y l l a b l e of d i v i n i t y can be d e r i v e d f r o m /ai/ b e c a u s e
of the a l t e r n a t i o n i n v olved, but the [i] of fin is a
d i s t i n c t unit, / i/. If the /ai/ of fine is a s s o c i a t e d
w i t h that of d i v i n i t y , t h e r e is s t i l l no loss of
d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n t he a l t e r n a t i n g and the n o n - a l t e r ­
n a t i n g types, b e c a u s e fine does not o c c u r in c o n t e x t s
w h e r e t r i s y l l a b i c l a x i n g can take place. As far as
E n g l i s h is c o n c erned, the a r g u m e n t s a g a i n s t the SPE
t r e a t m e n t of s u c h forms m u s t be p s y c h o l o g i c a l , r a t h e r
tha n p h o n e t i c and d i s t r i b u t i o n a l . S i n c e this is
o u t s i d e the scope of t his book, I s h a l l not p u r s u e
it further, but an i n v e s t i g a t i o n of h o w c h i l d r e n cope
4
w i t h the a c q u i s i t i o n of such a l t e r n a t i o n s and tests
of the sort o u t l i n e d in f o o t n o t e 1 w o u l d help to
p r o v i d e an a n s w e r ( 2 ). In terms of the i n t e r e s t s
and aims of this p a r t i c u l a r book, it is q u i t e c l ear
that the a c c e n t s of E n g l i s h u n d e r d i s c u s s i o n n e e d all
the u n d e r l y i n g e l e m e n t s i n v o l v e d in the L a t i n a t e
a l t e r n a t i o n s ( 3) , and that they are r e l a t e d m o r p h o ­
l o g i c a l l y in c e r t a i n instances. E x a c t l y h o w this
s h o u l d be i n c o r p o r a t e d into the g r a m m a r can be left
for s e p a r a t e i n v e s t i g a t i o n .
In the p h o n o l o g i c a l d i s c u s s i o n s I have a v o i d e d
b o t h the e x t r e m e p o s i t i o n s of, on the one hand,
a b s t r a c t n e s s (cf. Fudge, 1967, 1 9 6 9 a & 1969b;
Tr u d g i l l , 1974), w h e r e the u n d e r l y i n g e l e m e n t s have
no p h o n e t i c values, and, on the o t h e r hand, c o n c r e t e ­
nes s (cf. Hooper, 1976), w h e r e a b s t r a c t i o n of any
k i n d f r o m the s u r f a c e da t a is s e v e r e l y restr i c t e d .
(See D r e s h e r, 1981, for d i s c u ssion; see also Kiparsky,
1968. )

THE P H O N O L O G I C A L P R O C E S S E S
I am a s s u m i n g that E n g l i s h is su b j e c t to a n u m b e r of
w i d e s p r e a d p h o n o l o g i c a l proces s e s . M any of these
ha v e b e e n r e c u r r e n t t h r o u g h o u t its h i s t o r y and some
h a v e b e e n c o n t i n u i n g for a c e n t u r y or more. (It m a y
sh a r e the m w i t h o t h e r languages, too, but that is not
the c o n c e r n of the p r e s e n t book; on l i n g u i s t i c
p r o c e s s e s in general, see A i t c h i s o n , 1981; on p h o n o ­
lo g i c a l p r o c e s s e s , b o t h s y n c h r o n i c and d i achronic,
s ee e s p e c i a l l y , Stampe, 1979, and A n d e r s o n and Ewen,
1980.) However, t h e s e p r o c e s s e s are not d i s t r i b u t e d
u n i f o r m l y t h r o u g h o u t the d i f f e r e n t a c c e n t s of English,
and I h o p e to s h o w h o w the d i f f e r e n t d i s t r i b u t i o n of
the p r o c e s s e s h e lps to d i s t i n g u i s h b e t w e e n the
d i f f e r e n t accents. F o r example, i n t e r v o c a l i c v o i c i n g
of v o i c e l e s s s t o p s is a w i d e s p r e a d f e a t u r e of E n g l i s h
p h o n o l o g y : it is a r e c u r r e n t f e a t u r e of the P e a s m a r s h
ac c e n t (see C h a p t e r 3), but it is not fou n d at all in
the s p e e c h of the S t o c k p o r t i n f o r m a n t s (see C h a p t e r
1). P h o n o l o g i c a l p r o c e s s e s are not o b l i g a t o r y but
are normal, e s p e c i a l l y in the type of E n g l i s h u n d e r
con sideration , colloquial conversatio n. A process
r e l a t e s two or m o r e a l t e r n a n t forms (which m a y o c c u r
in d i f f e r e n t styles, e.g. c o l l o q u i a l v e r s u s formal);
if t h e r e is no alte r n a t i o n , then no p r o c e s s applies,
as far as the s y n c h r o n i c s y s t e m is concerned. For
example, in c o l l o q u i a l RP c o n s o n a n t a l h a r m o n y and
c l u s t e r s i m p l i f i c a t i o n apply to n a s a l + a l v e o l a r
st o p + C s e q u e n c e s as in s a n d - c a s t l e . T h e s e forms
are r e l a t e d to the careful, f o rmal sty l e of p r o n u n ­
ciation, g i v i n g t h r e e p o s s i b l e p r o n u n c i a t i o n s :
5
[ s a n d k a s l ] , [ s a q g k a s l ] and [ s a q k a s l ] . On the o t h e r
hand, w i t h a w o r d such as h a n d k e r c h i e f no su c h a l t e r ­
nan t p r o n u n c i a t i o n s exist: [h a g k s t J*i j f ] is t he only
o ne p o s s i b l e . In this case t he p r o c e s s does not
aPPly> e v e n t h o u g h fr o m a d i a c h r o n i c p o i n t of v i e w
it d i d at so m e e a r l i e r period. C o n s e q u e n t l y , for
this w o r d t h ere is no u n d e r l y i n g form: * / h a n d k e t J i j f / .
T h e s a m e a p p l i e s m u t a t i s m u t a n d i s to the / t / in, on
the on e hand, the v a r i a n t p r o n u n c i a t i o n s of last news
w i t h and w i t h o u t a [t], and, on the other, w o r d s s u c h
as listen and g l i s t e n w i t h no a l t e r n a t i v e p r o n u n c i ­
ations .
I s h a l l give a g e n e r a l d e s c r i p t i o n of the m o s t
c o m m o n p r o c e s s e s here, and gi v e f u r t h e r d e t a i l s in
t h e i n d i v i d u a l chapters, w h e r e I s h a l l a l s o i n t r o d u c e
a fe w m i n o r o n e s as n e c e s s a r y . In the final c h a p t e r
I s h a l l g i v e f o r m a l i z e d v e r s i o n s of the r u les i n v olved.

(i) L e n i t i o n
T h e g e n e r a l n a t u r e of l e n i t i o n is d i s c u s s e d by H y m a n
(1975: 164-69), H o o p e r (1976), F o l e y (1970), a nd
A n d e r s o n a nd J o n e s (1977), all f r o m s o m e w h a t d i f f e r e n t
p o i n t s of view. A n d e r s o n a n d E w e n (1980: 28) p r e s e n t
the f o l l o w i n g schema, w h i c h I h a v e a d a p t e d h e r e by
u s i n g t r a d i t i o n a l a r t i c u l a t o r y categ o r i e s :

voiced
S t O p
Nk liquid
voiceless voiced or >v o w e l
stop fricative frictionless
^ continuant
voiceless
fricative

T h e d i r e c t i o n of l e n i t i o n is f r o m left to right; a
s o u n d u n d e r g o i n g l e n i t i o n w i l l not n e c e s s a r i l y go
t h r o u g h the w h o l e p r o c e s s ; that is, a v o i c e l e s s st o p
m a y b e c o m e a v o i c e d stop a n d go no further, as in
P e a s m a r s h [badm] b o t t o m (line 18), or a s o u n d f u r t h e r
a l o n g the chain, not i t s e l f a p r o d u c t of lenition,
m a y be s u b j e c t to the next s t e p of the p r o c e s s , as
w h e n a l i q u i d b e c o m e s a v o w e l in S h e p h e r d ’ s Bush
[staio] style (line 5). Voiceless stops may become
v o i c e d stops, as in the P e a s m a r s h e x a m p l e above, or
t h e y m a y b e c o m e v o i c e l e s s f r i c a t i v e s , as in S t o c k p o r t
[p e i $ o ] p e o p l e (line 13). T h e u s u a l e n v i r o n m e n t for
l e n i t i o n to take p l a c e is i n t e r v o c a l i c a l l y .
6
(ii) Harm ony
T h i s is a m o r e g e n e r a l term than the u s ual one,
" a s s i m i l a t i o n ”. C e r t a i n f e a t u r e s of two or m o r e
segme n t s , e i t h e r c o n s o n a n t a l or vocalic, h a r m onize,
i.e. are the same in ea c h segment. T h i s can apply
to b o t h c o n t i g u o u s and n o n - c o n t i g u o u s s e g m e n t s (see
Stampe, 1979: 76, and Lodge, 1983, for a d i s c u s s i o n
of this p h e n o m e n o n w i t h r e f e r e n c e to chi l d l a n g u a g e
as well). V o w e l h a r m o n y is w e l l e x e m p l i f i e d by
T u r k i s h (Lyons, 1962, a nd Hyman, 1975: 182), but does
not o c c u r in the v a r i e t i e s of E n g l i s h p r e s e n t e d here.
C o n s o n a n t a l harmony, of w h i c h there are s e v e r a l types
in B r i t i s h English, is u s u a l l y c a l l e d a s s i m i l a t i o n
and not giv en the s ame p h o n o l o g i c a l s t a t u s as vowel
h a r m o n y (cf, G i m s o n ’ s d i s c u s s i o n of English, 1962:
270-73), or it is a p p l i e d to c h i l d l a n g u a g e (cf.
Vihman, 1978). (There are a lso s u g g e s t i o n s that
v o w e l s in V C V s t r u c t u r e s h a r m o n i z e generally; see
H a r d c a s t l e , 1981: 55-56.) H oweve r, there is no
r e a s o n to a s s u m e that any of these types of h a r m o n y
are not b a s i c a l l y the sa m e p h e n o m e n o n from a p h o n e t i c
p o i n t of view. They can all come u n d e r the gene r a l
h e a d i n g of ease of a r t i c u l a t i o n a nd s e e m to ser v e the
sam e p u r pose. W h e t h e r s e g m e n t s i n t e r v e n e b e t w e e n the
two h a r m o n i z e d s e g m e n t s or not, does not m a k e any
difference. In fact, S t a m p e (1979: 76) cla i m s that
t h e r e is no su c h t h ing as n o n - c o n t i g u o u s harmony,
s i n c e the f e a t u r e s in q u e s t i o n c o n t i n u e t h r o u g h the
i n t e r v e n i n g s e g m e n t s as w e l l (cf. a lso Lodge, 1983,
for a d i s c u s s i o n of r e t r o f l e x i o n in one i n s t a n c e of
s o m e b o d y as p r o n o u n c e d by a 3 | - y e a r - o l d S t o c k p o r t
b o y ).
T h e f e a t u r e s that h a r m o n i z e m a y be m a n n e r of
a r t i c u l a t i o n , p l a c e of a r t i c u l a t i o n , voice, t o n g u e
height; in fact, any f e a t u r e can harmon i z e . The
m o s t c o m m o n i n s t a n c e s of h a r m o n y in E n g l i s h are those
of place, e.g.
[tem m e n e ? ] te n - m i n u t e S t o c k p o r t (18)
[k'a:mp bi] c a n ’
t be S h e p h e r d ’
s Bu s h (27)
[ a m baek ] a n d b ack P e a s m a r s h (52),
the m o s t w i d e s p r e a d a p p l y i n g to the u n d e r l y i n g
a l v e o l a r s and dentals, even in RP (cf. Gimson, loc.
cit.). The s y l l a b i c a l v e o l a r nasal h a r m o n i z e s , s o m e ­
ti m e s to the p r e c e d i n g consonant, s o m e t i m e s to the
f o l l o w i n g one, e.g.
?
[uek(j] r e c k o n S t o c k p o r t (17)
[ e p l e k f e e J*A) f a m ] application form Stockport (9).

7
 T h e s o - c a l l e d velars, / k / a n d /g/, h a r m o n i z e
w i t h the f o l l o w i n g vowel, g i v i n g a r a n g e of r e a l i z a ­
t i o n s f r o m p a l a t a l to velar, a n d e v e n u v u l a r for so m e
s p e a k e r s b e f o r e [ s : ] - t y p e vowels. I h a v e not i n d i ­
c a t e d t h i s in the t r a n s c r i p t i o n s , as it a p p l i e s to
all the a c c e n t s u n d e r c o n s i d e r a t i o n (and p r o b a b l y all
a c c e n t s of Engl i s h ) . T h e l a b i a l s can a l s o h a r m o n i z e ,
b u t the r a n g e is on l y b i l a b i a l to l a b i o d e n t a l . This
is m o s t c o m m o n in the one S t o c k p o r t inf o r m a n t , Y, e.g.
[gep me] give me (9).
A n o t h e r c o m m o n h a r m o n y of p l a c e in E n g l i s h is w h a t we
might call p a l a t a l i z a t i o n , that is the c h a n g e of
/t d s z/ to a p a l a t o - a l v e o l a r in front of /j/, e.g.
[ o : w i 3 jous] a l w a y s us e d S h e p h e r d ’
s Bush (1)
[pjcaepJ* joud] p e r h a p s y o u ' d P e a s m a r s h (53).
T h i s is a p r o c e s s w h i c h h a s b e e n g o i n g on for so m e
c o n s i d e r a b l e time in all types of E n g lish; s o m e w o r d s
h a v e f i n i s h e d the p r o c e s s , as w i t n e s s e d by t h o s e w o r d s
w i t h o n l y one p r o n u n c i a t i o n w i t h a p a l a t a l a r t i c u ­
lation, e.g. nature, sugar', o t h e r s s h o w f l u c t u a t i o n
b e t w e e n tw o p o s s i b l e p r o n u n c i a t i o n s , e.g. is sue w i t h
[ — s j - ] or [— j*— ] . (Note that a few w o r d s h a v e a v o i d e d
the p r o c e s s by d r o p p i n g the p a l a t a l a r t i c u l a t i o n ;
t h e s e w o r d s ha v e a l t e r n a t i v e p r o n u n c i a t i o n s w i t h a
n o n - h a r m o n i z e d a l v e o l a r f o l l o w e d by the p a l a t a l , or
w i t h no p a l a t a l at all, e.g. suit w i t h [sj-] or [s-].)
F o r the p u r p o s e s of this b o o k I a m p a r t i c u l a r l y i n t e r ­
e s t e d in t h o s e c a s e s w h e r e t h e r e are e n v i r o n m e n t a l l y
c o n d i t i o n e d va r i a n t s , in p a r t i c u l a r a c r o s s w o r d -
boundaries.
H a r m o n y of m a n n e r is less frequent, but a p p l i e s
m o s t c o m m o n l y to /5/. In so m e s p e a k e r s it a p p l i e s to
o t h e r s o u n d s as well. E.g.
[an ns] on the S t o c k p o r t (26)
[w e i 1 1 ] Well the S h e p h e r d ’
s Bush (7)
[in £ae? ] in that P e a s m a r s h (34)
[aj j a ] a n d y o u ’
re S t o c k p o r t (25) (+ p l a c e h a r m o n y )
[ d 3 ap 5 e ] job then S t o c k p o r t (6)
[deu u o f ] d e a d r o u g h S t o c k p o r t (62) ( + p l a c e
harmony)
In the case of /5/ the h a r m o n y is l e f t - t o - r i g h t , r a t h e r
t h a n the m o r e u s u a l r i g h t - t o - l e f t .
V o i c e h a r m o n y is, of course, w e l l k n o w n in E n g l i s h
m o r p h o l o g y , as in t he f o r m a t i o n of n o u n p l u r a l s , the
3 r d p e r s o n s i n g u l a r of the g e n e r a l ten s e and the p a s t

8
tense, and in this all the a c c e n t s u n d e r d i s c u s s i o n
are alike. O t h e r w i s e , it is on l y sporadic, as in
[ p e i v m e n d ] p a v e m e n t S h e p h e r d ' s B u s h (28).
(It is als o f o u n d in W e s t Y o r k s h i r e speakers, as in
[ b r a t f 3d] B r a d f o r d , c f . H u g h e s and Trudgill, 1979: 58;
Wells, 1982: 367.) We m a y n ote h ere that one of the
a l t e r n a t i v e first s t a g e s of l e n i t i o n c o u l d be i n t e r ­
p r e t e d as v o i c e harmony, that is b e t w e e n two v o i c e d
s o u n d s the v o i c i n g c o n t i n u e s t h r o u g h w h a t w o u l d o t h e r ­
w i s e be a v o i c e l e s s stop, as in
[bad its] but it's P e a s m a r s h (18)
[badm] b o t t o m P e a s m a r s h (13)
i
[daeon da ] down to P e a s m a r s h (16).

(iii) C o n s o n a n t c l u s t e r s i m p l i f i c a t i o n (CCS)
In m a n y c o n t e x t s t h r e e (or more) c o n s o n a n t s in se r i e s
are r e d u c e d in number. The d e l e t e d c o n s o n a n t s are
u s u a l l y s t o ps (oral and nasal), t h o u g h o t h e r s o u n d s
are als o s o m e t i m e s involved, d e t a i l s of w h i c h I shall
g i v e in the i n d i v i d u a l chapters. C o n s i d e r the f o l l o w ­
ing examples:
[? t/ s e n d 3 5e] c h a n g e d my S t o c k p o r t (31)
[k £ tt nje] kept my S t o c k p o r t (57) (+ l a b i o d e n t a l
harmony)
[mAos weikes leki] most weakest little S t o c k p o r t (62)
[ faeon n £ m ] f o u n d them S t o c k p o r t (75)
[spots ? b e i ] s u p p o s e d to be S t o c k p o r t (85)
?
[s£$ ? a ? ] except that S t o c k p o r t (2)
[ d 3 os stak] just s t o ck S t o c k p o r t (21)
[ d 3 os u a e ? ] just ri ght S t o c k p o r t (23)
[seim ta] s e e m e d to S t o c k p o r t (48)
[ d 3 As k o d n ? ] just c o u l d n ' t S h e p h e r d ' s Bu s h (4)
[siim ta] s e e m e d to S h e p h e r d ' s Bu s h (8)
[a n nae? s ] a n d that's S h e p h e r d ' s B u s h (15)
[ l o ? s A m © i q ? ] l ook ed s o m e t h i n g S h e p h e r d ' s B u s h (48)
[paonz daon] p o u n d s down S h e p h e r d ' s B u s h (51)
[n £ ks w i i k ] next w e e k S h e p h e r d ' s Bu s h (55)
[ fe;cs w e j i d ] F irs t W o r l d P e a s m a r s h (25)
[ d 3 ©s lef ta] j us t left to P e a s m a r s h (38)

9
 [ A o i mae:n] o ld m a n P e a s m a r s h (40)
[sp e j i e ss] s p e c i a l i s t s S t o c k p o r t (77)
[fjcenz]
o
fr i e n d s E d i n b u r g h (91).
Al l the a b o v e are e x a m p l e s of /t / and /d/ in the
context: C___ +C, w h e r e + = m o r p h e m e b o u n d a r y , and
the f i r s t c o n s o n a n t has the s a m e v o i c e f e a t u r e as
/ t / or / d/ ( 4). T h i s m e a n s that ft/ a f t e r v o i c e d
s o u n d s is not deleted. / k / is al s o d e l e t e d u n d e r
the s a m e c o n d i t i o n s , e.g. [a:st] a s k e d C o v e n t r y (69).
(/ p / m a y do, as well, but t h e r e are no e x a m p l e s in
the r e c o r d e d m a t e r i a l , cf. Lodge, 1981: 35.)
T h e n a s a l /n/ is t r e a t e d d i f f e r e n t l y a c c o r d i n g
to the f o l l o w i n g s o u n d and f r o m l o c a l i t y to locality.
F o r e x a m p l e , in S t o c k p o r t it is e i t h e r d e l e t e d
c o m p l e t e l y o r the a l v e o l a r c o n t a c t is d e l e t e d l e a v i n g
n a s a l i t y in the p r e c e d i n g v o w e l phase, w h e n the
f o l l o w i n g s o u n d is / t / ( [ ? ]), e.g.
[w q ?] w an t (54)
[wag>? ] w o n ' t (61) x 2.
O n the o t h e r hand, w i t h /d/ fol l o w i n g , /n/ is not
delet e d , but the / d/ is, in a c c o r d a n c e w i t h the a b o v e
e x a m p l e s , e.g.
[ faeon nem] f o u n d them (75).
In S h e p h e r d ' s B u s h a nd P e a s m a r s h , howev e r , / t / is
o f t e n d e l e t e d a f t e r /n/, w h e n a v o w e l follows, e.g.
[didn Anda s tae:mb ] didn 11 u n d e r s t a n d S h e p h e r d ' s B u s h
1 (3 9 )
[ka-n iiv4,] c a n't even P e a s m a r s h (11). v
D e t a i l s of s u c h d i f f e r e n c e s f r o m l o c a l i t y to l o c a l i t y
w i l l be g i v e n in the s e p a r a t e chapters. (For a
d e t a i l e d d i s c u s s i o n of CCS in S t o c k p o r t w i t h i n a
d e p e n d e n c y framew o r k , see Lodge, 1981.)
T h e r e is a s p e c i a l case of d e l e t i o n of /d / , /v/
a n d /z/ in the a u x i l i a r y v e r b forms, s u c h as w o u l d n ' t ,
h a v e n ' t d o e s n ' t (cf. Petyt, 1978), w h i c h a p p l i e s to
a l a r g e n u m b e r of E n g l i s h accents , a nd is s p e c i f i c to
t h i s c l a s s of verb. I do not i n t e n d to d eal w i t h
this in d e t a i l here, b ut c l e a r l y the c o n d i t i o n s for
the d e l e t i o n are not t h ose of CCS.

(iv) U n s t r e s s e d v ow e l d e l e t i o n (UVD)
A n o t h e r w i d e s p r e a d f e a t u r e of c o l l o q u i a l E n g l i s h is
t he d e l e t i o n of u n s t r e s s e d vowels , e i t h e r c o m p l e t e l y
or by r e d u c t i o n to a glide. T he c o m m o n e s t e x a m p l e s
of this, w h i c h a p p l i e s to RP as well, are the so-
c a l l e d w e a k forms of the a u x i l i a r y verbs, s u c h as

10
I’ ve, h e ’ s, w e ’ v e . I shall not be c o n c e r n e d w i t h
su c h f o r m s in the i n d i v i d u a l l o c a lities, as they
o c c u r in all of them. However, it is w o r t h n o t i n g
that Z w i c k y (1972: 610-11) r e l a t e s some of the
a u x i l i a r y c o n t r a c t i o n s to a s y n t a c t i c c o n s t raint,
d i s t i n g u i s h i n g b e t w e e n " d e p e n d e n t " and " i n d e p e n d e n t "
au x i l i a r i e s . T h e former, i n c l u d i n g w i l l , are and am,
c a n n o t c o n t r a c t u n l e s s they are in close s y n t a c t i c
r e l a t i o n w i t h the p r e c e d i n g word. A l t h o u g h this is
not the p l a c e to c o n s i d e r this in detail, in m a n y
a c c e n t s will is i n d e p e n d e n t r a t h e r than dependent,
e.g.
There’ s a m a n lives next d o o r ’ll m e n d yo u r
f r i d g e for you
is p e r f e c t l y n o r m a l in Stockport. (See Lodge, 1979,
for a d i s c u s s i o n of s i m i l a r c o n s t r u c t i o n s in S t o c k ­
port.) The c o n t r a c t e d n e g a t i v e /nt/ is also d i s c u s s e d
by Z w i c k y (1972: 612-13) and he s u g g e s t s that it
e n t e r s the p h o n o l o g i c a l c o m p o n e n t in that form.
(Hasegawa, 1979: 1 3 6 - 3 7 s u g g e s t s that s uch c o n t r a c ­
tio n s s h o u l d be h a n d l e d in the lexicon.)
T h e d e t a i l s of o t h e r types of UVD, w h i c h are
p h o n o l o g i c a l p r o c e s s e s , are l o c a l l y v a r i e d and w i l l
be g i v e n in each chapter. O n e of the c o m m o n e s t forms
of this p r o c e s s is the d e l e t i o n of the first [ 0 ] in
s y l l a b l e s e q u e n c e s ( r e g a r d l e s s of w o r d b o u n d a r i e s ) ,
w h o s e " f u l l " r h y t h m i c p a t t e r n is C ^ C 0 CV, w h e r e C = at
least one consonant, as in l a b o ure r and c o m f o r t a b l e .
E.g.
[© p A o i s t u 0 ] u p h o l s t e r e r S t o c k p o r t (37)
[i i m e m b i 0 m] r e m e m b e r them P e a s m a r s h (35)
[batje] b a t t e r y S t o c k p o r t (79).
T h e r e s u l t a n t c l u s t e r m u s t be a p o s s i b l e E n g l i s h one
or the d e l e t i o n c a nnot take place, e.g.
* [ h A m b l j ©n] h u m b l e r a n d .
An e x a m p l e of the r e d u c t i o n to a glide is:
[5 j e d m i m s t j e j n ] the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n E d i n b u r g h
(29-30).
A d i f f e r e n t e n v i r o n m e n t in w h i c h an u n s t r e s s e d
v o w e l is s o m e t i m e s d e l e t e d is w h e r e two c o n s e c u t i v e
v o w e l s come at a w o r d - b o u n d a r y : V # V. In such
ca s e s o n l y one vowel remains, e.g.
[J e e ? J e baoe? ] shakes you a b ou t S t o c k p o r t (49).

11
(v) L i n k i n g r a n d r h o t i c i s m
T he i n s e r t i o n of r b e t w e e n two v o w e l s b e l o n g i n g to
d i f f e r e n t s y l l a b l e s is a w i d e s p r e a d l i n k i n g d e v i c e
in En g l i s h . T h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s u n d e r w h i c h it is
u s e d v a r y c o n s i d e r a b l y f r o m one a r e a to another, a n d
e v e n f r o m one s p e a k e r to a n o ther. E v e n those s p e a k ­
e r s w h o use it w i d e l y do not a l w a y s use it. The
f o l l o w i n g p a i r s of e x a m p l e s are by the s ame inform a n t :
[fau eedjez] for ages Y, S t o c k p o r t (57)
[ e t d u esa op] h a i r d r e s s e r up Y, S t o c k p o r t (56)

[e n d o s j etjeal] i n d o o r a e r i a l N, S t o c k p o r t (67)
[je q :n n j e ] y o u r o r d i n a r y N, S t o c k p o r t (77)

[h e 0 © n ] ha ir a n d S h e p h e r d ' s B u s h (2)
[ p f eipai a.] p a p e r I S h e p h e r d ’
s B u s h (3).
In a c c e n t s w i t h p o s t - v o c a l i c r the s i t u a t i o n is s o m e ­
w h a t d i f f e r e n t , s i n c e in a g r e a t m a n y i n s t a n c e s , e.g.
the s i x g i v e n above, t he w o r d s e n d in /r/ anyway.
In s u c h a c c e n t s the v a r i e t y of r u s e d m a y be u s e d as
a l i n k b e t w e e n w o r d s w h e r e the r e is no final /r/,
e.g. law of, or the g l o t t a l s t o p m a y be used, e.g.
[50 ?3eo s ] the house Peasmarsh (38).
(For w o r d s s u c h as c o m m a and c h i n a in r h o t i c accents,
s e e Wells, 1982: 2 2 1 - 2 2 . )
T h e s t a t u s of /r/ is s o m e w h a t c o m p l i c a t e d in
E n g l i s h in that its i n c i d e n c e v a r i e s f r o m one a c c e n t
to a n other. T he d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n r h o t i c and non-
r h o t i c a c c e n t s is in the o c c u r r e n c e or not of /r/
b e f o r e a consonant. Thus, n o n - r h o t i c a c c e n t s h a v e no
a l t e r n a t i n g forms of w o r d s s u c h as f a r m , port, c h u r c h
a nd p e r p l e x , so su c h w o r d s h a v e no u n d e r l y i n g /r/, as
they do in r h o t i c accents. T h i s r e f l e c t s the i n a b i l ­
ity of n o n - r h o t i c s p e a k e r s to p r e d i c t c o r r e c t l y the
o c c u r r e n c e of w o r d - i n t e r n a l , p r e c o n s o n a n t a l /r/.
(On this point, see T r u d g i l l , 1980/83: e s p . 1 4 8 -49.)
On the o t h e r hand, w o r d - f i n a l /r/, w h i c h is r e t a i n e d
b e f o r e v o w e l s ev e n in n o n - r h o t i c accents, does
i n v o l v e a l t e r n a t i o n s , so t hat /r/ can b e p o s t u l a t e d
in t h e u n d e r l y i n g forms of s u c h w o r d s as car, door,
fu r a n d letter. In the c ase of u n s t r e s s e d -er the
u n d e r l y i n g f o r m is s y l labic: /r/, w h i c h m a y lose its
s y l l a b i c i t y by m e a n s of UVD. ^e n e e d an / r / - d e l e t i o n
r ul e to a c c o u n t for its n o n - o c c u r r e n c e b e f o r e c o n s o ­
nants, a n d the f o l l o w i n g r e a l i z a t i o n rules for /r /:

12
 lrl _____,
[e) I - - t~~
__,;,
[e.:r] I - - f~~
I

lrl _;,. r:p I f~~

Then there is lrl-insertion in those cases without

underlying final lrl for those people who have forms
such as [l~.:r ev] law of (for numerous examples, see
Wells, 1982: 223-25).
An alternative solution is not to postulate any
underlying lrl in word-final position either and
simply have an lrl-insertion rule (cf. Wells, 1982:
222). However, the advantages of the former
solution are (i) rhotic and non-rhotic accents have
the same underlying forms in respect of final lrl,
and (ii) it accounts for the fact that soaring has an
lrl but sawing does not for many speakers (cf. Wells,
1982: 225). Those who do have an r-sound in sawing
etc. have extended the application of lrl-insertion,
not differentiating between word-final and word-
internal 1 ~ 1. There are even further extensions of
lrl-insertion in some accents, e.g.
[jer Eni8ig] you anything Coventry (3)
[be~ a~?] by heart Norwich (32).
(Cf. [tte.:r ¥i?J to eat, Trudgill, 1974: 162; also
Wells, 1982: 227. For some speakers in Norfolk even
the indefinite article has linking lrl, e.g. [e.:r~pt)
a apple.) Finally, we must note another type of 1

speaker, who has no linking lrl at all except word-

internally, as in nearest, and uses [?) instead. For
them no underlying final lrl is necessary.
To sum up, there are basically three types of
speaker with regard to underlying lrl:
(i) Those with preconsonantal lrl (rhotic);
(ii) Those with word-final lrl and lrl-deletion;
(iii) Those without syllable-final lrl and lrl-
insertion.
lrl-insertion applies in different degrees for (i)
and (ii), but for all three types the rule has the
same phonetic formulation: any vowel lower than mid,
i.e. [e) and lower, whether long or short, stressed
or unstressed, allows linking lrl to follow before

13
a n o t h e r vowel. F o r s p e a k e r s of type (iii), /a/ not
/r/ a p p e a r s in the u n d e r l y i n g forms of letter etc.
Tliere are a l s o so m e s p e a k e r s of type (ii) w h o d e l e t e
/r/ i n t e r v o c a l i c a l l y , as in [vei] v e r y , g i v i n g the
s a m e o u t p u t as (iii) for w o r d s e n d i n g in /r/ b e f o r e
a vowel. T h e f o l l o w i n g d e r i v a t i o n s gi v e a l t e r n a t i v e
p r o n u n c i a t i o n s of q u a r t e r of for (ii) and (iii).

(i i ) /k w otr dv/

Stress placement => kwotr av

i
/r/-realization k w o t a r av
UVD => [kwotr av] /r/-deletion => kwota av
UVD ==> [kwotav]

(iii) /kwota d v /

Stress placement => k w ota av

UVD =s> [kwotav] [ 7 ]- i n s e r t i o n => [kwota ? av]

(The /t / can also be r e a l i z e d as [? ].)

PANLECTAL AND POLYLECTAL GRAMMARS

O n e p r o b l e m to w h i c h this b o o k is i n t e n d e d as a
c o n t r i b u t i o n is h o w far one s y s t e m u n d e r l i e s all
v a r i e t i e s of a language. T h i s a s s u m p t i o n (often
i m p l i c i t ) m a y s e e m a t t r a c t i v e at first s i g h t in that
it a c c o u n t s for the n o t i o n of one l a n g u a g e : all
s p e a k e r s of the same l a n g u a g e h a v e the s a m e b a s i c
s y s t e m w i t h t he v a r i a n t s a c c o u n t e d for by f a i r l y late,
r e a l i z a t i o n rules, r u l e o r d e r d i f f e r e n c e s and the
like. It s e e m s r e a s o n a b l e to s u p p o s e that if s p e a k e r s
of the s a m e l a n g u a g e can u n d e r s t a n d each other, th e n
t h e y m u s t h a v e the s a m e b a s i c s y s t e m u n d e r l y i n g t h e i r
performance. How e v e r , m u t u a l i n t e l l i g i b i l i t y is not
a s i m p l e y e s / n o qu e s t i o n . T h e r e are d i f f e r e n t d e g r e e s
of i n t e l l i g i b i l i t y , t h e r e is i n t e l l i g i b i l i t y in one
w a y only, a n d f u r t h e r m o r e m u t u a l i n t e l l i g i b i l i t y cuts
across generally accepted language boundaries. For
e x a m p l e , b r o a d d i a l e c t s p e a k e r s fr o m D e v o n and D u r h a m
w i l l h a v e c o n s i d e r a b l e d i f f i c u l t y u n d e r s t a n d i n g one
a n o t h e r , w h e r e a s s i m i l a r l y b r o a d s p e a k e r s fr o m L e e d s
a n d L i v e r p o o l w i l l h a v e far f e w e r p r o b l e m s of c o m m u n ­
i c a t i o n , t h o u g h there m a y w e l l be some. Seco n d l y , we
m u s t n o t e that n one of t h e s e s p e a k e r s h a v e any d i f f i ­
c u l t y in u n d e r s t a n d i n g RP as u s e d on the r a d i o and
t e l e v i s i o n , w h e r e a s s p e a k e r s of R P o f t e n h a v e d i f f i ­
c u l t y in u n d e r s t a n d i n g b r o a d r e g i o n a l accents.
T h i r d l y , w i t h r e g a r d to t h e a r t i f i c i a l i t y of l a n g u a g e
14
b o u n d a r i e s , a L o w G e r m a n s p e a k e r l i v i n g near the
D u t c h - G e r m a n b o r d e r has m o r e in c o m m o n l i n g u i s t i c a l l y
w i t h his n e a r D u t c h n e i g h b o u r s than w i t h his B a v a r i a n
compatriots. Fourthly, it s o m e t i m e s h a p p e n s that two
s p e a k e r s can u n d e r s t a n d ea c h o t h e r u s i n g d i f f e r e n t
l a n g u a g e s (cf. D o r i a n ' s s t u d y of G a e l i c and E n g l i s h
in Eas t S u t he r l a n d , 1982), i n d i c a t i n g that m u t u a l
i n t e l l i g i b i l i t y is c e r t a i n l y not a s u f f i c i e n t
crit e r i o n . C h o m s k y (1980: 117-20) c o n c l u d e s that the
n o t i o n of l a n g u a g e is of lit t l e use to linguists, who,
in his view, s h o u l d c o n c e n t r a t e on g r a m m a r s not
languages.
We m u s t also take a c c o u n t of the s p e a k e r ' s k n o w ­
ledge of h i s / h e r o w n system. O u r e x a m p l e of o n e - w a y
i n t e l l i g i b i l i t y d e m o n s t r a t e s that it is p o s s i b l e for
a s p e a k e r of one v a r i e t y to u n d e r s t a n d a n o t h e r w i t h o u t
n e c e s s a r i l y b e i n g able to r e p r o d u c e it. Let us give
a m o r e s p e c i f i c e x a m p l e to c l a r i f y the point.
N o r t h e r n E n g l i s h (i.e. not S c o t t i s h ) s p e a k e r s do not
d i f f e r e n t i a t e b e t w e e n [o] and [ a ] in t h e i r own
syste m s , w h e r e a s S o u t h e r n speaker s, a n d RP speakers,
do, as in put and p utt r e s p e c t i v e l y . Nevertheless,
N o r t h e r n e r s can u n d e r s t a n d r a d i o a nd t e l e v i s i o n news
b u l l e t i n s s p o k e n w i t h an RP accent, and S o u t h e r n e r s
can u n d e r s t a n d n o t - t o o - b r o a d N o r t h e r n e r s w i t h resp e c t
to this d i s t i n c t i o n . But, if w e o b s e r v e N o r t h e r n e r s
and S o u t h e r n e r s t r y i n g to m i m i c t h e i r c o u n t e r p a r t s
(for w h a t e v e r reason), we soon see that there are two
s e p a r a t e v o w e l systems. A n u m b e r of N o r t h e r n s p e a k e r s
(who w e r e not b r o u g h t up to do so) try to use the
[o]/[a] d i s tinc t i o n : they use an u n r o u n d e d vowel,
s o m e w h e r e in the r e g i o n of [ae] or [?], for bo t h
sounds. (See b e l o w for f u r t h e r d i s c u s s i o n of this
f r o m a s o c i a l p o i n t of v i e w . ) T h u s we h e a r not o nly
[kaem] come and [saen] son, s u n , b u t also [paet] put and
[baetJ*a] b u t c h e r . T h e s e s p e a k e r s s i m p l y do not know,
in the t e c h ni c a l , l i n g u i s t i c sense, the d i f f e r e n c e
b e t w e e n t h e s e two sounds. Similarly, Southern-born
a c t o r s p o r t r a y i n g N o r t h e r n e r s o f t e n forget to use
[©] for b o t h sounds, u s i n g the o c c a s i o n a l [ a ] in
a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h e i r own system: they, for their
part, do not k n o w the lack of d i f f erence.
M i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g s b e t w e e n s p e a k e r s of d i f f e r e n t
r e g i o n a l v a r i e t i e s of a l a n g u a g e are a u s e f u l s o u r c e
of e v i d e n c e for linguists; m a n y e x a m p l e s of this k i n d
of o c c u r r e n c e are v ery e n l i g h t e n i n g f rom the p o int of
v i e w of u n d e r l y i n g systems. If w e are a t t e m p t i n g to
e s t a b l i s h a t h e o r y of l a n g u a g e w h i c h c l aims to e x p l a i n
h o w n a t i v e s p e a k e r s u n d e r s t a n d ea c h other, we m u s t
al s o i n v e s t i g a t e h ow it is t hey o f t e n m i s u n d e r s t a n d
e a c h o t h e r as well, b e c a u s e even in p e r f e c t c o n d i t i o n s

15
of c o m m u n i c a t i o n m i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g s occur. For
i n s t a n c e , in a s e m i n a r a b out the l a n g u a g e of c o m e d y
s h o w s I m e n t i o n e d the e x p r e s s i o n [t'jrobi a ? ?mi3r]
(tr o u b l e at the mill). A s t u d e n t f r o m the L o n d o n
a r e a w r o t e t his d own s u b s e q u e n t l y in an e s s a y as
tr o u b l e up m i l l . In t e r m s of h er p h o n o l o g i c a l s y s t e m
[ s ? ] f o l l o w e d by a b i l a b i a l c l o s u r e c o u l d o n l y be
i n t e r p r e t e d as up. F u r t h e r m o r e , b e c a u s e she w a s u n ­
u s e d to the u s e of a g l o t t a l s t o p for the d e f i n i t e
a r t i c l e , she w a s u n a b l e to d e t e c t the l o n g e r h o l d
p e r i o d of the g l o t t a l s t o p ( d u r i n g w h i c h the lips are
b r o u g h t t o g e t h e r ) in c o m p a r i s o n w i t h the h o l d p e r i o d
w h e r e no d e f i n i t e a r t i c l e occurs, as in tr ou b l e at
M a n o h e s t e r . In a d e t a i l e d t r a n s c r i p t i o n of the two
u t t e r a n c e s this d i f f e r e n c e can be i n d i c a t e d as
follows:
?
[ a ? pm] as in at the mill,
[a ?m ] as in at M a n c h e s t e r .
(It s h o u l d be p o i n t e d out t hat the u s e of two j o i n e d
l e t t e r s y m b o l s in the first t r a n s c r i p t i o n g i v e s in
t h i s v i s u a l f o r m an i m p r e s s i o n of g r e a t e r l e n g t h
th a n is, in fact, invol v e d , but this is one of the
p r o b l e m s of l e t t e r t r a n s c r i p t i o n s . )
T r u d g i l l (1983a) p r e s e n t s t he r e s u l t s of two
t e s t s d e s i g n e d to a s c e r t a i n the d e g r e e of p r e d i c t a ­
b i l i t y of s y n t a c t i c f o r m s a nd s e m a n t i c i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s
f r o m v a r i o u s E n g l i s h diale c t s . T h e s e s h o w that, for
the m o s t part, l i n g u i s t i c a l l y s o p h i s t i c a t e d n a t i v e
s p e a k e r s , e v e n t h o s e w i t h c o n s i d e r a b l e t r a i n i n g and
e x p e r i e n c e in l i n g u i s t i c s , fare l i t t l e b e t t e r than
f o r e i g n e r s in p r e d i c t i n g p o s s i b l e s e n t e n c e s of so m e
v a r i e t i e s of E nglish. O n t he b a s i s of this k i n d of
e v i d e n c e it is d i f f i c u l t to see h o w a p a n l e c t a l
g r a m m a r is j u s t i f i a b l e , a nd w h e t h e r e v e n a p o l y l e c t a l
a p p r o a c h is a p p r o p r i a t e .
It is w o r t h n o t i n g h o w c h i l d r e n d eal w i t h v a r i a n t
forms. If t h e r e are v a r i a n t f o r m s w i t h i n the c h i l d ’ s
i m m e d i a t e c i r c l e of a d u l t m o d e l s , it w i l l t e n d to
w a v e r in its u s a g e a nd this m a y w e l l p e r s i s t in adult
sp e ech; for i n s tance, P ' s u s e of b o t h [bo*k] and
[bok] for b o o k , Lodge, 1983, a n d Y ’ s u se of b o t h
[ 1 i o k ] a n d [lok] for look in C h a p t e r 1 below, b e c a u s e
b o t h h a d in t h e i r i m m e d i a t e f a m i l y s p e a k e r s w h o u s e d
the d i p h t h o n g a l v a r i a n t a n d a l s o t h o s e w h o u s e d the
m o n o p h t h o n g a l v a r i a n t in s u c h words. If a c h i l d is
e x p o s e d to r e g i o n a l v a r i a n t s o n l y s p o r a d i c a l l y , up to
a b o u t the age of 3 or 4, it o f t e n h a n d l e s t h e m p h o n ­
e t i c a l l y , that is to say, it i m i t a t e s them; thus, a
c h i l d of S o u t h e r n p a r e n t s , e x p o s e d to a N o r t h e r n

16
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
my expressions of gratitude.” Mr. Goupil spoke rather deliberately
and seemed to choose his words with care. “That your telegram
received no response is a matter of extreme regret. Yet, when I
inform you that it never reached me, you will, of a certainty,
exonerate me from discourtesy, Mr. Laurie.”
“Why, surely,” agreed Laurie eagerly. “We had already found out
that the telegram was delivered to the wrong person, sir.”
“Ah! Is it so? But doubtless!” Mr. Goupil paused and nodded
several times. “Allow me, please, the explanation of certain ever-to-
be-regretted circumstances. You must know, then, that after the
death of my excellent and never-to-be-forgotten wife I was plunged
in sorrow. You, sir, have never lost a beloved wife—but, no, no, of a
certainty you have not!” Mr. Goupil laughed at himself heartily before
he went on. “Very well. To pursue. In my sorrow I returned to the
country of my birth for a visit, to France, to Moissac, where live many
of my relations. But, sir, one does not elude Sorrow by crossing the
ocean! No, no, it is here!” Mr. Goupil struck himself twice on the
chest. “Soon I return, sir, yet in the brief period of my absence the
harm has been done!” He paused with dramatic effect.
“Indeed,” said Ned sympathetically, yet puzzled.
“Yes, sir, for although I am absent but five months, yet when I
return a so horrible deed has been perpetrated in my name.”
“Indeed.” It was Laurie’s turn this time. Mr. Goupil’s large
countenance depicted the utmost dejection, but only for a moment.
“In my absence,” he went on, brightening, “my lawyer, in whose
hands all my affairs of person were left, learned of the terms of the
will of my late wife’s mother. The will says that at the death of my late
wife the property in this so quaint town occupied by my dear sister-
in-law shall revert. Thereupon, stupid that he was, my lawyer
proceeds to write to my sister-in-law to that effect. The rest, sir, you
know. Yet this lamentable news reached me but three days ago!
‘What,’ asks this lawyer, ‘will you do with this property in Orstead,
New York?’
 “‘What property do you speak of?’ I ask him. He tells me then. I am
overcome. I am frantic. ‘Imbecile!’ I shout. ‘What have you done?’ I
come at once by the fastest of trains. I am here!”
“That—that was very nice of you,” faltered Laurie, keeping his
eyes carefully away from Ned.
“Nice! But what else to be done? For nothing at all would I have
had it so happen, and so I hasten to make amends, to offer
apologies to my dear wife’s sister, to you, sir, to correct a so great
mistake!”
“Certainly,” assented Laurie hurriedly. “Of course. But what I don’t
understand is why the letter that Miss Comfort wrote to you didn’t
reach you, sir.”
Mr. Goupil made a gesture of despair. “I will explain it also. My
dear sister-in-law made a mistake of the address. I saw the letter. It
was wrong. I—but wait!” Mr. Goupil drew forth a handsome card-
case, selected of the contents, and reached forward. Laurie took the
card and read:
Chicago Sioux City Des Moines
GOUPIL-MacHENRY COMPANY
Stocks Bonds Investments
514–520 Burlington Bldg., Sioux City, Ia.
Members of the
Chicago Stock Exchange

“You see?” pursued Mr. Goupil. “My dear sister-in-law made the
mistake regrettable. She addressed the letter to the ‘Goupil
Machinery Company.’ There is none.”
“I see,” said Laurie, enlightened, as he passed the engraved card
to Ned. “This MacHenry is your partner, sir?”
“Of a certainty. Adam MacHenry he is, a gentleman of Scottish
birth, but now, like me, William Goupil, a citizen of the United States,
sir.”
 “Oh! Well, but look here, Mr. Goupil. Miss Comfort must have had
your initials wrong, too, then, for—”
“Ah, another misfortune! Attend, please. My name is Alphonse
Guillaume Goupil. Yes. Very well. When I am in this country but a
very short time I find that Alphonse is the name of all waiters in all
hotels everywhere I go. I put aside Alphonse then. I am Guillaume
Goupil. Then I become prosperous. I enter into business. Many do
not know how to pronounce my first name, and that is not well. So I
then spell it the American way. To-day I am William Goupil, American
citizen!”
“That explains why the telegram didn’t get to you,” said Laurie.
“Well, the whole thing’s been a sort of—of—”
“Sort of a comedy of errors,” suggested Ned.
Mr. Goupil seized on the phrase with enthusiasm. “Yes, yes, a
comedy of errors! You’ll say so! A comedy of errors of a certainty,
beyond a matter of a doubt! But now, at last, it is finis. All is
satisfactorily arranged. You shall hear. First, then, I offered my dear
sister-in-law a nice home in Sioux City, but no, she must stay here
where it has been her home and her people’s home for so long a
time. Also”—Mr. Goupil laughed enjoyably—“also, Mr. Laurie, she
fears the Indians! But at last it is arranged. In the fall she will return
to her house. By then it will be a place worthy of the sister of my dear
and greatly lamented wife. To-morrow I shall give orders, oh, many
orders! You shall see. It will be—” Mr. Goupil raised his eyes
ecstatically—“magnificent!”
“Well, that certainly is great,” said Laurie. “I can’t tell you how
pleased I—we both are, Mr. Goupil.”
Mr. Goupil bowed again, but without arising, and smiled his own
pleasure. “I shall ask you to believe, Mr. Laurie, that never did I
suspect that my dear sister-in-law was in any need of assistance.
But now I understand. It shall be arranged. From now on—” He
waved a hand grandly. Words would have said far less.
He arose. Laurie arose. Ned arose. Mr. Goupil bowed. Laurie and
Ned bowed.
 “Once more, Mr. Laurie, I thank you for your kindness to my dear
sister-in-law. I thank also your so noble brother. I shall be in Orstead
for several days and it will give me great pleasure to see you again.
We shall meet, yes?”
“Of a certainty,” answered Laurie, with no thought of impertinence.
“To-morrow, perhaps, at Miss Comfort’s, sir. We are going there in
the morning to say good-by to her.”
“Excellent! Until the morning, then.” Mr. Goupil bowed. Laurie
bowed. Ned bowed. Mr. Goupil placed his derby in place, gave it an
admonishing tap, smiled pleasantly once more, and was gone.
Laurie closed the door after him and leaned weakly against it.
“If anything else happens to-night,” he sighed, “I’ll go batty!”
 CHAPTER XXV
THE MARVELOUS CATCH

W ednesday afternoon, and the hands of the clock in the tower of

the Congregational Church, seen distantly over the tops of the
trees, pointed to eighteen minutes before three.
Ideal weather for Class day, hot in the sun, pleasantly warm in the
shade, with a very blue sky trimmed around the edges with puffs of
creamy-white clouds. An ideal day, too, for the big game, with plenty
of heat to make muscles responsive and no wind to deflect the ball
from its long, arching course. Kind, as well, to the wearers of pretty,
light dresses, with whom the stands were liberally sprinkled,
mothers, sisters, cousins and aunts of the important-looking
graduates. Dark-blue pennants and pennants of maroon and white
drooped against their staffs save when a moment of frenzy set them
swirling above the sloping stands.
The game was three innings old, and the black score-board
behind the back-stop held six big round naughts. Those three
innings had not been devoid of interest, however, even if neither
team had tallied. Nervousness and over-anxiety had filled at least
two of them with breathless moments. In the first and second
Farview had placed men on bases; in the second Hillman’s had got
Pat Browne as far as third. There had been errors by both sides, and
more than one case of poor judgment. Nate Beedle, pitching for the
home team, and Luders, for the visitors, had been in hot water much
of the time. Yet each had survived, and now, at the beginning of the
fourth inning, with Farview coming to bat, the game was still to be
won or lost.
Laurie had been through some bad moments. For the first two
innings he and Nate had not worked together very smoothly. They
had had a half-hour of practice before an early dinner, during which
Nate had coached the new catcher and Laurie had mastered signals.
Later, Cas Bennett had given Laurie the “dope” on the Farview
batters. He was still giving it between innings, for Laurie’s mind was
in no condition to memorize. By the beginning of the third inning ten
Farview players had come to the plate, and at least ten times Nate
had refused Laurie’s signal. Of course Laurie had known that Nate
was right and that he was wrong, but it had all been mighty
confusing and disconcerting. Added to that was the continuing dread
of throwing badly to second. He could peg the ball to first unerringly
enough, or to third, but the long heave across the width of the
diamond terrorized him. Once when he should have thrown to Lew
Cooper that fear of misfortune held his hand, and Hillman’s had
groaned as a Farview runner slid unchallenged to the bag. Save for
that occasion a throw to second had not been called for, and the test
was still ahead of him. For the rest, Laurie had done well enough. He
had dropped the delivery more times than he cared to recall, but had
escaped without penalty. Once the ball had got past him entirely and
bounded against the back-stop, but, fortunately, the bases had been
empty. During the first of the third he and Nate had come to
understand each other better, and constant reiteration by Cas had
finally impressed Laurie with the foibles of the enemy batsmen. Now,
at the beginning of the fourth, he breathed easier and found himself
sustained by a measure of confidence. His throw to second, before
the first of the enemy stepped into the box, was straight, hard, and
knee-high.
Farview began with a scratch hit to the left field that took an
unexpected bound away from Frank Brattle’s ready glove. Followed
a screaming two-bagger that placed the first runner on third. Only a
smart throw-in by Lee Murdock prevented a tally then and there. The
tally came later, however, and a second followed close behind it.
Nate passed a batter and filled the bases. Then a pretty sacrifice fly
to short right moved the runners up, and Farview cheered her first
score. Nate struck out the subsequent batter. Then came a rolling
grounder to Cooper and Lew scraped it up and, with all the time in
the world, threw low to first. By the time Tom Pope had turned
around about three times looking for the ball that he had stopped but
not caught, the runner on third had scored, the batsman was safe,
and the chap from second was half-way between third and the plate.
Tom shot the ball home; Laurie got it, held it, and swung downward.
There was an instant’s confusion of dust and sound, and the umpire
swung his mask upward and out.
Two runs for Farview.
Farview clung to that lead until the sixth, but could not add to it. In
her half of the fourth Hillman’s got Captain Dave as far as second,
but Murdock’s fly to left made the third out. In the fifth the opposing
pitcher struck out Laurie and Nate and kindly allowed Cooper to pop
a fly to third baseman.
In the sixth things began to happen, all at once and on all sides.
Farview started the trouble by hitting through short-stop for a base.
Nate pitched ten deliveries before the next batsman at last fouled out
to first baseman. Then came an attempted sacrifice. The batsman
laid down the ball scarcely two feet from the plate, and the runner on
first was off. Laurie dashed his mask aside, scooped up the trickling
sphere, stepped forward, and sped it to second. The throw was
perfect, and Pope got the runner. Hillman’s applauded delightedly,
and from the Blue’s bench came the approving voice of the coach,
“Good work, Turner!” Laurie, accepting his mask from a Farview
batsman, reflected that maybe nothing was nearly as bad as you
pictured it beforehand, and remembered with surprise that in making
the throw he had not consciously thought a thing about it; hadn’t
hoped he would make it or feared that he wouldn’t; had simply
picked up the ball and plugged it across the diamond! Exit the
bugaboo!
With two down, however, Farview refused to yield the inning.
Instead, she poked a hit across second base and another past third
and so added another tally. That seemed to distress Nate Beedle
unnecessarily, and he proceeded to pass the next batsman. And
after that, with two gone and two strikes and one ball on the
succeeding aspirant, he pitched three more balls in succession and
passed him, too! Very suddenly the bases were full, and the game
seemed about to go glimmering. And at that moment George
Pemberton and the scrub catcher strode off around the first base
stand, and if the visiting crowd hadn’t been making such a ridiculous
noise the thud of ball against mitten might have been heard from
back there.
Nate was, in baseball parlance, “as high as a kite.” His first effort
against the new batsman was a ball that Laurie only stopped by
leaping two feet from the ground. Laurie walked half-way to the
pitcher’s box, amid the exultant howls of a joyous foe, shook the ball
in Nate’s face, and savagely told him to take his time. Laurie was
angry just then. Nate was snappy and told Laurie to “go on back and
quit beefing! I’ll get him!” Laurie signaled for a high ball; the batter
“ate up” low ones. Nate hesitated, shook his head. Laurie called for
one close in then. Nate wound up and stepped forward. The result
was a wide one that made the score two balls and no strikes. On the
bench Mr. Mulford was watching with sharp eyes. Nate followed with
a fast ball that was struck at too late. Laurie’s heart retreated down
his throat again. Once more he signaled a high one. This time Nate
made no demur, but the ball failed to go over. A substitute detached
himself from the group on the bench and sped around the stand.
Laurie, holding the ball, glanced toward the coach. He got the
expected sign. Nate, too, saw, and began to pull at his glove.
Captain Dave joined him at the mound. Nate looked gloomy and
mutinous. Then George Pemberton came into sight, paused an
instant at the bench, and strode toward the box.
Hillman’s cheered and Farview jeered. Nate went to the bench
with hanging head. As he tossed the ball to the relief pitcher Laurie
saw Mr. Mulford pull Nate to a seat beside him and put a big arm
over the sorrowful one’s shoulders. Then George Pemberton was
pitching his warm-up balls, and Laurie was devoutly hoping that they
weren’t samples of what he would offer later. They were, but Laurie
didn’t know it then, for, with three balls and but one strike on him, the
over-eager Farview third baseman struck at George’s first offering
and got it. The bases emptied, and red legs streaked for the plate.
But far out in deep center field Lee Murdock cast one last look over
his shoulder, turned, and pulled down the fly, and Hillman’s let loose
with a sound that was half a groan of relief and half a yell of joy!
With the score 3 to 0 against her, Hillman’s pulled up even in the
last of the sixth. Craig Jones worked a pass; Tom Pope sacrificed
him neatly to second; and Captain Dave, functioning perfectly at last
in the rôle of clean-up batter, hit for two bases, and both Cooper and
Jones scored. Pat Browne was safe on a fielder’s choice, Dave
going out at third. Brattle hit safely, and Murdock was passed. The
bags were all occupied, and the home team’s cohorts roared
exultantly and waved blue banners in air. And Laurie came to bat.
I’d like immensely to tell how Laurie knocked a home run or even a
single, but truth compels me to state that he did nothing of the sort.
He swung twice at good ones and missed them, and ended by
swinging a third time at a very poor one. It remained for Pemberton
to deliver the hit and, perhaps because he was a proverbially poor
batter and wasn’t feared one bit by Mr. Luders, he selected the
second delivery and jabbed it straight at the young gentleman’s
head. Luders put up a defensive hand. The ball tipped it and
bounded toward second. Three players ran for it. By the time short-
stop had got it, Pemberton was galloping up to first, and Pat Browne
had slid in a cloud of dust across the plate. A moment later Brattle
was caught off second, and the trouble was over for the time.
The seventh began with the score 3 to 3, but it wouldn’t have
remained there long if George Pemberton had been allowed to pitch
the inning through. George was even wilder than he had indicated.
He couldn’t find the plate at all. Four successive balls put a Farview
batter on first. One strike, a foul back of the plate that Laurie missed
by inches only, and four more balls put another runner on bases.
Laurie begged, counseled, threatened. George nodded agreeably
and still sent them in anywhere but at the expected spot. When he
had pitched one strike and two balls to the third man up, Coach
Mulford gave the “high sign” and George, not at all regretfully, it
seemed, dropped the ball and gave way to Orville Croft.
Somehow Croft came through unpunished. There were no more
passes, for Croft put the ball over the base nicely, but there were so
many near-hits that Laurie’s heart was in his mouth almost every
minute. If the Hillman’s fielders hadn’t worked like a set of young
professionals in that inning awful things would certainly have befallen
the Blue. The infield showed real ball playing, and thrice what
seemed a safe hit was spoiled. Farview got the first of her runners to
third, but he finally died there when Captain Dave dived to the base-
line and scooped up a ball that was on its way to deep left.
For Hillman’s the last of the seventh made good its reputation. It
was the lucky seventh, and no mistake about it. Luck put Cooper on
first when Luders slanted a slow curve against his ribs, and luck
decreed that the red-legged short-stop should drop the ball a minute
later when Cooper took advantage of Jones’s slam to third. Perhaps
luck had something to do with the pass handed to Pope, too, but it
certainly didn’t altogether govern Captain Dave’s second long hit that
sent in Cooper and Jones and put Hillman’s in a veritable seventh
heaven—I almost wrote “inning”—of delight!
That hit ended Luders’s usefulness. He issued another pass, got
himself into a hole with Frank Brattle, and was derricked, a sandy-
haired youth named Clay succeeding him. Clay disposed of Brattle
very neatly, Murdock flied out to short-stop, and again Laurie failed
to deliver the hit that was, he felt certain, somewhere inside him.
Laurie brought the lucky seventh to a close by knocking a weak
grounder to first baseman.
Hillman’s visioned victory and was joyous and noisy when the
eighth began, but after the first Farview batsman had lined out
Croft’s first offering for two bases the joy paled and the noise
noticeably subsided. And when the next red-legged batter had hit for
a single it began to dawn on the Hillman’s supporters that possibly
the old adage to the effect that he who laughs last laughs best might
be true. Hillman’s pitching staff was exhausted, and if Croft went the
way of Beedle and Pemberton—and he gave every indication of
doing so—the only way the Blue would get the game would be as a
gift from Farview! The Maroon and White took to Croft as a duck
takes to water. He didn’t have much except a couple of slow curves.
His fast one wasn’t exceptionally fast, and it generally failed to locate
the plate. Those slow curves pleased the Farview batsmen
immensely. Even the tail-end of their list found no trouble in hitting
them. Laurie, watching the man on first as a cat watches a mouse,
saw more than a runner who might steal second; he saw a victory
fading into defeat.
 Croft worked two strikes on the next man, and then again came
the dread sound of wood against leather. This time, though, the ball
arched high and Cooper, racing back, got under it, and there was
one down. The runner on third had no chance to score, or thought
so. Then, when Captain Dave had talked briefly but earnestly to
Croft, that youth promptly issued one more base on balls, and the
sacks were filled, and defeat loomed large on the horizon. One
down, the bases full, and Croft going the way of the others! Laurie’s
gaze wondered to the bench and Coach Mulford. And then, since to
have looked at the bench at all without seeing it would have been
impossible, he glimpsed the round, anxious, earnest countenance of
Kewpie Proudtree. Laurie’s heart jumped out of place for possibly
the twentieth time that afternoon, and he called to Captain Dave.
The game was held up while captain and catcher conferred.
Finally Dave hurried across and hailed the coach. Another
conference followed, while Farview clamored for the contest to go
on. Then Mr. Mulford waved his hand at Croft, and Kewpie, very
much surprised but apparently not at all overwhelmed, walked into
the diamond, pulling on his glove.
There was a moment of silent amazement. Then Farview went
delirious with delighted amusement. The Farview stand almost
rocked with the laughter that emanated from it, laughter that came as
a relief to strained nerves and was indulged in freely. Hillman’s,
recovering from its first instant of amazement, cheered valiantly, and,
cheering, took hope. After all, it might well be that the chubby
Proudtree would prove no worse than Croft. It was even possible
that he might be an improvement on that youth. Meanwhile Farview
laughed until tears came and Laurie and Kewpie met midway of
mound and plate.
“Go slow, Kewpie,” said Laurie, “and follow the signals. Take all
the time you can; hear? Waiting may worry them. Keep your nerve,
son, no matter what happens. Just pretend that you’re pitching to me
in practice.”
“Sure,” agreed Kewpie complacently. “Don’t worry about me, Nod.
Let’s go!”
 One down and three on, a hit meaning two runs! It was a tough
situation that Kewpie faced. But Kewpie seemed totally unworried.
Laurie saw and marveled. His own heart was thumping inside him
like a small sledge-hammer. He wondered if Kewpie was faking that
unconcern and would presently go to pieces like the others, letting in
an avalanche of runs!
But Kewpie was right. Laurie needn’t have worried about him.
Kewpie was magnificent, if a boy of Kewpie’s size and proportions
can ever be magnificent! He was as slow as cold molasses, yes, and
his delivery elicited more amusement from the enemy, but he struck
out with apparent ease the first batsman who faced him, caused the
next man to foul out to Captain Dave, and fanned the third!
When that last of the enemy waved through empty air and then
cast his bat from him venomously, Hillman’s loved Kewpie Proudtree
with a deep and fervid passion. Hillman’s said so. Hillman’s rose
from stand and greensward and cheered his name to the blue
afternoon sky and howled and yelled and went crazy generally. And
Kewpie moved smilingly back to the bench to submit to the hugs of
his companions.
There was no scoring for the Blue in the last of the eighth, for Clay
was master of the situation.
Then Farview started her half of the ninth with desperation written
large on every countenance. Kewpie, the unhurried, returned to his
job. He disposed of the Farview pitcher with four deliveries and then
faced the head of the list. That he would survive that inning without
misadventure was too much to hope for. The misadventure came
when the Farview center fielder slammed a ball into left field and got
two bases. Kewpie looked, or so Laurie though, a little surprised and
a little grieved, but he didn’t allow his emotions to affect his pitching.
He fooled the next man twice with his out-drop and finally finished
him with a slow ball that the batter struck at too soon. Hillman’s
shouted, waved, and prepared to go home.
But the end was not yet. Up came the Farview captain, and he
made it plain to Laurie at once that he wasn’t to be caught with
trifles. He demanded good ones. If he didn’t get them he wouldn’t
swing. He didn’t say all this in words, of course, but he looked it and
showed it by calmly watching Kewpie’s first offering drop by him, a
scant inch beyond the outer corner of the plate. In the end, he had
his way. There was something that suited him, and he accepted it
and drove it down third base line, scoring the man on second and
placing himself on third when the throw went to the plate. Those who
had wandered toward the exits reconsidered and stayed their steps.
With a runner on third the score might yet be tied.
The Farview right fielder had not yet made a hit, but that to
Laurie’s thinking made him the more dangerous, and Laurie worked
very carefully. Kewpie answered the first signal with a straight one
over the center of the plate, and it went for a strike. The next was
also over the center, but too high. Then again Kewpie failed. One
and two now. The runner on third was dashing up and down the
path, and the coachers were yipping like mad. Kewpie, however
remained surprisingly calm. To show how calm he was he sent in a
drop that scored a second strike for him, and the blue pennants
waved triumphantly. Laurie called for the same thing again, but this
time the batter did not offer at it; the score was two and three, and
Laurie’s heart sank. The next must be good. He placed his hands out
and called imploringly:
“Right into the old mitt, Kewpie! Make it good!”
And Kewpie made it good, and, since it was good, unmistakably
good, the Farview youth swung against it with all his might.
But he hit under it, and the ball went up and up in the sunlight
almost straight above the plate. Cries arose from all sides, a
confusing bedlam of warning, entreaty, command. Laurie dashed his
mask behind him, stared upward into the blue, saw the gray sphere
poised overhead, turned and stepped back, looked again, again
retreated. He was under it now—almost. One step further toward the
back-stop—
Then Nemesis took a hand, or sought to. Laurie’s backward
placed foot found the discarded mask. He strove to retain his
balance but could not and fell backward to the ground. The mask
described a curve and landed yards away. Laurie’s feet flew
heavenward. His hands were stretched wide. Then his startled gaze
saw a new danger. Right above him was the ball, falling straight for
his face. Nothing save pure instinct, the instinct that causes one to
fend off a blow, brought his hands up before him. It was, however,
not so much instinct as baseball training that brought them there
palms upward. And, beyond any doubt, it was training that caused
his fingers to close convulsively about the round object that landed
with a loud smack in the hollow of his old brown mitten!

The Graduation Ball was over, and as the twins walked homeward
with Polly and Mae twelve o’clock struck from the tower of the
Congregational Church across the park. There was a big round
moon riding high in the heavens, and the June night was warm and
scented. Mae was to spend the night with Polly, and so the four kept
together across Walnut Street and past the Starling house where, on
the second floor, one lighted window proclaimed the presence of
Bob. Even as Ned proposed a discreet hail, the light behind the
shade went out.
“It was a lovely dance, wasn’t it?” asked Polly. Laurie, beside her,
assented. “It’s been a perfectly gorgeous day,” added Polly. “All of it.
It was such fun this morning at Miss Comfort’s. And that Mr. Goupil is
a darling duck, isn’t he? And, oh, won’t it be perfectly corking next
fall, Laurie, when we have the boat for our own? Think of the good
times we can have! It was wonderful of Miss Comfort to think of it.”
“Bet you anything,” chuckled Laurie, “she’ll wish herself back
there. Dare say she won’t be able to sleep on shore again after a
summer on the rolling deep!”
Polly laughed. “She’s a dear, isn’t she? And, Laurie, didn’t
everything turn out beautifully this spring? Think how we ‘reclaimed’
Kewpie and—”
“Heard Kewpie’s latest? He told Ned and me before supper that he
might not be able to play football next fall because he didn’t want to
risk hurting his pitching arm! He’s a rare bird, that Kewpie!”
 “Oh, he must play football! But he will, of course. Wasn’t he
splendid this afternoon? And—and weren’t you splendid, too? I just
shrieked and shrieked when you made that perfectly wonderful catch
and saved the game!”
“I didn’t save the game,” answered Laurie. “I dare say that fellow
would have struck out in another minute. Anyhow, Kewpie says he
would have!”
“But Kewpie doesn’t know, and if he had made a hit it would have
tied the score at least. Anyhow, your catch was absolutely
marvelous. Every one says so.”
A short silence followed. Then Laurie said resolutely: “Look here, I
guess you might as well know the truth about that, Polly. I didn’t
really make that catch.”
“Why, what do you mean? I saw you make it!”
“Yes, I know, but—well you see, I didn’t intend to do it. I saw that
ball coming down straight for the end of my nose, and I just put my
hands up to ward it off. Of course every one thinks I’m a regular
wonder, but I’m not. It was just an accident. I—I haven’t told any one
but Ned—and you.”
“That doesn’t spoil it a bit,” declared Polly. “You did catch the ball,
didn’t you? And if you’d just been trying to keep it from hitting you
you wouldn’t have really caught it, would you?”
“That’s what Ned said,” mused Laurie. “Hanged if I know!”
“Ned’s perfectly right,” responded Polly emphatically.
“Of course I am,” said Ned as he and Mae joined them before the
door of the little shop. “But what is it this time?”
“Never mind,” said Polly. “You can ask Laurie.”
“He probably won’t tell me,” said Ned gloomily. “He hates to say
I’m right about anything. Gee, Polly, it seems funny to think that I
won’t see this place again for three months.”
“It’s horrid,” answered Polly, and Mae murmured agreement. “Still,
I suppose three months won’t seem awfully long. And you will write,
won’t you?”
“Certainly will,” asserted Ned. “And don’t you forget to. But we’ll
see you both in the morning. We don’t get away until eleven twenty-
two. Thanks for coming to the dance.”
“Thanks for asking us,” said Polly, her hand on the door. “Good
night. Good night, Laurie. We’ve had a lovely time.”
“Same here,” said Laurie as he tugged at Ned’s sleeve.
Ned joined him at the edge of the sidewalk, and they took their
caps off and bowed in the manner of Mr. Goupil.

“Beneath yon moon’s effulgent light—”

“We, Nid and Nod, wish you Good Night!”

Transcriber’s Notes:
Except for the frontispiece, illustrations have been moved to
follow the text that they illustrate, so the page number of the
illustration may not match the page number in the List of
Illustrations.
Printer’s, punctuation and spelling inaccuracies were silently
corrected.
Archaic and variable spelling has been preserved.
Variations in hyphenation and compound words have been
preserved.
*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK NID AND NOD
***

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will
be renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S.

copyright law means that no one owns a United States copyright in
these works, so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it
in the United States without permission and without paying copyright
royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part of
this license, apply to copying and distributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept
and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and
may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following the
terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use of
the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for
copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very
easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as
creation of derivative works, reports, performances and research.
Project Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given
away—you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with
eBooks not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject
to the trademark license, especially commercial redistribution.

START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
 PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free

distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or
any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at
www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and

Redistributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree
to and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your
possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be
bound by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from
the person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in
paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be

used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people
who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a
few things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic
works even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.
See paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with
Project Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this
agreement and help preserve free future access to Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the
collection of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the
individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the
United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in
the United States and you are located in the United States, we do
not claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing,
performing, displaying or creating derivative works based on the
work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of
course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg™
mission of promoting free access to electronic works by freely
sharing Project Gutenberg™ works in compliance with the terms of
this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name
associated with the work. You can easily comply with the terms of
this agreement by keeping this work in the same format with its
attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when you share it without
charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also
govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most
countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside the
United States, check the laws of your country in addition to the terms
of this agreement before downloading, copying, displaying,
performing, distributing or creating derivative works based on this
work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes
no representations concerning the copyright status of any work in
any country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other

immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must
appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™
work (any work on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or
with which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is
accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied or distributed: