Australia's Many Voices: Teil 1 Australian English - The National Language [Reprint 2013 ed.] 9783110904871, 9783110181944

Citation preview

Australia's Many Voices

W G DE

Contributions to the Sociology of Language

90.1

Editor

Joshua A. Fishman

Mouton de Gruyter Berlin · New York

Australia's Many Voices Australian English — The National Language

by

Gerhard Leitner

Mouton de Gruyter Berlin · New York

M o u t o n de Gruyter (formerly Mouton, The Hague) is a Division of Walter de Gruyter G m b H & Co. K G , Berlin.

© Printed on acid-free paper which falls within the guidelines of the A N S I to ensure permanence and durability.

ISBN 3-11-018194-0 Bibliographic information published by Die Deutsche

Bibliothek

Die Deutsche Bibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data is available in the Internet at < h t t p : / / d n b . d d b . d e > .

© Copyright 2004 by Walter de Gruyter G m b H & Co. K G , D-10785 Berlin All rights reserved, including those of translation into foreign languages. N o part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Printed in Germany.

To Maite, Martin and Philip, who have given me so much inspiration

Acknowledgements The idea of writing Australia's Many Voices owes its existence to a research prize awarded me in 1995 from the Australian Research Council. That prize enabled me to deepen and broaden what I knew about Australia's language habitat and to pursue basic research at the Department of Linguistics, Monash University, the inviting institution. The Alexander von Humboldt Foundation, the Freie Universität Berlin, the University of Melbourne, Macquarie University and Edith-Cowan-University in Perth permitted me to update and broaden the perspectives and to present preliminary findings to wider, expert audiences. There are many institutions and individuals I can only list. As for demographic data, I must mention the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) and the Department of Immigration, Multiculturalism and Indigenous Affairs for their extensive help and open information policy on the internet. Regarding English, I will mention my colleagues at Monash University, The University of Adelaide, The University of Sydney, Macquarie University (Sydney), The University of Melbourne, the National Languages and Literacy Institute of Australia (Canberra), now renamed Language Australia, ABC Radio in Sydney and Melbourne, The Age and the Herald-Sun in Melbourne, Fairfax, the publishers of The Age (Melbourne) and the Sydney Morning Herald. The Macquarie Library (Sydney). Especially the chief-editor Susan Butler and Nie Witton were helpful in providing material and doing specific research for me. On the mass media I would like to mention: Christine Liao, Head of the Standing Committee on Spoken English, ABC Radio, Melbourne; Maria Zijlstra, producer of "The Europeans", ABC Radio, Melbourne; the heads of News, Current Affairs and Sports, ABC Radio, Sydney; Sybilla Noras, The Age, Melbourne; head of training Kim Lockwood and Vickie Ritchie, Herald and Weekly-Times, Melbourne; Gerda Louch, German section, SBS Radio, Melbourne; Executive Director Marc Gonsalves, Fairfax Community Papers, Melbourne. A great personal debt goes to the many Australians who have so generously given their time and supplied information, and have helped me to establish further contacts. I must single out Michael Clyne, who has demonstrated a never-ending willingness to assist, provide ideas, and refer me to sources of information. Lesleyanne Hawthorne from the "Bureau" the now defunct Bureau of Immigration, Multiculturalism and Population

viii

Acknowledgements

Research - and currently at The University of Melbourne, was equally generous, anticipating so often what I needed to know. George Smolicz and Ian Malcolm have done much to help me to access material I could not have tapped otherwise. Eveline and David Charles have helped me over a number of hurdles that can remain untold. Sincere thanks go to my student assistants in Berlin, especially to Juliane Thiessen, Inke Sieloff, Astrid Segui von Enzberg and Kirsten Middeke, as well as those at Monash University, Melbourne. My friends Wolfgang Thiele, former professor of English linguistics at the university of Leipzig, Michael Clyne and Brian Taylor have read earlier drafts. This study brings to some sort of end my research and teaching done over two decades. It all began with a sabbatical at The University of Sydney and Macquarie University in 1983 where I met Arthur Delbridge, a true and gentle Australian. Those, he said, who like Australia will never forget it. I never have! I am grateful for the inspiration he has given me.

Table of Contents Acknowledgements

vii

List of illustrations

xi

Notational conventions

xii

Introduction Chapter 1 1.1 1.2 1.3

1.4

2.5

3.2

3.3

The demography of Australia's language habitat

Demography and the demography of Australia The growth of Australia's population The composition of the population A profile of selected communities 2.4.1 Indigenous Australians 2.4.2 British settlers, including Celtic settlers 2.4.3 Migrants from continental Europe and Asia Conclusion

Chapter 3 3.1

Australia's language habitat

Demographic, cultural and linguistic diversity Past approaches to Australia's many voices A unified approach to Australia's many voices 1.3.1 Language, languages and language performance 1.3.2 Changing the habitat of languages 1.3.3 The social dimension A coherent, inclusive account of Australia's languages

Chapter 2 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4

1

Australian English: The national language

Attitudes to English: From colonial cringe to epicentre 3.1.1 Dimensions of attitudes to language 3.1.2 Views from without on the English in Australia 3.1.3 Views from within and from the Mother Country The British English heritage in mAusE 3.2.1 The accent 3.2.2 The dialect English in Australia in contact 3.3.1 Contact with the indigenous language habitat 3.3.2 Contact with migrant languages other than English

3 4 7 13 14 20 35 41 45 46 51 60 67 68 72 79 85 87 90 91 92 94 106 107 117 149 151 177

χ

Table of Contents

3.3.3 3.4

3.5

3.6

3.7

Contact with other varieties of English 191 Internal stratification of mAusE 220 3.4.1 Variable patterns in the accent 221 3.4.2 From the non-standard to the standard dialect 238 3.4.3 A note on ethnicity 248 3.4.4 Regional variation 249 Standard mAusE and Australia's national language 263 3.5.1 The Australian Broadcasting Commission 265 3.5.2 The Macquarie dictionary project 282 3.5.3 Government and other codifiers 289 3.5.4 Usage guides, especially newspaper guides 292 3.5.5 The Style Council 297 3.5.6 Non-discriminatory language and plain English 298 3.5.7 The English language industry 3 09 A social and linguistic history of mAusE 311 3.6.1 The formation of the accents 312 3.6.2 The origin of stratification of the dialect 329 3.6.3 Recent change 335 The language repertoire of the speech community of mAusE.336

Chapter 4

An epi-centre in the Asia-Pacific region

338

References

347

Name Index

382

Subject Index

389

List of illustrations List of Tables Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table

2-1. Percentage of second generation Australians: 1996 3-1. The onomasiological break-up of loans 3-2. Integration of loans: More than one meaning 3-3. Items ordered according to onomasiological criteria 3-4. Total of six years of output for each paper 3-5. Number and definition of varieties of mAusE 3-6. Features that stratify in social terms 3-7. The vowel variants of mAusE accents 3-8. Non-standard features of the dialect 3-9. Phonemic alternation between /ae/ and /a/ 3-10. Types of regional Australianisms 3-11. Crayfish terms 3-12. Analysis of the scope of lexicographic publications 3-13. Examples of the shared Anglo-American heritage

64 154 157 168 171 222 223 230 240 254 256 259 282 331

List of Diagrams Diagram Diagram Diagram Diagram Diagram Diagram Diagram Diagram Diagram Diagram Diagram Diagram

1-1. Stages of language development in a new habitat 21 1-2. The Englishes of Australia 36 2-1. Total population growth 51 2-2. Ethnic composition from 1861 62 3-1. The mAusE monophthongs and RP 109 3-2. Onomasiological domains by time 155 3-3. 1000+ items in three papers 1993-8 172 3-4. Women's business 173 3-5. Koorie 174 3-6. Variety formation and contact 191 4-1. Broad stages of language development inside the habitat.. 345 4-2. Shared periods of the transformation of the habitat 346

List of Maps Map 3-1. Dialect areas

255

Notational conventions Abbreviations AAP ABC

Australian Associated Press Australian Broadcasting Corporation (called Commission up to the late 1950s) AborE Aboriginal English ABS Australian Bureau of Statistics ACOD Australian Concise Oxford Dictionary AGPS Australian Government Publishing Service AGSM Australian Government Style Manual ALRC Australian Language Research Centre, Uni. of Sydney AmE American English AND Australian National Dictionary ATSIC Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Council AusE Australian English (see also mAusE) BI(M)PR Bureau of Immigration(, Multiculturalism) and Population Research (Melbourne, abolished in 1996; formerly called Bureau of Immigration and Population Research, BIPR) BrE British English EDD English Dialect Dictionary EFL English as a foreign language EngE English English ENL English as a native language HMSO Her Majesty's Stationary Office (UK) HR A Historical Records of Australia HRT High rising tone (a particular intonation pattern) HWT Herald Weekly Times (Melbourne) IrE Irish English mAusE mainstream Australian English (see also AusE) NCELTR National Centre for English Language Teaching and Research, Macquarie University, Sydney NESB non-English-speaking background (migrants) (see ESB) NODE New Oxford Dictionary of English NSW News South Wales NT Northern Territory NZE New Zealand English OED Oxford English Dictionary Qld Queensland RP Received Pronunciation (EngE prestige accent)

Notational conventions SA SBS SCOSE ScotE SthAfE Tas Vic. WA

xiii

South Australia Special Broadcasting Service Standing Committee on Spoken English, ABC Scottish English South African English Tasmania Victoria Western Australia

Use of terminology Aboriginal, Aborigine, indigenous Australians: used fairly indistinctly; at times Torres Strait Islanders are separated out. Koori is used rarely and only with reference to Aborigines in the South East of Australia Settlers, free settlers, invaders, convicts are used variously and mainly with what they would be taken to mean literally. Invaders is used intentionally with an ideological bias with reference to diagram 1-1 or else to reflect what some indigenous Australians say about white Australians at the early period Migrants, immigrants are generic terms to refer to non-Aboriginal Australians who came at various periods of Australia. Descendents of migrants in the second, third or later generation are described in precise terms.

Introduction At the time of Australia's bicentenary in 1988, the Asian correspondent of the Los Angeles Times reported, half-seriously, a story he he had been told: "A confused American dining with Australian friends appealed for a crash course in the strange tongue Australians call English. 'No worries, mate', one of the Australians said. 'Just toss the rule book on the rubbish heap. Ya gotta learn it word by word'." The 'unruliness', the slanginess and informality are the features of Australian English most widely known that reflect a persistent undercurrent of un-Englishness and lend themselves best to the marketing of a particular image of Australia as 'easy-going', 'laissezfaire'. "Professor feels the strine" was the headline of a newspaper article in The Sunday Age (21 January 1996) on my inability to feel much for cricket. The word strine is pronounced as if it were strain and can be a pun downunder only. Yet, mainstream Australian English, the dominant variety of English, owes almost everything to Australia's Anglo-Celtic heritage. Starting out as a deviant form, it has been raised to Australia's national language. It does not exhaust English in Australia. There are the English of indigenous people, the English of first generation migrants, that of the second generation, the English that is a lingua franca in the public arena, in the workplace, in church and elsewhere. There are the pidgins and creóles that have merged features of English with those of indigenous languages. This book lays the foundation. Focusing on the mainstream variety, it tells the story from the transportation of a medley of accents and dialects from Britain and Ireland by convicts, administrative and military personnel to its current status and role as a national language, an epi-centre of English inside the Asia-Pacific region. It is starting to act as a regional player there and may eventually compete with American and British English. This study uncovers the changing attitudinal and public reactions to Australian English, it shows features that typify Australian English, explores where they come from and what function they may have. Importantly, this study embeds the development of Australian English in a wide ecological or habitat framework and emphasizes the contact it has had, and goes on having, with Indigenous languages and, importantly, with American English and migrant languages. Australia's participation in global matters reveals an underlying layer of globalization and the fact that its English may be or become a 'conveyer belt' to diffuse influences from the outside.

2

Introduction

The sub-title of this book - Australian English. The National Language - may cause some problems. Is Australian English really a national form of the language? The issue is controverisal. And though I am using the term that depicts it in terms of its status, I do intend it more as a synonym for 'mainstream Australian English' or for 'the English of the mainstream society', rather than as a depiction of all facts. Neither do I mean to imply that its speakers are monolingual in it or that they all have to have an Anglo-Celtic background - on the contrary! Its speaker base comes from many past and recent ethnic communities and many of its speakers have a wider language repertoire than the status of the language suggests. But there is some justification for calling that English the national language that will become clearer as the picture of that English unfolds. The main title Australia's Many Voices is also used for Leitner (2004b), which deals with the 'other languages' and other, more sectional varieties of English. It also covers the political and educational dimension of the habitat of all languages, though those parts that are relevant to an understanding of the variety of English discussed are included here. There is a good deal of common ground between all languages, which would be hard to separate. And there are good reasons for making another assumption: Australia's history since 1788 may not shared between Indigenous and immigrant Australians in the sense that they all had an equal chance of participating. Yet, from a sociolinguistic perspective there are elements that call for an approach that focuses on contact and interaction. This book develops that shared, underlying perspective and includes essential data on Australia's demographic diversity, on the history that bears upon an understanding of contact and interaction and it shows that Australia's Many Voices can and should be understood in terms of a transformation of a language habitat.

Chapter 1

Australia's language habitat

"Until recently Australians saw their society as homogeneous - as white, English-speaking, and culturally and intellectually British. Although this was never wholly true, it formed the core of a myth which is now very worn", wrote Jupp in the preface to The Australian People (1988: 1). Doubts about that association had been voiced long ago, as Pringle's description of Australia's national character shows: When the migrant arrives at his destination he is at first met and welcomed by friends who are either English themselves or, shall we say, threat to the ordinary Australian, however much they supported immigration otherwise. Assimilationism, still a powerful attitude in the 1970s, expected immigrants to comply, to use English to their children so as to facilitate the adoption of Australian values. Migrants did and gave up a part of their past. As for indigenous Australians, assimilation was a step forward, one might say, cynically. After decades of segregated development, they became a visible part of the whole picture. The English language thus grew in numbers of speakers and in status. It also grew by the natural tendency of people shifting to it, as mixing increased between members of different communities. A large number of people had three or four different cultural and language affiliations. What was their background when they were bom of an Aboriginal mother and a Scottish father? A Koori? A Scottish-Australian? Just an Australian? Ethnicity now was a matter of conscious decisions and many decided to be just that: Australian, an indistinguishable member of the mainstream. Assimilationism, integrationism and pragmatism, they all had one outcome, viz. a trend towards homogeneity. And in the last couple of years the trend towards full integration has gained in force again. "In the intervening period since 1988", Jupp says in the second edition of The Australian People (2001: 1), "issues such as immigration, multiculturalism, ethnic diversity and the optimum size of the population have become increasingly controversial". A renewed emphasis on homogeneity and integration is hard to ignore today. Diversity and homogeneity open up a wide field of study as one asks what happens when people of diverse language and culture backgrounds are thrown together and made to interact. Which of the outcomes are Australian? Which of them can be found in similar circumstances elsewhere - in New Zealand, Canada or the USA? In exploring these questions, I will follow three principles. I will, firstly, emphasize the role of

4

Chapter 1 Australia's language habitat

contact in language and culture. Secondly, I will embed Australia into the wider socio-historical and international context of the time, and, finally, I will draw on the relevant scientific disciplines in an attempt to contextualize and explain what has been happening on the language side. 1.1

Demographic, cultural and linguistic diversity

Diversity has always been pervasive in Australia - whether during precolonial times or since colonization. Australia has seen periods of major change in the size, composition and self-perception of its population. Apart from the diversity brought about by the mixture of convicts, supervisors and administrators on the First Fleet in 1788, the 1820s saw a policy shift towards free settlement, not unlike in the American colonies. There was an expansion of the agricultural exploitation of the land, the beginning of educational efforts and, most of all, that of missionary work amongst Aborigines. Economic success and the discovery of gold in the 1850s brought hundreds of thousands of immigrants of diverse backgrounds to the colonies. The Germans were amongst the first and they settled together, built their own infrastructure, and maintained their language and cultural identity. The Chinese, who came at about the same time, did not, at least not to the same extent. The depression of the 1880s slowed down immigration and the advent of the White Australia policy accelerated that slow-down. There continued to come, it is true, South Pacific Kanakas and Italians and other immigrants to the labour-intensive sugar cane and tobacco farms in northern Queensland.1 But the numbers of Chinese and Kanakas immigrants declined. It was then that the Italians, Greeks and the remaining Chinese began to establish community structures. When free and secular schooling was introduced in the 1870s it became difficult for ethnic communities to maintain their schools. The tide of nationalism, the federation of the colonies into the Commonwealth of Australia in 1901, the anti-Asian White Australia policy that came with it and the tensions that increased during the years leading up to World War I promoted an AngloCeltic self-perception and suppressed the existing diversity. The postWorld War II period triggered a new wave of immigration from continental Europe. And when the White Australia policy was abolished in the mid1960s, Vietnamese refugees were the first large group of Asian migrants to come. The decline of migrations from Europe could only be compensated

1

The word Kanaka is of Hawaiian origin and means 'men'.

1.1 Demographic, cultural and linguistic diversity

5

by migrants from across the Tasman. The War had already made Australia look to the USA for cultural and economic models, but Britain's entry into the European Community in 1973 was the final and decisive factor that forced Australia to re-assess its geopolitical and cultural position and to engage in contact with its Asian neighbours. The seeds of diversity which had been sown so early, went on changing Australia's demographic and cultural texture, as Clyne and Kipp argue: Australia is a country of diversity - in its landscape, in its climate and in its people. A history of indigenous culture spanning 40,000 years has been overlaid in the last two centuries with cultures from Europe, Asia, the Americas and the Middle East, and the bearers of these cultures have brought with them, in addition to their food, their festivals and many other traditions, a multiplicity of languages. (1999: 1) What do they mean by 'overlaid'? Are we to think of a series of layers, some being closer to the surface, others deeper-lying? Are we to think of an increasing opaqueness as one goes down from the surface? Would such opaque layers constitute an Australian commonness? Diversity was never conflict-free. Within weeks of the arrival of the First Fleet tensions erupted against the Aborigines and continued into the 20th century. In the 1850s there were tensions with the Chinese, who came as house servants and as gold-diggers. Tensions foreshadowed the 'White Australia' policy, which lasted to the mid-1960s. Despite it, some Chinese found pockets where they could survive. Pacific labourers, the Kanakas, were repatriated or made themselves invisible. Even Europeans felt the pressure towards assimilation. While immigrant diversity was debated, welcomed or rejected, as the case may be, indigenous diversity was not even noticed, let alone appreciated. Aborigines had formed the majority population into the 1830s, were not homogeneous socially or culturally yet they were seen as an undifferentiated mass of sameness. Their numbers declined so dramatically that they were considered a dying race that was in need of protection and a life in controlled, segregated environments. Missions and reserves slowed down physical death but did not stop the decline of cultures and languages, in fact they may have speeded it up. Children of mixed descent were treated 'better'. It was hoped they would assimilate and lead a western-style life, if they were removed or stolen from their parents and families. The Stolen Generation debate is a living testimony to the enduring effects of assimilationism and the difficult relationships between black and white Australians. The film Rabbit-Proof Fence by Phillip Noyce is a telling testimony of this conflict.

6

Chapter! Australia's language habitat

Indigenous Australians had several hundred languages and dialects but the chain of language and culture transmission was broken, contact languages developed early in New South Wales and elsewhere. Most of them disappeared in the south by the late 19th century to give way to Aboriginal English (AborE) and mainstream Australian English (mAusE). In the north more stable forms developed, were maintained and, in the 1970s, accepted as indigenous languages by indigenous representatives. As for migrants, the mixing of non-English speaking migrants turned out to be a mixed blessing as it accelerated the shift to Anglo-Australian patterns and English. The chain of language transmission was broken for them, too, until the post-World War II years rejuvenated some of them or introduced new languages. Assimilationist policies were now out of tune with the new realities, the languages of non-English migrants began to flourish and policies supported linguistic pluralism. Though well-known in the study of English as such, the cultural, ethnic and linguistic diversity of British settlers is often overlooked. They, too, assimilated quickly, melting their accents and dialects into a novel form, viz• Australian English. That English acquired characteristic features in the new environment and bore the marks of diversity in accent and the dependence on contact with indigenous people and migrants. That new English accentuated, stabilized and expanded till it became the de facto and, over time, the accepted variety - the mainstream Australian English (mAusE). The early impetus for stabilization in pronunciation came from the second generation, the settlers' children, in the 1830s. Inheriting new, unstable forms, they shaped that English to suit their needs. Newcomers adapted to the linguistic patterns of the founder generation (Mufwene 1996) as they did in other ways. But a "second wave" of British migrants in the last 40 years of the 19th century brought with them the accentuating patterns of social stratification in England and the English prestige accent, Received Pronunciation. From the turn of the 20th century a fully stratified pattern was emerging. Influenced by that second wave, it made mAusE the only viable option for a new nation. It has continued to absorb hundreds of thousands of speakers who themselves or whose ancestors used languages other than English which show traces of this integrative achievement. If one ignores the socio-political issues with migrants, one can observe that mAusE is being redefined to leave space for other varieties of English such as AborE - the English of many Aborigines - and Kriol - the northern creole. AusE is more diverse than one likes to think. Diversity in language, then, is a result of contact and interaction, which form the background to this investigation of Australia's language situation.

1.2 Past approaches to Australia's many voices

7

The two questions, viz. 'What happens when people of diverse backgrounds are put into a situation where they have to interact' and 'How many and which of the outcomes are Australian?' bring out the close dependency of demographic, social and cultural parameters. This dependency will not be lost sight of and readers should keep in mind that the three adjectives, i.e. demographic, social and cultural, point to three approaches to the understanding of Australia's many voices. The first, macro-sociological, one highlights demographic characteristics and relates languages to factors like countries of origin, size of first or later generations, etc. The second one turns to the public and private space in which communication takes place and includes interlocutors, topics, locale - which are normally subsumed under the notion of domain. The third one addresses the role of attitudes, experiences, the cultural heritage and related factors and highlights the attitudes of people towards the languages they can choose from or are confronted with. The transition from demographic data to the social space and on to experiences and values shows that these approaches look at ever more fine-grained aspects of a common theme - the language habitat. But contact and interaction may have two sides, the one being local or Australian, the other being global, involving Australia with the world at large. Local contact will be at the centre of this investigation but often, and increasingly so, it is the gobal that makes itself felt. It can be seen in global words, attitudes, the call for non-biased language, plain English, etc. Australia's language situation can never be isolated from the global context. Ethnic mixing, by free will, the force of circumstances or by political pressure, added another agent. Homogeneity, traditionally defined in terms of an Anglo-Celtic heritage, translated into one that was essentially Australian. It was a 'malleable', continually changing homogeneity whose texture integrated the diversity of an immigrant country. The 'British myth' was rarely more than a myth that disguised underlying ethnic, cultural and linguistic diversity. And from the late 1960s multiculturalism and pluralism became Australia's hallmark, though recently one has seen a renewed shift of Australian Englishness or, should one say, English Australianness?

1.2

Past approaches to Australia's many voices

Diversity, contact, interaction and the linguistic outcomes is a complex, dynamic field whose study throws up many and complex questions. One only needs to think of the history of English, its interaction with indigenous and migrant languages since 1788 and the changes that have occurred in the

8

Chapter 1 Australia's language habitat

dialects transported that were to form a local, Australian form. One may think of the status changes from Australia being a penal colony to Australia being a regional player in the Asia-Pacific region. It maintains a dynamic balance between local and global pressures. That English has attracted an enormous amount of attention (Leitner, Taylor, and Fritz forthc.). There are the migrant languages and the ways they have changed as a result of transplantation and contact in Australia. One may mention the changes to their status and functions in society and their structure. There are the values and attitudes society, groups and individuals associate with them. There is the indigenous language heritage and its long past, its association with the land and the people, and the massive losses and restructuring of languages. The migrant languages, like the indigenous ones, are continuously threatened by extinction for the lack of socio-communicative space outside the narrow home, family and friendship domains, form an wide area of interest. And there is the field of language policy that aims to tolerate, restrict or widen the space allocated to them. It may, at certain moments in the history of Australia, support the aspirations of communities regarding their languages and provide necessary political, financial or other support for a variety of reasons. Social cohesion, equality of access or foreign policy and economic needs have variously been used as arguments to retain language pluralism. Can one do more, in light of such a complex task, readers may ask, than present, in a fairly lucid way, the knowledge that has accumulated over decades of research? Can there be a common conceptual framework that embraces such a broad field? Given that Australia defines itself as an immigrant country, like Canada and the USA, and as a multicultural nation or, more recently, as a nation with a diverse population, one suspects that there is one - at least, that there should be one. It would embrace linguistic, socio- and psycholinguistic, socio-political, educational and economic components - a multiplicity of issues. Contact and interaction have been major research fields since the 1970s. There is no space for a comprehensive research overview and relevant work will be referred to in the body of this study. But it is pertinent to emphasize at the beginning that most studies have been non-integrative, confining themselves to language types, individual languages or selected features of those types of languages. Many studies deal with pronunciation, lexis or the syntax of Australia's languages, others with socio- or psycholinguistic aspects, social and regional variation or history. Only a few studies have integrated linguistic, social, socio-psychological and other aspects with English, indigenous, migrant and contact languages and thus come close to

1.2 Past approaches to Australia 's many voices the intentions of this exploration. For the purposes at hand I will identify five research fields which have contributed important knowledge and, within them, highlight those studies that are accessible to non-specialists.2 Turner's Good Australian English and Good New Zealand English (1972), which, while prescriptive, addressed "intelligent Australians and New Zealanders who care about their language", as the preface stated. It is a practical book, giving advice on good usage. Its normative bias was not accidental and echoes an earlier, more defensive research tradition that saw little or no legitimacy in AusE. The Cultivated Australian, a Festschrift for Arthur Delbridge, the 'cultivated Australian', edited by Clark (1985), contains papers on the history of mAusE, pronunciation, lexicography, idiom, style, the legal register, and indigenous influences. It expressed a more self-assured attitude to the English of Australia. Collins' and Blair's Australian English. The Language of a New Society (1989) was a landmark collection and brought together studies on language attitudes, on variation in time, space and society; on the standardization of AusE and its codifiers; and on the influence from migrant languages and other varieties of English. But it was really limited to the mainstream of AusE and ignored the English of Aboriginal and migrant speakers. Its sequel, English in Australia (Blair and Collins 2001), makes good headway towards a more comprehensive view but still ignores the wider language situation of the country. With some modifications that will be mentioned in Chapter Three, these collections have supported the consensus on the nature of mAusE as the language of a new society and presented data on its differentness from its parent, BrE. They highlighted internal patterns of variation, yet most of them did not give due weight to non-mainstream varieties of English and to non-English languages altogether. When they do mention them, they tend to limit the scope to the effects they have had on English. The second and third research areas make up for some of the limitations but they rely on their own agendas. They figure prominently in Leitner (2004b) but are relevant for an understanding of English. The field of research on indigenous languages differs fundamentally from the one on English and understandably so. Most studies approach these languages from a theoretical linguistic perspective, asking questions about the characteristics from a comparative-typological and/or historical angle. They include semantics, pragmatics and the reflection of cultural patterns in 2

While some of what I will say will be more relevant to Leitner (2004b), past research is necessary for an understanding of what I mean by an integrative and comprehensive approach.

9

10

Chapter 1 Australia's language habitat

language. To mention kinship terminology, the elicitation of information and discourse structures. Many studies look at the effects that contact with English has had on their structure and status and, especially, on the level of language maintenance, shift and loss. Regarding indigenous languages, there are a few accessible studies such as Blake's Australia's Indigenous Languages (1991), the introductory chapter in, e.g., Dixon and Blake (1991) by Blake and Dixon. Dixon (2002) is a recent, comprehensive study with new ideas on typological and historical features. SSABSA's (1996) Australia's Indigenous Languages is a splendid, accessible production with a welter of illustrations, pictures and sound. Schmidt (1990), finally, deals with the loss of indigenous languages. McKay (1996) surveys the situation in four contemporary communities and projects a more positive image. Studies of languages that resulted from contact between indigenous Australians and British settlers straddle the first and the second fields and show the range of varieties of English or English-based contact languages have emerged. Harris's (1986) story of the origin of Kriol in the Northern Territory and north Queensland is a lucid account of language contact, leaving a thread that was taken up in Troy's (1990; 1994) work on the situation in New South Wales from 1788 to 1845 and the Sydney language. Walsh and Yallop's (1993) collection on the language situation of Aboriginal Australians focuses on contact and indigenous languages. There are contributions on the social and sociolinguistic texture of Aboriginal communities and on how their languages are embedded within their value systems. AborE is seen as resulting from the depidginization of a pidgin, but is not studied in detail. Foster and Mühlhäusler (1996) investigate language contact in South Australia. The most outstanding resource that integrates current knowledge in a way that opens up new avenues of research is Wurm, Mühlhäusler, and Tryon's (1996) Atlas of Languages of Intercultural Communication. It shows how Australia's contact languages are related to the wider scene in the South Pacific and what they might have borrowed from the pidgins of the Atlantic. Siegel (2000b) contains papers on the effects of language contact in Australia and the South Pacific. A closely related stream of studies has an educational angle. Kaldor, Eagleson, and Malcolm's (1982) work on AborE amongst urban Aboriginal Australians in the east and west is one of the earliest descriptive studies. Malcolm (e.g. 1999a) has done most for the unravelling of the texture of Aboriginal English, its development and relatedness to traditional languages. Turning to language choice in multilingual Aboriginal schools, Harkins (1994) shows that choice, including that of mAusE and AborE, in Alice Springs can be

1.2 Past approaches to Australia's many voices

11

described in terms of a framework that reflects norms of traditional societies. The fourth area deals with the languages of non-English-speaking migrants and shares with the second one the interest in the maintenance of languages and the role of English in a complex language web. It identifies patterns of usage, attitudes and the tasks of language teaching in promoting linguistic competence. Clyne and Pauwels have published extensively on cross-cultural communication, training and other applications (Clyne 1994; Pauwels 1995). Based on research on cross-cultural communication and migrant LOTEs, NCELTR published a series of nine so-called handbooks on the Arabic, Chinese, French, German, Indonesian/Malay, Italian, Japanese, Hindi-Urdu, Spanish, Modern Greek, Korean, Thai, Vietnamese and Russian communities and languages (e.g. Ronowicz 1995 on Poland; Brick 1991 on China). Clyne (1982; 1991), Clyne and Kipp (1997a/b; 2002) have updated language facts census after census and provided information on language maintenance, shift, and social and sociopsychological factors that promote the one or the other from a macrosociological angle or from that of communicative networks. Clyne also illustrates lexical, structural, and functional features that occur as a result of the transplantation of languages into an Australian environment. Taking a different line of investigation, Smolicz (1999) is interested in the sociopsychological position that languages have inside the value systems of migrant communities, and whether that influences the desire and efforts to maintain languages. These approaches complement each other. Clyne (1994) investigates the use of English as a lingua franca in the workplace and Clyne and Kipp (1999) explore the question of whether communities that are united by a common language but have different backgrounds otherwise, express different concerns about the need or desirability of maintaining it. Focusing on 'pluricentric' languages such as Chinese, Arabic and Spanish, they find that communities manifest different responses to the language situation in relation to their countries of origin and pre-migration experiences as well as attitudes and values that they draw on. As a result, Clyne and Kipp (1999) argue that studies on the maintenance of loss of a language must have a double focus, viz• on communities and on languages. I have mentioned education-oriented studies. They form the fifth research field that draws on work on individual languages and language groups and asks questions like "What is the role of language in and for the public arena and in and for education?", "What kind of training is required for teachers and professionals in their interactions with non-Englishspeaking Australians?", "Do migrants and indigenous Australians have

12

Chapter I Australia's language habitat

linguistic rights that must be respected - and what does respect imply?", "What, above all, is meant by the national role of English and what kind of English should be used in the public domain?" Such questions were condensed in the debates about an explicit language and literacy policy that began in the 1970s and culminated in Lo Bianco's (1987) National Policy on Languages, which was implemented between 1988 and 1991. In the early 1990s it was replaced by the quite different approach to pluralism of the White Paper (Dawkins 1991). These policies and the shifts from one to another have prompted many studies on the nature and benefits of linguistic diversity for Australia's socio-political and economic position. A major line of research is intercultural communication, such as in the workplace (Clyne 1994), in the health and social services sector (Pauwels 1995), the courtroom (Eades 1995), and contract law and legislation (Eagleson 1985). Forensic linguistics, plain English and the avoidance of bias in public domains have had significant impacts on all of Australia's languages. Though research has tended to compartmentalize language issues, it has accumulated a large body of information and argument that can be drawn upon to create a comprehensive and integrative new position. There are a few real precursors. Lo Bianco (1987) should be mentioned not only as a policy in itself but also as a resource that addressed all languages and communities and formulated a comprehensive position. Clyne's (1985c) Australia. Meeting Place of Languages, too, raises questions that apply to all language types, viz. English, indigenous, contact and migrant languages. Though it excludes mAusE, since Collins and Blair (1989) was in preparation at that time, mAusE is the ever-present foil against which these issues are being discussed. It is worth quoting Clyne's intent in editing Australia. Meeting Place of Languages, which, he says, "concentrates on language contact in Australia" and is the first attempt at starting a dialogue between scholars working on a range of issues concerning contact between English and other migrant languages and those studying similar questions relating to contact between English and Aboriginal languages. (1985a: 1)

Within these self-imposed limitations, Clyne integrated themes that had been compartmentalized before. Some studies have followed his lead. Collins and Blair (2001) goes some way towards a comprehensive picture, and Leitner (1996; 2002a) is a popularized survey written for non-specialist readers. Harris (1986), Troy (1994) and Wurm, Mühlhäusler, and Tryon (1996) pursue a similarly comprehensive approach as Clyne (1985c) with

1.3 A unified approach to Australia's many voices

13

regard to contact languages. There is little recognition of the usefulness of an integrative approach in studies on mAusE. Mitchell, who is guilty of compartmentalization himself, has belatedly acknowledged the benefits of a multidisciplinary approach: The disciplines whose help might be sought include: Human historical geography, including population movement and settlement, migration internal and external - studies which bring together time, space and people; Demography, Ethnography; Sociology and social history; Economic history; Education; Transport and communication; What might be called the home disciplines - linguistic theory, lexicography, sociolinguistics, general history and literature. We might join demography and social history, perhaps adding women's studies to strengthen the understanding of a topic very significant for the subject - the role of women and children. (1995: 1)

The situation for a unified approach is thus better than one might think. 1.3

A unified approach to Australia's many voices

What, then, is meant by a unified approach, i.e. an approach that does not isolate the different types of languages or looks at them all from an English perspective? To spell out the details, I will raise these questions: (1) What features of language are affected by contact and interaction? - The meanings of the concept language (2) What has happened to the old language habitat as people of different language and cultural backgrounds started to interact? Responses to, and outcomes of, language contact (3) What has changed in the lives of languages? - The new habitat of languages (4) What was and is the role and impact of the society and of elite sections of it? - Shaping languages and the language situation The first question may not seem an immediately obvious one to the nonlinguist reader, but we need to know what is affected as the language habitat changes as a result of enforced contact with invading languages. Probing deeper with regard to that theme, question (2) turns to the sociohistorical context in which re-habitation and contact are taking place. Question (3) addresses the linguistic side of re-habitation and contact which, in the long run, altered the ways languages have fared. Some have

14

Chapter 1 Australia's language habitat

developed into new epi-centres, such as English, others died and were, in some cases, revitalized at a later period of time, such as Kaurna. The last question addresses the impact of the emerging Australian society on the language scene. It highlights the changes at the level of the structure of languages and the overall concerns with the language situation or ecology. The goal of this study can thus be described as an attempt to show how all communities fit into a common framework. One must avoid sectionalizing and ignoring common features, while giving due weight to differences. But Australia's Many Voices is more than an attempt to cast a language net onto Australia, it provides a model for English elsewhere, indeed for other habitats, as in NZ, South Africa, the USA or Canada.

1.3.1

Language, languages and language performance

Following the lead of modern linguistics, Vater (1996) identifies seven uses of the term language, of which four are helpful to a characterization of the scope of this study (cf. Leitner 2000a): (i)

The general human ability to communicate by means of vocal signals (French le langage)

(ii) The particular ability of a speech community to communicate by means of vocal signals (F la langue{) (iii) The sets of the expression of a particular language (F la langue2) (iv) The actual uses that are made of a particular language (F la parole) These uses mark a transition from a general cognitive ability to the social uses to which speakers put language. For the transition from predisposition to purposeful action to be possible it is necessary to postulate an intermediate step, which is seen in individual languages (langues). The languesj are tied to specific communities, are socially grounded, and, yet, speakers each have their own mental representation. The third use of language, langue2, embraces the sets of verbal expressions, the languagespecific signs, used in communication. However, one must extend Vater's conception and include social values (often discarded as connotations or expressive values) that are associated with the sets of linguistic expressions or with subsets, say, pronunciation, the meaning and use of words, etc. It is, therefore, necessary to replace Vater's definition of (iii) by (iii'): (iii') the sets of the means of expression of a particular language along with social values and attitudes associated with them (F la langue2)

1.3 A unified approach to Australia's many voices

15

Langue], the reader will recall, was defined in terms of a community's ability to use the sets of expressions. Since (iii') includes social values, the conception of language as a code must also include attitudes and values: (ii') the particular communicative ability of a speech community to communicate by means of vocal signals, along with social values and attitudes associated with the code or entire set (F la langue ι) Sets of 'means of expression' can be aggregated in grammars, usage guides, dictionaries or other reference sources of a langueSuch resources exist for many languages, but a language or languex does not need them to be functional, especially since such materials can only be derived from language use and tend to be seen as signs of language standardization, rather than as mere descriptions. Indigenous language societies, for instance, have never developed them on their own since they virtually only occur as a by-product or a consequence of reducing language to writing. La parole, finally, reflects both langue\ and languei and is indirectly related to langage. It is one of the tasks of theoretical linguistics to clarify the link between predisposition to language and language-specific competence, but also to clarify the impact of the social forces behind language, which come out most concretely in parole. The polar emphases on the mental and the social has led to a multiplicity of approaches that will surface from time to time in subsequent chapters. As mentioned above, the uses of the concept of language are connected by way of a gradual specification from langage to langue χ and, via langue2, on to parole. And that abstract formulation enables one to ignore the distinction between different languages and the dialects of a language, which is normally made on the basis of a 'whole' langue2 and the subdivisions that can be postulated inside it. Such sub-divisions can be defined in terms of parameters relating to region, social class, ethnicity, gender, etc., and there is a range of terms to refer to them. The most neutral one is variety (of a language), which will be used most frequently. For regional varieties, the term dialect is common, for social ones sociolect, for gender (less commonly) genderlect, etc. Unless such distinctions are called for, I will use the term language to mean languex and langue2. However, I need to re-emphasize that language attitudes influence the way concrete interactions are managed and can have long-term effects on languages and the conceptualizations of encounters in cross-linguistic or intercultural situations. To quote Cargile et al.: This process whereby hearers react to both linguistic and paralinguistic variation in messages is at the centre of the language-communication

16

Chapter 1 Australia's language habitat intersection. It affects not only everyday and applied social interactions but also impinges at the macrosociological as well as public policy levels in terms of whether languages have institutional support or are superseded by more prestigious varieties. An understanding of this process, along with the different kinds of evaluative profiles that arise from such language variation in different social contexts and cultures, is the heartland of 'language attitudes'. (1994: 211)

Having clarified the concepts, I can point to three branches of linguistics that will be important to this study: (i)

theoretical linguistics, the study of langage

(ii) descriptive linguistics, the study of langueh langue2 and parole (iii) socio-, psycho-, corpus linguistics and other sub-disciplines, which study parole and connect it with theoretical, descriptive and applied, educational linguistics. Australia's Many Voices will only marginally be concerned with the general human capacity for language and with theoretical linguistics. In most cases I will refer to descriptive linguistics and its levels of language organization such as phonology, morphology, syntax, semantic, pragmatics. I will now turn to three questions that arise as one looks at real communities. The first is how a language can be identified; the second is, if and how languages, such as English, Spanish or German, which are spoken in several national communities, can be assumed to represent a single speech community in Australia. Turning to multilingual societies, the third question is about contact linguistics. As langue ι and langue2 exist only in the form of varieties that may be typical of a region, a social group, the genders, etc., there is an ambiguity when one explores outcomes in the real world, viz. in Australia or similar situations in Canada, the USA, etc. The third meaning of language, i.e. langue2, refers to the set of expressions and the way it constitutes a system. It is often said, when one looks at a text, 'This is English' or 'This is German'. But such a view is circular. Not every expression used by English speakers is an English expression, and English expressions can be used by non-English speakers when they speak their own language. The problem of identification is particularly acute when there is a gradual transition from one language to another. In indigenous Australia languages often faded into one another, as one moved from one tribe to a neighbouring one. Partly because of that, it has frequently been claimed that indigenous people speak dialects and that there is only one language. Mühlhäusler (1996) makes a point worth mentioning regarding the languages in the Pacific region, viz. that they have

1.3 A unified approach to Australia's many voices

17

often been 'created', rather than identified, by missionaries and administrators. As a name of the 'language' could not always be elicited from the people with whom Whites intended to work, they named it after the location, avoiding detailed research and ignoring the attitudes or knowledge of the people they considered the targets of proselytization. But languages - and their names - normally result from acts of community agreement and are not identifiable on the basis of sets of expressions or langue2• English is, in other words, the language that a community has agreed to call it English; it is not the set of English expressions, though there is a close correlation. Australian English is, by analogy, the form of English that Australians have agreed to call AusE. It resulted from a shift in attitudes to what was called English in Australia before. But if a community has no name for their ways of speaking, the question of naming seems irrelevant. For strangers to assign a name is an act of imperialism, says Mühlhäusler. That takes me to the next question, namely the problems raised by socalled 'pericentric' languages like English, German or Chinese (Clyne 1992b). It has often been maintained that English is no longer a single language with a single speech community that shares a consensus on a common set of 'means of expression'. There are, so the argument goes, different, if related, sets which characterize different English-using countries. The norms that guide their use have developed locally in and for the communities concerned. English is no longer linked to a single English speech community but to an American, Australian, Indian, or English English one. To show the relationships that do exist, the term speech fellowship was coined. Different speech communities exist inside a fellowship or, put differently, the English speech fellowship manifests itself in the American, English, Indian, or Australian speech communities. Communities that set their own speech norms are called epi-centres (Leitner 1992) and they use partly distinct sets of expressions. But since many norms and expressions are shared, some are characteristic of the larger speech fellowship. I will return to that issue when I discuss the problem of identifying sets of expressions of mAusE (langue2) or social codes (langueι) and introduce two concepts of core, i.e. one that relates mAusE to other epi-centres, the other that shows its internal cohesion. A study of pericentric languages is inherently comparative: Each epicentre must be contrasted with other epi-centres. Since mAusE and its speech community form an epi-centre, the study of its social make-up, uses and expressions is comparative. The presence of sub-communities throws up further questions: How does the English of (many) Aborigines, i.e.

18

Chapter 1 Australia's language habitat

AborE, how do creóles like Kriol, how do migrant forms of English, tie into that languex and its speech community? Is the Australian speech community perhaps less integrative than one has liked to think? Is it itself a fellowship? Can there be pluricentricity inside an epi-centre? What holds for AusE holds, as Clyne and Kipp (1999) have shown, for Spanish, Arabic and Chinese in the Australian context. Speakers of Spanish, for instance, come from Spain and South America, Arabic speakers from Egypt, the Lebanon and elsewhere. The 'language communities' of such languages are internally heterogeneous, though they may form a single speech community in the long run that redefines such differences as 'dialectal' rather than as showing a different national variety of the language. I should comment here on a controversy that was alluded to above when I pointed out that a langueι can be treated as a 'given' in its socio-political context. Even if one agrees that a langue \ is a code that a community has agreed to call its language, there are three contrasting views. One holds that a langue ι is based on an underlying formal set of rules that is recognized by the community as defining its language. In a way this view defines language in terms of a more abstract position on langue2. A position more compatible with the aims of this study holds that a languex is paired with a set of norms that co-defines how its expressions are used appropriately and how they stratify internally. That view is close to definitions (ii') and (iii') above. A third use maintains that a language is much more than a system or code: It is part of what a community knows, a repository of its experiences. Joshua Fishman has written this about that wider role of languages: Specific languages are related to specific cultures and to their attendant cultural identities at the level of doing, at the level of knowing and at the level of being. Such a huge part of every ethno culture is linguistically expressed that it is not wrong to say that most ethno cultural behaviours would be impossible without their expression via the particular language with which these behaviours have been traditionally associated. Education (in content and in practice), the legal system (its abstract prohibitions and concrete enforcements), the religious beliefs and observances, the self-governmental operations, the literature (spoken and/or written), the folklore, the philosophy of morals and ethics, the medical code of illnesses and diseases, not to mention the total round of interpersonal interactions (childhood socialisation, establishment of friendship and kinship ties, greetings, jokes, songs, benedictions, maledictions, etc.) are not only linguistically expressed but they are normally enacted, at any given time, via the specific language with which these activities grew up, have been identified and have been

1.3 A unified approach to Australia's many voices

19

intergenerationally associated. It is the specificity of the linguistic bond of most cultural doings that makes the very notion of a 'translated culture' so inauthentic and even abhorrent to most ethnocultural aggregates, (italics mine; Fishman 2001: 3)

In other words, langue2 is used to re-enact - rather than merely reflect the cultural embedding. Fishman also shows how communities relate to language as part of their ethno-cultural 'knowledge' and 'being', which permits one to make two inferences, viz• that a langue ι is a code with 'loose ends', a code that straddles the space between 'knowledge of the language' and 'knowledge of the world' - a distinction that has been cast into the dichotomy between linguistic and encyclopedic knowledge in theoretical linguistics. Generative theory maintains that linguistic knowledge is categorically different from encyclopedic knowledge. Theories closer to functional paradigms like functional grammar, in contrast, believe in gradual rather than categorical differences. The second inference is that the 'wide' definition permits one to talk about languages as involved in political action. Writing about language politics in Australia, Ozolins argues that Manning Nash poses this issue most sharply, in describing language as both a cultural and a political phenomenon, and it is the interaction between them that must be explained: Language seems straightforwardly a piece of culture. But on reflection it is clear that language is often a political fact, at least as much as it is a cultural one. It has been said that 'language is a dialect with an army and a navy'. And what official or recognized languages are in any given instance is often the result of politics and power interplays.... (1993: 27f)

The metaphor that language is a dialect with an army shows that one cannot reduce the study of a language situation, such as Australia's, to language abilities, whether innate or socially acquired, and to attendant sets of expressions. Most of the changes that have occurred rest on a link between language and culture and language politics and planning - a major theme in this study - cannot be done without the wide notion. That view can also be found in Clyne's study of migrant languages: Four major functions of language are relevant to any discussion of community languages, and these will be referred back throughout this volume. Language is: (i) (ii)

The most important medium of human communication; A means by which people can identify themselves and others;

20

Chapter 1 Australia's language habitat

(iii) A medium of cognitive and conceptual development; and (iv) An instrument of action. (For example, language is sufficient for acts such as complaints, promises and threats to be performed.) (1991: 4f) Such a view enables one to show how language ties in with other areas of the organization of communication, as witness presentational norms in speech. Conversational routines in greetings, announcements and in writing (e.g. typesetting) are cases in point. I will therefore adopt that broad view throughout, without ignoring a more limited perspective when appropriate. 1.3.2

Changing the habitat of languages

The second and third questions at the beginning of section 1.3 argued that the basic communicative situation in Australia was contact and interaction between languages and between varieties of a language. While that manifested itself at first at the level of parole, long-term effects were triggered in langue ι and langue2· The participating languages and varieties were ultimately recast into novel forms. Some approaches to the language habitat, language ecology or situation adopt an ecological perspective and argue that changes occur at three distinct levels which are - from the more abstract to the more concrete - the level of speech situation, speech event and speech act (Mühlhäusler 1996: 5 Iff). Speech situations relate to the demographic base (and changes) of languages, socio-psychological attitudes and beliefs, norms of communication, the overall socio-political texture of a country, which defines the space given to its languages and their respective roles and statuses, etc. Speech events look at numerous specific features, such as the form of the message, the constitution of a speech situation, the styles and registers. Speech acts are, broadly speaking, about the actual realization of communicative acts. Diagram 1-1 on the next page attempts to map the situation and integrate the responses and outcomes in Australia or in comparable situations in North America, New Zealand and elsewhere. It is a key to this study and will be developed further in Chapter Four (also Leitner 2004b; ch. 5) to show how it helps to mark the force of English, the invading language, and how it helps identify historical steps in the transformation of the language habitat. Like all representations of complex phenomena, it needs clarification. The basic idea is, as I have said, that transplanted (dialects of) languages invade an existing language habitat (as shown in the ellipsis at the top of the diagram) and unsettle it (box in line 5). It is gradually recast into a new

1.3 A unified approach to Australia's many voices

INVASION O F AN EXISTING INDIGENOUS LANGUAGE HABITAT by a LANGUAGE [affermai system or as a social codej HABITAT AT MOMENT OF INVASION [NON-TRANSPLANTED LANGUAGE]

6

fRANSPLANTED INDLGEN&DS.

/

Λ

INDIGENOUS LANG.S mAusE MIGRANT LANG.S INDGIG. CONTACT LANG.S MIGRANT ETHNIC VARIETIES^ INFL. FROM/TO OUTSIDE

Diagram 1-1. Stages of language development in a new habitat

21

22

Chapter 1 Australia's language habitat

and dynamically changing habitat (as indicated in the ellipsis at bottom of the diagram). In principle, I would have to mark a whole series of such ellipses to show the transitional steps, but the diagram confines itself to theinitial and final situation. I must add further detail. I have distinguished different aspects of language but the diagram is unspecific and speaks of participant languages and outcomes. The second point is that diagram 1-1 may seem to suggest that it describes merely local Australian developments. That would be a false interpretation. Though habitat changes manifest themselves at the local level, they are influenced from the outside and may, in turn, influence the outside. The box "outside influences" pinpoints the role of the outside in shaping what is happening. Maori words, for instance, entered various languages, including AusE, in the past. Today, powerful global forces against biased language use impact entire language habitats (cf. line 13) rather than being diffused via a single language to others. I mark the impact of what is happening on the outside between lines 6 and 7. Australian contact languages, for instance, fed into the emerging Melanesian Pidgin English, AusE and affected NZE. Closely related is the third remark, i.e. the diagram may suggest that the changes involved in the transformation of a habitat are solely a matter of the interaction of available languages at the time of transplantation. But the inherent dynamism of contact and interaction recycle, so to speak, and the earlier outcomes feed back into the languages and varieties whose development is under way. As contact languages, for instance, are emerging and stabilize, they go on modifying English and indigenous languages and thus create sediments that reflect the period of contact. The fourth point is that lines 8 to 10 suggest that contact languages may be identifiable as such from the beginning. But at the initial and very fluid stage in the unsettling of the old habitat a common (contact language) base emerges that may, after some time, resolve into discrete languages. The fifth point is that the diagram graphs what is logically possible, not what actually happens, let alone a temporal sequence or parallelisms between outcomes. It does not represent a path from line 1 to 12 that all languages will move along. There may be stops, regressions, convergences with other outcomes or parallelisms. A language may be more ahead in its movement through this diagram in some respect(s) than in others. There may be discrepancies between effects on different levels of linguistic organization and the socio-psychological evaluation of a language. 'Selfcontrol' may be achieved in pronunciation first, not in grammar; attitudes often lag behind. Different speeds is what one will have to expect. As a final note, the heavy line with arrows emanating from it at the bottom of the

1.3 A unified approach to Australia's many voices

23

diagram in line 13 is to indicate that a new language habitat will have been created (after a series of intermittent stages), that it is relatively selfcontained, Australian in kind. There are three broad types of responses to the unsettling of the habitat, which tend to co-occur (line 6). In reverse order, the first affects the original bi- or multilingual scenario (if the habitat is multilingual), the second one (may) lead to contact languages, and the third one is about the modifications of existing languages and varieties, which may be quite substantial and, one should add, those languages that come into existence as a result of the transformation of the habitat. They will be dealt with in this order in the next sections.

1.3.2.1.

Multilingualism

As communities interact in novel situations marked by differences in the overall numbers of speakers, their distribution, social status and power and communicative needs, the first and obvious outcome is that the number of languages increases. The invading languages thus create an unstable situation that will seek a new balance. Some language(s) may be lost, others weakened and reduced in their functional potential, others may expand. Communities may attempt to reverse the loss of their language, to recover it or, at least, to document what it was like. Most of all, the relationships between languages will be redefined and, as was the case in Anglophone countries, focused onto English. English became the dominant language in a multilingual hierarchy. There is a complementary process, i.e. the re-allocation of socio-communicative space for other languages. As to the other invading non-English, migrant languages, De Bot and Clyne provide deep insights in their discussion of language shift and loss: [T]he term 'loss' will be used here as the overall term for all types of decline of linguistic skills, both in individuals and communities. 'Shift' denotes the loss of linguistic skills between generations, while 'attrition' refers to loss of skills in individuals over time (1994: 19).

Shift, in other words, implies loss or, at least, the weakening of a language. Lo Bianco and Rhydwen's (2001) distinction between "loss by rupture", viz• loss by the sudden death or disappearance of speakers, and "loss by attrition", viz• the gradual decline of a language until its demise, is more useful since shift need not imply that all language competencies are gone - neither in a community nor in individuals. Old speakers may

24

Chapter 1 Australia's language habitat

effectively have ceased to use their language, yet their competence may not have dried up completely. If they experience a social climate more conducive to language pluralism, that may lead to a reversal, though this often necessitates modernization, i.e. the adaptation of language to the new habitat after long periods of non-use. There may even be a stage when the language is fully functional again. If reversal is impossible, it may be possible to document the language. Documentation is an attempt to save, at least, 'a few expressions' for the benefit of culture revival - though documentation may be a more far-reaching activity for linguists. In other words, loss and shift can be abrupt and complete. They may also be slow and partial and proceed via phonological, grammatical, or lexical attrition and the pervasive use of code-switching to make up for the loss of competence in the original language. Along with this are shifts in the status and functions of the original language. Such intermediate steps on the way to language loss and shift affect the texture and uses of a language and are dealt with in the context of modification. That term, then, has a double meaning, which may not be entirely obvious in a cursory reading. The one is modification that leads to a new variety of a language, the other is changes on the way to the loss of an original one. Multilingualism, i.e. line 6, has been a characteristic feature of Australia both before and after colonization at both the societal and individual level. In traditional Aboriginal Australia it did not give an advantage to those that were more multilingual than others and there do not seem to have been languages that had more status than others; multilingualism was a given, a fact inherited from a distant past. European-induced multilingualism, which in most cases has decreased to bilingualism with English being the obligatory member, has been asymmetric - non-dominant communities had to learn English and, generally speaking, multilingualism was soon reduced to bilingualism. There are some exceptions. German was maintained for three to four generations, so well into the 20th century in some of its enclaves, and enjoyed considerable support till the late 19th century. Chinese also survived into the 20th century in some areas. Language loss and shift has thus affected indigenous and non-English immigrant communities alike. Of several hundred indigenous languages only few have survived to the present. For a few languages descriptions are available that can be used for documentation or the reversal of language shift; in some cases a few old speakers are alive and willing to act as models. NonEnglish migrant languages of the 19th century have all now disappeared. The presence of non-English migrant languages today is the result of 20th century migrations. Most indigenous and migrant languages have lost

1.3 A unified approach to Australia's many voices

25

regional, social or stylistic varieties. English-speaking settlers from Britain, for instance, did not form close-knit communities for long enough for their dialects to survive. Contact and interaction ultimately merged or 'levelled' the different varieties of English into AusE.

1.3.2.2.

Contact

languages

These changes are related to the way languages are transmitted from one generation to the next. Non-transplanted languages are subject to processes of normal, the others to non-normal transmission. Though Thomason ignores sociolinguistic factors, it is useful to quote her definition: By normal transmission, I mean complete and successful transmission, by native speakers to child or adult learners, of an entire language, i.e., a complex of interlocking sets of phonological, morphological, syntactic, semantic, and lexical systems, (my italics; 2001: 74) The crucial line 6 in diagram 1-1 above suggests that language and variety contact may lead to non-normal inter-generational transmission. That is most obvious in language loss and the recasting of a multilingual situation. But non-normal transmission also leads to the creation of contact languages, which are a way out of a communicative dilemma if one's first language is lost or is dysfunctional. The creation of such languages is the most radical mixed outcome, which Thomason defines in these terms: [a] contact language is a language that arose by some historical process other than normal transmission. Or, to put it another way, a contact language is comprised of grammatical and lexical systems that cannot all be traced back to a single parent language, (my italics; 2001: 75) The time span permitted by the definition for contact languages is short enough to exclude Australian Aboriginal languages which contain lexical and other material from each other. Such areal features, which are significant in Aboriginal Australia, do not point to the presence of contact languages. Identifying three types of contact languages, viz. pidgins, creóles, and bilingually mixed languages, Thomason says: [T]he prototypical pidgin, I suggest, arises in a new contact situation in which three or more groups of speakers come together for purposes of trade or other limited communicative purposes. The contact among the groups is sufficiently limited that no group has the need, the desire, and/or the

26

Chapter1

Australia's language habitat

opportunity to learn any of the other groups' language... If there is a socially or economically dominant group, its vocabulary is chosen as the lexical base.... If the contact situation is sufficiently stable over time, and if the circumstances of language use remain more or less constant, then a fully crystallized pidgin develops and remains in use... (my italics; 2001: 76) Pidgins have, in other words, no native speakers, a limited range of lexical and grammatical resources and are not the primary language of anybody. Though Thomason mentions some resources to expand pidgins, Siegel's summary is more lucid. He names, for instance, the re-analysis or simplification of constructions and the levelling and diffusion of related ones. He adds that re-analysis and simplification are "psycholinguistic and thus occur at the individual level", while levelling and diffusion are "sociolinguistic and occur at the community-level" (2000b: 1). Turning to difference between pidgins and creóles, Thomason says that the prototypical creole shares important social and linguistic features with the prototypical pidgins. Like pidgins, prototypical creóles develop in a contact situation involving more than two groups of speakers; like pidgins, creóles develop when no group has the néed, the desire, and/or the opportunity to learn any of the other groups' languages. Creoles, too, typically draw their lexicon primarily from one language whose speakers are in some sense dominant, and the grammars of creole languages may be accounted for in large part as cross-language compromises among the grammars... Prototypical creóles differ ... most notably in the social feature of primary vs. restricted communicative functions: a prototypical Creole is the main language ... and is learned as a native language... (my italics; 2001: 78f) Creoles are primary languages and acquire the range of resources of normally transmitted languages. But there are two different situations in which creóles may arise. The one is when they arise suddenly, without a prior pidgin stage, the other when they develop slowly over at least two generations. Pitcairnese, which is now referred to as Pitkern, is the ancestor of Australia's Norfolk Island creole (or Norfolk) and illustrates the first, Kriol and Torres Strait creole the second process of creolization. There is an important feature that should be mentioned in this context. Such contact languages are, if you like, not owned by anybody in the contexts in which they are used and are mere communicative vehicles. However, they may, in a process of tertiary hybridization (Sebba 1997), become owned by one group, which is normally the subordinate, powerless one. In the Australian context, pidgins and the few creóles that developed thus typically became

1.3 A unified approach to Australia's many voices

27

languages of indigenous Australians. Yet, that was not without exception. Norfolk and Pitcairnese and Cape Barren English, for instance, are shared between members of the two communities, which was facilitated by the fact that they mixed heavily in a very short time. Pidgins and creóles require the presence of more than two languages. On bilingually mixed languages Thomason says that they : evolve, or are created, in two-language contact situations ... those in which bilingual mixtures arise involve widespread bilingualism on the part of at least one of the two speaker groups. In fact, the only significant feature in which bilingual mixed languages resemble pidgins and creóles is their nongenetic development: in these languages too the extent of the mixture makes it impossible to establish genetic links with other languages. (2001: 80)

Several pidgins developed as a result of the interaction of settlers with indigenous Australians. They were influenced by the phonology, lexis, grammar and pragmatics of indigenous languages and were based on the resources of English. But only two creóles have survived, viz. Kriol and Torres Strait creole, and whether there are mixed languages that meet Thomason's criteria is a hotly debated question. There are, however, some candidates. AborE is a case in point. Norfolk, a descendant of Pitkern, is seen by some as such a languages, others argue it is a creole in origin.

1.3.2.3.

Modification

As just indicated, modification, line 6, is a central type of outcome and an essential characteristic of the unsettling of habitats by invading languages and by the recasting of a multilingual situation. Modification (via contactinduced features) covers a variety of cases and is often described in terms of transfer (= result), transference (= process), borrowing, interference, levelling or even koinéization (cf. Clyne 2003; Thomason 2001; Siegel 2000a; Trudgill 1986). These and other terms show the affinity of this outcome to studies of pidgins and creóles or the interlanguage of learners and that all levels of language organization, including pragmatics and the underlying rules of discourse are involved. Such processes trigger a range of subsequent processes such as integration into the host language structure, generalization, levelling or re-analysis in the host language. Clyne (2003) has a discussion of the terminologies used in the area of borrowing and code switching that cannot be summarized here in full. To quote him:

28

Chapter 1 Australia's language habitat There is a great deal of disagreement in recent literature as to what determines clearcut instances of both 'borrowing' and 'code-switching'. In recent years also, there has developed a consensus among some linguists (...) that there is no clear dividing line between 'code-switching' and 'borrowing', that they form a continuum... While the term 'code-switching is employed for both single-word and multi-word elements, 'borrowing' is limited to the former. Phonological or morphological integration is likely in borrowing but not in 'code-switching'... (2003: 71)

There are, of course, different types. I would argue that borrowing includes multi-word expressions and concepts and would refer to such processes as hybridzation, loan translation, etc. As to code-switching, Clyne contrasts insertion, i.e. the embedding of a constituent, with alternation, the alternative use of the two codes. Code-switching is a communicative strategy that bi- or multilingual people can employ, borrowing is not. However, insertion may be done by monolinguals, who have learnt such expressions as, e.g., savoire vivre. Code-switching will be illustrated in the next section. Modification refers to situations where the phonology, lexicon, grammar, stylistic repertoires and rules of communication - the pragmatics - are changed on the basis of the resources of the varieties of the transplanted language itself and of the influences from other transported or uprooted languages. Modification affects all languages in such a situation but to different degrees and with different inputs. The most common concept for capturing modification is transference from other languages, which creates a modified language. The modification of English in Australia, for instance, was fed from transference from varieties of English, indigenous and migrant languages. The first source amounted to a reshuffling of the internal resources of English that were available to the settlers or entered their sphere through outside contacts. The second one was marginal and restricted to lexical expressions from these languages. Yet, borrowing is more than the mere addition of words. According to Fowler, a vocabulary of a language represents a cognitive network, a map, whose continued existence requires it to be re-enforced or re-enacted through discourse: The lexicon (the 'mental dictionary') stores ideas in sets structured around certain formal, logical relationships such as oppositeness, complementarity, inclusion, equivalence... The vocabulary ... sorts concepts into strictly defined categorical relationships, and this is the basic resource through which some field of experience or activity is kept stable, and transmitted from person to person, from generation to generation.... it is also vital that

1.3 A unified approach to Australia's many voices

29

the systems of meanings are kept alive and familiar, by being uttered regularly in appropriate contexts. This is where conversation has a major function. (1991: 54) [t]he vocabulary of a language, or of a variety of a language, amounts to a map of the objects, concepts, processes and relationships about which the culture needs to communicate. (1991: 80f) Transference goes on between all languages in contact and is, as Fowler says, more pervasive than its effects on the 'open-class' lexical stock of a language suggest. Transference and modification may occur at the level of phonology, orthography, grammar, semantics and pragmatics and alter the language so much that it becomes indistinguishable or, at least, hard to distinguish from the contact languages discussed above. These themes will be discussed extensively in Leitner (2004b; ch.s 4 and 5), but at this point I can confine myself to referring to the theory of Thomason and Kaufmann (1998), who distinguish heavy and casual contact and the use of much borrowing or modification in the former and little in the latter. Clyne's (2003: 95) borrowing scale provides a useful basis for discussion: 1. Casual contact: 2. Slightly more intensive contact: 3. More intensive contact: 4. Strong cultural pressure: 5. Very strong cultural pressure:

lexical borrowing only slight structural borrowing slightly more structural borrowing moderate structural borrowing heavy structural borrowing

Structural borrowing covers transference of morphological features like tense marking, to the inclusion of prepositions into languages that have postpositions or other elements, to large-scale word order changes. If contact is less pervasive, modification furthers variety formation (line 11 in diagram 1-1) and can lead to self-controlled development (line 12) or, put differently, adds local colour in a transplantation situation. Its effects tend to go unnoticed for a while but, by the time they reach the level of consciousness, they may be rejected or, over time, become an accepted part of the language. Self-controlled development will require more than the mere availability of distinct local expressions. Only after local norms have emerged and relevant sections of the community have adopted a positive attitude towards it will that variety-in-the-making be like a non-transplanted language. Further change will be guided by inherent tendencies. New national varieties result and make the language in question pluricentric - if there exist distinct national varieties - and enrich it with new varieties or else associate it with processes of modernization.

30

Chapter 1 Australia's language habitat

The formation of a new variety of English presumably began shortly after the turn to the 19th century. But variety formation was not confined to English; it has happened in indigenous languages that have remained strong - having been 'explanted' late - or are becoming so again after intensive periods of adaptation and the reversal of language shift. Some contact languages, especially Kriol and Torres Strait creole, also underwent variety formation and are fully-fledged, if still controversial, languages. Migrant languages, generally, have acquired local Australian features, there has even been talk of, say, Italo-Australian. Their status is generally too low for members of the second and later generations to find such Australianized forms attractive. But the next step, self-controlled development, the rise of Australian-based norms, is limited to mAusE and a few indigenous languages. But one aspect of the contact scenario must be emphasized again, viz. that all languages, whether indigenous or migrant, have had to define their position vis-à-vis English - they have become a part of an English-centred multilingual hierarchy, as Mühlhäusler maintains: One of the main characteristics of the linguistic picture within Australia over the last 200 years, is the rapid sequence of change caused by the sudden onset of new factors. Such factors have been either introduced from the outside (...) or have developed locally (...). While there was continual linguistic change in the 40,000 years or more preceding European colonization, the value of change in the linguistic picture of Australia accelerated greatly after 1788. Not long after this date, any possibility of isolated development, sheltered from imported waves of language and culture could no longer be maintained. All languages, whether local or imported, had to define their position vis-à-vis English and other imported languages. (1996: 14) Starting with line 1, I moved to contact and interaction and travelled along the main lines down to self-controlled development. But that and variety formation could be reached by other avenues, as I indicated with Kriol and Torres Strait creole. Rather than moving on to that stage, creóles may be drawn into the realm of the former lexifier language - the language that provided most of the lexical items - when contact with it is becoming more intensive. Kriol, for instance, can be seen as forming a cline of variation that begins with English-based pidgins, so-called basilects, and comes close to mAusE (i.e. the acrolect). Another path down the diagram is the potential convergence in line 10, which shows that two forms of a language may produce a new language. Aboriginal English may be a case in point, if one assumes that it derives

1.3 A unified approach to Australia's many voices

31

from fossilized learner English and processes of decreolization. No case can be made for migrant languages to reach stages 11 or 12, as noted above. And only a few indigenous languages have reached these stages after processes of heavy modification and adaptation. A language that reaches variety formation may yet regress and become weak.

1.3.2.4.

Shifting between languages,

code-switching

I come now to a few final notes. There are some limitations in this diagrammatic representation, which like any diagram, is a simplification of more complex phenomena. It cannot reflect the fact that the processes named require the - sometimes extensive - modification or, one might say, adaptation to the new environment and its new status inside a community. Neither does it reflect what really happened to Australia's many voices, it only maps logically possible outcomes (or responses). Thomason makes a similar point, when she holds that a historical angle is a prerequisite to contact linguistics and when she adds that such an angle avoids problems of categorization: I will argue that the frequent difficulty of making such assignments does not reflect a problem with the classificatory criteria per se, but instead results from the fluid nature of language history, and indeed of human behaviour as a whole. (2001:71) It's easy enough to see why a single overall framework is needed for a viable typology of contact languages.... But why should the unifying perspective be a historical one rather than, say, a purely linguistic or a synchronic sociolinguistic one? The answer is that only the historical approach provides the means of unifying, and accounting for, the characteristic social and linguistic features of prototypical pidgins, creóles, and other contact languages. (1997: 73)

It is best to conceive of outcomes as developmental stages rather than as products and to allow outcomes to merge, regress or, as mapped in the diagram, diversify. A historical angle, paired with a dynamic perspective, then, is best able to explain what is happening in a contact situation. Related to this is that outcomes do not describe either/or responses; they may occur simultaneously. To return to language loss, as speakers' competencies dry out, the set of expressions of their language (langue 2 ) becomes heavily mixed and speakers have recourse to large-scale codeswitching. But, as I said above, switching may also be a signal of variety

32

Chapter 1 Australia's language habitat

formation, of a speaker's bi- or multilingual (or multi-varietal) competence in managing encounters. Speakers may resort to code-switching to signal loyalty to their 'own kind', shift of emphasis, irony, or other values. The following examples from the Junga Yimia Magazine, a community magazine, show this between Warlpiri, a Central Australian language, and English (examples from Welsch (1999: 145) with her kind permission): (1)

(2)

Manu-lpa-rnalu yuparli bush banana, yuparli Get-CONT-lst P, SUB J Getting+we bush banana bush banana bush b. 'We collected bush bananas' Aged care warding-kirli-ji kalu jana jarlu-patuju kanyi ngurra kurra

In example (2) "aged care warding-kirli-ji kalu" is well integrated into the texture of Warlpiri and might not be a case of code-switching, while bush banana in (1) is not. It is, rather, a paraphrase of yuparli in Warlpiri. These examples illustrate the controversy about how to distinguish codeswitched expressions from borrowed ones and I will not take a position at this stage. That area is illustrated further in the following example which shows how English affected the German of Theodor Strehlow, the first professor or linguistics at The University of Adelaide: (3)

Am 8. August (i) ging Mr. Heinrich nach Gilbert Spring hinaus. Er wollte zwar früh (ii) fortkommen, doch dauerte es bis Vi 11 Uhr bis er fortkam: immer wieder wurden Kisten, Kästen, (iii) Swags, Säcke, Draht, Zangen u.s.w. dazu auch ein Schleifstein, ein (iv) Rifle, eine Gun, Cartridges etc. auf den Wagen gepackt. 'August 8 Mr. Heinrich went out to Gilbert Spring. He had wanted to take off early but it lasted till half past ten till he took off: ever more boxes, cases, swags, sacks, wire, pliers, etc., as well as a grinding stone, a rifle, a gun, cartridges were packed onto the car.'

A few comments for readers unfamiliar with German may be in order: (i) is a loan translation of go out and so is (ii), which would be get away. The other examples, i.e. (iii) and (iv), contain loan words that are integrated orthographically and spelt with capital letters, like nouns are in German. Such features signal a high level of stability in the language. Strehlow narrates a story about Mr. Päschke's arrival: (4)

Mr. Päschke, der am 3. Aug. mit den neueingebrochenen Pferden ("die roughste lot, die er je gehandelt hatte") nach Ellerys Creek geritten war... Mr. P., who had come to Ellerys Creek on the newly broken horses ("the roughest lot he had ever handled") ...

1.3 A unified approach to Australia's many voices

33

There are other features that would be worth looking at in detail (Leitner 2004b; ch. 2). Suffice it to say here that the italicized items are either borrowed words and phrases such as rifle or show the effect of lexical and grammatical transfer from English - note gehändelt 'zu tun haben mit'. Strehlow is obviously aware of what is acceptable (in German) and what goes beyond accepted limits. He manifests, one is tempted to say, an interlingual competence. Switching and borrowing can, of course, occur between different varieties of English and that leads me the final point. There have always been several varieties of English in Australia. From an historical perspective, one will note the varieties transported, which formed the input and in due course merged to form AusE (see diagram 1-1). AusE, in turn, developed into mAusE via processes of variety formation and selfcontrolled development. One must also point to the role of speakers of languages other than English, such as German missionaries, who used English to Aborigines and thus spread foreigner English. While foreigner English of that time has disappeared, Aboriginal Australians have developed their own distinct varieties over the period of some 200 years during which they have used English. Contact languages, pidgins and creóles, were the first, from an historical angle, and most of them have disappeared. Only Kriol and Torres Strait creole have survived and are expanding. AborE, considered a dialect of AusE today, may be traced back to the early colonial period - certainly to the beginning of education in the 1820s and has developed a range of dialectal and social manifestations, some of which come close to being a bilingually mixed language. In a few cases native English-speaking seafarers, such as the mutineers on the Bounty and their descendants have created what may be called an Englishbased native creole, i.e. Pitkern, which was transported to Norfolk by the mid-IP01 century. The early settlers on Cape Barren Island formed a mixed community of Tasmanian Aborigines, European sealers and whalers and others and are said to have created this contact language, according to Thomason (1997). Finally, migrants from Asia, Europe, South America and Africa have been using learner varieties and, for many, English has become a lingua franca in their interactions with one another and native speakers.

1.3.2.5.

Englishes inside Australia

The range of varieties of English that have developed is represented in diagram 1-2 on page 36, which suggests pluricentricity inside an epicentre

34

Chapter 1 Australia's language habitat

(Leitner 1992), or, to recall a term used earlier, the existence of different speech communities within the Australian speech fellowship who speak a variety of English of their own. What I said on diagram 1-1 applies to this one, too. It is an oversimplification and cannot do justice to the full range of outcomes and the paths by which they have been achieved. I should explain some of what this diagram maps before I come to what it does badly. The first point is that AusE is represented as the most important outcome of contact as English was transplantated to Australia. Diagram 1-1 described how AusE developed from the set of transplanted varieties of English and on into mAusE. But there have been a number of outcomes that came about at the same time as, or even prior to, AusE (lines 2 and 4b), i.e. Norfolk and Cape Barren English. The former was called Norfolk creole above and derives from Pitcairnese. The latter arose, in fact, much later and was independent of AusE at its formative period. Ignoring many details, I can say at this point that the pidgins mentioned in line 2 had developed early and spread throughout much of the continent. In the early period, they drew heavily on outside interaction with the South Pacific jargon, while migrant contact languages (see line 4b) were the result of local interaction of non-English-speaking migrants with English speakers. The outside contact with the Pacific, in fact, was also a formative element for Norfolk and Cape Barren English. They have a history distinct from that of mAusE, a history that runs parallel to it. The pointed lines leading to Kriol and Torres Strait creole are there to suggest that varieties of transplanted English have contributed a lot to them. Australia's first pidgin, i.e. NSW pidgin, too, shares with Norfolk and Pitkern a history of contact that was partly independent of the development of AusE. But as it spread and transformed into localized pidgins in South Australia, Queensland and elsewhere it came under the influence of (m)AusE. An understanding of indigenous contact languages, such as Kriol and Torres Strait creole, also suggests that it may be best to assume multiple sources for a range of features. The term Outside Influence' here refers to the role of maritime and other kinds of contact that Australia engaged in and that acted as agent in the formation of pidgins and creóles. During the 20th century these contacts have ceased and lost out to the dominant influence of mAusE. Diagram 1-2 assigns two meanings to the concept of AusE. One is historical and sees it as a transitional variety that emerged after the varieties of English began to settle in Australia. It subsequently developed into the mAusE mentioned in line 4a. The other meaning of AusE is nonhistorical and an umbrella term for a cluster of varieties of English in Australia that comprises all varieties underneath it in line 4b. Variety

1.3 A unified approach to Australia's many voices

35

switching and borrowing may occur between these Englishes or between English-based varieties and it is not difficult to see that speakers may switch between an ethnic variety, say, AborE, Kriol and mAusE; or (today) between Norfolk and mAusE. There is an added socio-historical dimension in this diagram which is meant to show that most of the varieties identified have a dual history. They began at a time when AusE and mAusE had not yet (fully) formed and thus have to do with the varieties of English transplanted. That is especially true of Norfolk, whose origin is entirely unrelated to Australia. But it is also true of AborE and, to a more limited extent, of the precursor of Kriol and Torres Strait creole, i.e. the NSW pidgin. As AusE formed and developed into mAusE, that variety became the nationally dominant one and now influences any variety and, indeed, any indigenous and migrant LOTE on the continent. Lines 4a and 4b are meant to suggest that distinction. Diagrams 1-1 and 1-2 form the basis for a host of questions about outcomes of contact and their relationship to social issues that will be discussed in this study and Leitner (2004b). To just mention a few questions: What social factors determine which specific outcomes are more likely in a given situation? Why do speakers of a transplanted language need to borrow into their language? What areas of language organization lexis, grammar, etc. - will be affected most and first? What are the circumstances in which contact languages are most likely to arise? Demographic, social and socio-psychological factors are crucial elements of answers to these questions. There will be factors to do with power and powerlessness, with needs and benefits. And there will be factors such as motivation or access. Communities will respond in their own ways and create a level of social, ethnic, regional or other identity. Outcomes are the result of a complex of co-occurring factors that support or hinder each other, and necessary detail will need to be added in the chapters to follow.

1.3.3

The social dimension

I have said that diagram 1-1 maps the outcomes that may occur in principle when a language habitat is invaded and transformed into another one. Its languages no longer stand in the same relationship with one another, the languages themselves have changed, and, most of all, the set of languages has changed altogether, as contact languages developed. As none of that would have happened 'naturally', we need to know what socio-political or socio-psychological factors were responsible, and if deliberate policies

36

Chapter 1 Australia's language habitat

have been put in piace to shape the transition and the current situation. In addition to the linguistic dimension that addresses questions of language development, habitat transformation has social, psychological and political dimensions which together make some outcomes more likely than others. (VARIETIES OF) ENGLISH (TRANSPLANTED) OUTSIDE INFLUENCE

'·. early pidgins, '"•Norfolk (< Pitkern), Gape. Barren English A AusE (via implantation)*.

4a 4P" 4b

lingua franca

English

.

'"m

ethnic varieties of English (today)

AborE

Kriol Torres Strait creole

Diagram 1-2. The Englishes of Australia To understand that, one needs a knowledge of the power that languages and their communities can rely on because of the size and influence of their demographic base, of economic, cultural or other factors and general trends associated with them. One cannot assume a static, once and for all situation, as power structures shift and as migrants and indigenous populations adapt, assimilate or alienate themselves from one another. Moreover, as each new wave of migrants enters with their language(s), a new phase begins in the changing habitat and cause further change. Looking at this scenario from the perspective of language types, viz. English as the dominant and transplanted language, other migrant languages and indigenous ones, one needs to focus on what has happened to each of them under an enforced contact situation. Regarding the texture of multilingualism, one needs to comprehend the original situation and the changes that have affected the

1.3 A unified approach to Australia's many voices

37

types of interactions and attitudes reactions to language, seen from the three perspectives described in section 1.3.1 above. Such issues have been studied on the basis of, for instance, population censuses, often complemented by smaller-scale investigations of, for instance, interactional case studies and studies to do with the elicitation of belief systems and attitudes that seek to identify whether a language is a core value of a community. Paired with socio-historical background, one could correlate the shifting power structures of the overall community or the nation with segments to the temporal phases of habitat transformation. Contact languages, in particular, presuppose an extreme inequality of social power for them to become, through a process of tertiary hybridization (Sebba 1997) or appropriation, the language of a community. The easing of inequality through social change may facilitate the access to the, by now, dominant language and integrate - or, as the case may be, force - contact languages under the umbrella of the dominant language. There may, but need not, be explicit policies that aim to monitor and manage changes in the public domain, in education and elsewhere and allocate communicative space or functions to the languages involved (Lo Bianco 1987; Lo Bianco and Wickert 2001). Modification, too, requires detailled knowledge of the power relations and the changes that took place in Australia before one can understand to what extent the English was affected by other languages and to what extent it impacted on them (Thomason 2001). One needs only to refer to the minor impact of indigenous languages on English in Australia, which is in stark contrast to the effect that English has had on the texture of indigenous and non-English migrant languages alike. Pluricentric languages like Mandarin, German and other languages throw up particular problems as they are not based on norms come from one, original language community. Change in language habitats often occurs without conscious planning at the level of government and its subordinate layers in education and elsewhere. But as the invasion of one or more languages is creating pressure, it may be necessary to formulate explicit political goals and implement them through planning. That was the case in Australia. It will be indispensable to identify the agents and lobbyists, the primary and secondary goals and the like that shape policies. I will turn to such issues of power in the course of this study and, from the perspective of Australia's Many Voices, in Leitner (2004b). Here, I need to come to a specific point about language modification that reflects, from a language angle, the effects of power relations and especially the conflictridden relationships between the source of invasion - Britain - and the rise

38

Chapter 1 Australia's language habitat

of an Australian variety, which itself has created numerous sub-varieties. The former issue will come up extensively in this study, the latter in Leitner (2004b). The pointed lines in diagram 1-2 highlight the fact that some of the varieties of English go back both to the transplanted set of dialects and to the developing AusE variety. If one were to read diagrams 1-1 and 1-2 in a simple a fashion, one might be led to believe that there is one process of transplantation and, as line 6 in diagram 1-1 suggests, a single process of contact and interaction between the languages and varieties of a language available to follow. The paths from line 6 would be local phenomena. But immigrant societies like Australia have experienced a continuous process of transplantation and each outcome becomes a participant in an on-going process of interaction. It might be accepted, reinforced or rejected by other players. Many pidgin words like the Portuguese pickaninny or the indigenous kangaroo have moved between such participants in that way. There is, one might say, continuous feedback, which blurs the simplicity of the emanating lines. It may also happen that peripheral participants in contact become effective players and/or carriers of outcomes. The multilingual crews on the ships that sailed the oceans during the 19th century, for instance, transported the features from the Atlantic that have been created as a result of language contact to the Pacific and Australia. And the impact of Yiddish, German and Japanese on (m)AusE cannot be understood without that of AmE, despite the fact that there was no or very little migratory contact - excepting the rather short period of the Gold Rushes in the mid-19th century. A major issue is to ask whether and why some languages or varieties in contact make it down to line 12 in diagram 1-1, while others stop, regress or progress again. English in Australia has gone through to line 9 and, as mAusE, has become a new epi-centre of English. Some indigenous languages have adapted and modernized varieties of them can be found today. Kriol, Torres Strait creole and AborE, too, have developed into fully-fledged varieties that complement mAusE in certain contexts for their users. Contact and non-English migrant languages have local features but are unlikely to reach the stage of self-controlled development. These are general outcomes and not specific to Australia. What in this is Australian? What makes mAusE Australian? What makes a modified indigenous language Aboriginal-A ustralian or some migrant language migrantAustralian, such as Italo-Australian? Trans- and explanted languages, I suggest, acquire features that characterize all their sub-varieties as Australian. To turn to mAusE, its descent from BrE is beyond doubt. But how should one interpret the features that mark it as distinct from BrE?

1.3 A unified approach to Australia's many voices

39

Baker, who did so much to promote the Australianness of English, argued that "[W]e [the Australians, GL] have to work out the problem from the viewpoint of Australia, not from the viewpoint of England and of the judgements she passed upon our language because she did not know it as well as we do" (1966: 10). That did not stop him from having an impoverished view of mAusE, when he located its creativity, innovation and significance solely at the level of slang and informality. Now, if it is true that mAusE stratifies from a very informal to a very formal level, does it not follow that it must have something that is common to all varieties over and above the features that are specific to its sub-varieties? An answer to that question can be given if one introduces a level between the English language and the English language in Australia (mAusE). Quirk et al.(1985) distinguish a core or nucleus and peripheries to capture variations between national varieties: A COMMON CORE or nucleus is present in all the varieties so that, however esoteric a variety may be, it has running through it a set of grammatical and other characteristics that are present in all the others. It is this fact that justifies the application of the name 'English' to all the varieties, (capitalization sic\ 1985: 16)

Theirs is a unidirectional conception in that the core characterizes all (national) varieties and differences increase outwards away from the core. That implies, moreover, that the specifics of all varieties cohere to form a common system of expressions or a common langue2. As a result, concepts like that of an International Standard English resemble a Swiss cheese: Our approach ... is to focus on the common core that is shared by standard British English and standard American English. We leave unmarked any features that the two standard varieties have in common, marking as or only the points at which they differ. (Quirk et al. 1985: 33)

Such a position has had forerunners, if one thinks of concepts like Turner's (1966; 1997) of an overseas dialect or Brook's notion of English dialects (cf. Turner 1997: 337). They all imply a direct derivational line from the English language to the national sub-varieties. Though such views contrast with Kachru's (1985), who maintains that varieties of English are culture-bound codes, a langueι, and are controlled by social norms. Together they form a family of 'Englishes', a family of related codes, whose relatedness can be described in terms of where the norms of 'good' English come from.

40

Chapter 1 Australia's language habitat

A problem arises if one surveys the actual descriptions of Australia's English (or of other varieties). As its local specifics tend to be located at the low end (Baker 1966), they will be characteristic of that level, not of mAusE as such. What about other layers of social or, possibly, regional variation? How will they compare with Quirk et al.'s (1985) conception? There seems to be an impasse, which can be overcome only if one postulates a second layer of a core and peripheries. There must, in other words, be an Australian core which contains all expressions characteristic of mAusE as a langue) and langue2 and Australian peripheries that characterize its sub-varieties. The notion of a national language (Turner 1997; Delbridge 1998) comes close to this assumption but fails to spell out the details. A dual characterization in terms of diachrony and synchrony seems promising. Historically, most of the core derives from the accents and dialects of early settlers, the founding fathers, and of the influences from indigenous and migrant languages during the formative period. The core also contains features that have emerged later and have spread throughout the language. The peripheries contain features that have stayed, especially those at the low end of the language or have come into the language after the formative phase or else have not settled sufficiently to become a part of all varieties. The concept of a core, then, does not mean that its features must be 'old'; there may well be some that have developed, or come into the language, recently. Synchronically speaking, it contains features that occur in all manifestations of the language and especially the abstract and often conflicting norms that govern the use of mAusE (cf. Chapter Three). Particular expressions that adhere to such norms may be limited to sub-varieties or the periphery. That conception of mAusE is a consequence of English being a pericentric language. The core and periphery will remain somewhat vague in Chapter Three since mAusE has not been studied in sufficient detail from that angle. I cannot avoid a measure of informed, subjective decision, both in respect of the linguistic details are concerned and the identification of the period when the stages were reached. It is within the logic of this approach that the core/periphery concept would apply to all languages in Australia's language situation, in principle, provided they have developed to the stage of self-control. That has, however, not happened with migrant languages and is not likely to do so. In the case of traditional languages it cannot happen since they have not been transplanted and are, as a result, not in a situation where there could be extra- and intra-territorial varieties. The preceding sections have developed an approach that makes it possible for linguistic descriptions of complex language situations such as

1.4 A coherent, inclusive account of Australia's languages

41

Australia's to unfold integratively and coherently, taking up similar themes throughout and discussing them in the context of all language types. But the categorical outcomes in diagrams 1-1 and 1-2 and the mixed ones alluded to do not have an equal chance of occurring and one must turn to societal and socio-psychological factors, i.e. question (4), to account for them. Given that I am dealing with complex language situations affected by the invasion of English (or other intruding languages), changes in language habitats are paired with changes of the societal dynamics they trigger. I have referred to demographic aspects, the socio-political power of the invading native speaker population as determining factors. I have noted that languages and the multilingual scenario have re-positioned themselves visà-vis English. While one can identify post-colonial indigenous lingue franche and pidgins, most contact languages are English-based. A crucial social factor, then, is the power relations between language communities. Socio-politically dominant and (in most cases) demographically large communities exert a greater degree of influence than others. If they are reasonably well-established, as they are, their sociolinguistic role will not be endangered by non-English-speaking migrants or indigenous people. Self-contained development of mAusE became a possibility but had to wait for a time when elites emerged that felt a need to codify English in ways that were useful for the purposes to which English was to be put and that were widely acceptable. The power base that mAusE rested on inhibited less powerful languages to achieve that same level of variety formation, let alone self-controlled development. But there are some languages that did move forward and are well ahead, to just mention AborE, Kriol, Torres Strait creole and Norfolk, which have managed to survive despite the ever greater pressure from the mAusE. Much of this exploration into Australia's many voices will concern itself with the dynamic interplay of social forces and the language habitat in contact. Social history and language history will have to be continuously connected with one another.

1.4

A coherent, inclusive account of Australia's languages

Taken together, this study and Leitner (2004b) will be more than a survey of Australia's many voices, language types or the sociology of its languages. They will be more than an accumulation of available knowledge in a single place. Their overarching theme will be to describe the transformation of a multilingual, indigenous language habitat into one that

42

Chapter 1 Australia's language habitat

is essentially English-dominated. The traditional habitat was extensively multilingual at the level of society and individuals. And it was not dominated by one or a few strong languages. The post-colonial habitat, in contrast, is dominated by one language, English, and multilingualism always includes English. How will an integrative and comprehensive account be developed? What do I mean by a coherent presentation that develops the framework chosen? Diagram 1-1 contains the core of this study's structure (cf. Leitner 2002b) but, for a number of reasons, a decision has been taken to cover this extensive theme in two books, which are yet readable independently. This book restricts diagram 1-1 to the mainstream variety of English and describes the line that runs from "invasion", to "modification" and on to "self-control". There will be enough background on social history to answer questions about what is common to similar situations where English was transplanted and maintained by a large native English-speaking population. It will highlight what is distinctively Australian in this and open the path to an understanding of the other Englishes, i.e. Aboriginal English, migrant Englishes, English as a lingua franca, and the contact languages that have developed. Chapter Two will provide the background on Australia's population, its growth, changes in its composition, settlement patterns, interaction and mixing throughout the period from 1788 that is relevant also to Leitner (2004b). I will cover the socio-historical context of immigration, without ignoring pre-colonial Australia. That type of information will be needed to understand the integrative power of mAusE as generation after generation of non-English speakers have shifted to English. However, it would have meant dissecting people artificially and ignoring the demands of an integrative approach had I limited Chapter Two to just those aspects that were relevant to mAusE. It is for that reason that I have used it to bring out the lines of development of Australia's total population. I will add further detail when and where that is useful in the remainder of this book. Chapter Three will be central to English in Australia and bring out the fact that mAusE never was the language of a homogeneous Anglo-Celtic society, but of Australians of many backgrounds that have shaped it over more than 200 years. I will show that the determining factors in the contact situation were (dialect) mixing and contact with indigenous languages which led to the modification of the formative input and the eventual emergence of a fully stratified variety of English. While that amounted to significant alterations of the texture of English, it is pertinent to point out that its socio-political and economic power base ensured that it could

1.4 A coherent, inclusive account of Australia's languages

43

assimilate speakers of other languages or even varieties of English, diminish the space for other languages and reject more significant changes that are common in pidginization. At the end of Chapter Three readers will have a deeper appreciation of the nature of mAusE and will be able to see that there may be some tension between Australia's local national linguistic identity and the global forces today and ethnic communities outside the mainstream may find it hard to escape that tension. Leitner (2004b) will pursue that theme and identify the way it manifests itself in Australia's other voices. Chapter Four will thus have a dual function. It will, for one, sum up the main lines of change from deviation (from English patterns) to full Australian self-control and the political adoption of mAusE as the national language. It is a fully stratified, but not specifically ethnically marked, variety of English and is the symbolically integrative element in language policy and language educational policies. While that theme will be gone into in detail in Leitner (2004b), enough background is provided in Chapter Four to comprehend that political role of mAusE. The second function of Chapter Four is to highlight the international or, perhaps better, regional, Asia-Pacific role of mAusE. Having matured fully, mAusE is branching out, presenting itself as a model, if not yet to emulate, but to use for practical purposes. And the tens of thousands of Asian students, business people and students will carry it into the region. The ethnic varieties of English, which are shown in diagram 1-2, are dealt with in Leitner (2004b), which deals with Australia's other voices. A note on designations for segments of Australia's population is in order at this point. The terms indigenous and non-indigenous Australians provide a crude basis for a discussion. The latter embraces all residents that have migrated to Australia. For the period to the mid-19th century, one may speak of convicts, settlers and administrative and military staff. But those terms are too fine-grained for most purposes and terms like British may be useful. European has often been used for migrants of non-British origin from the continent or has even included the British. The term immigrant has been replaced by migrant and a distinction is made between English (or, rather, British) migrants and migrants of non-British origin, which is paralleled by the term 'Language(s)-Other-Than-English'. As for indigenous people, general terms are hard to find and many are controversial. Eve Fesl, an elder of the Gubba Gubba people in Queensland, for instance, says this: An examination of the history of British colonialism and slavery throughout the world reveals that one of the first acts in the process of oppression has

44

Chapter 1 Australia's language habitat been the de-identification of the intended victims and a replacement of their names with labels such as "Indian", "aborigine", "native", "black" or "nigger".... The general noun "aborigine" has been used to replace our names which the colonisers never had the courtesy to use. (1993: ix)

Indexes of proper names, languages and key words and a bibliography will enhance the readability of this exploration and invite further study. Readers who desire more information are advised to turn to Leitner, Taylor, and Fritz (forthc.), which contains a full list of publications from 17882003. The level of linguistic or other background required to follow the argument will be kept manageable. If detailed information is called for, it will be included in an accessible style. As a result, Australia's Many Voices. Australian English - the National Language will benefit readers in a wide range of disciplines. Australian Studies, English studies, descriptive and applied linguistics are, of course, the central ones. A particular target is English Studies with its concern with national varieties of English. For these disciplines this monograph will provide a detailed account of the rise of mAusE. But it will also interest social and political scientists who look at the ability of language to create social cohesion or conflict. Social psychologists will find information on the role of a language in shaping individual or group identities, in making standardization and codification acceptable and in reforming the educational sector. The political dimension of mAusE will be dealt with only briefly (see Leitner 2004b).

Chapter 2

The demography of Australia's language habitat

Long-distance flights can be a bore and Europeans, less used to them, often complain about the time it takes to get to the Antipodes. But boarding halls offer the space and time to observe fellow travellers who find themselves thrown together, perfectly haphazardly, to reach a common destination. I found myself next to a Maltese on a flight from Melbourne to Rome. He had made enough money to go home and be celebrated once more as the well-to-do Aussie. On another flight I was sitting next to a couple of young Jewish girls on their way back to their Jewish school in Melbourne. There was the Italian-Australian business woman, a member of a trade delegation to promote Italian-Australian trade in Rome and the indigenous woman who had married a German. A mixed bag of people - migrants, Australianborn, long- or short-term immigrants, Australian citizens - and all of them speaking English - to me. "What language do you speak?" I often asked. "English", "Any other?", "Yes, Maltese. But my daughter never learnt it." "I don't really speak Greek, my parents never taught me. Later, I never had a chance", others said, or they said: "Only English, my parents and relatives are all from England or were born here." Australia has been host to many tongues as migrants transplanted and implanted their languages into a new habitat. Indigenous people, diverse linguistically too, still call dozens of languages their own. Australia has experienced periods of greater or lesser diversity of people, cultures, languages and the episodes recounted, which many readers could continue with their own ones, reflect today's diversity, a diversity that is the result of developments that started some 50 years ago. Diversity, contact and interaction, the underlying themes of this study, are naturally older and, since their nature and outcomes depend to a large extent on the participating groups of people, I will have to turn to a history of the demography of the nation and address questions like these: (1) How did the population grow as a whole, in states and territories? (2) Where did migrants come from? What was the ratio of Australianborn to overseas-born? (3) How large was the indigenous population before colonization and how did their numbers and proportion of the total population develop?

46 Chapter 2 The demography of Australia's language habitat (4)

What were the settlement patterns of migrants Australia's history?

throughout

(5)

What were, and are, the levels of mixing between people of different origins? As I deal with English and the language situation of an entire continent over a long period of time, I will bring together data and discuss issues that pertain to all languages. What is most and immediately relevant for an understanding of the nature and development of English in Australia is the historical setting of British settlement policies and practices of the 19th century, the overall population growth and the level of mixing that has been taking place over the past 200 hundred years. It is these factors that have shaped a local form of English and, more importantly, have extended its demographic base as non-Anglophone migrants shifted to English, making it and the local variety 'their' own language. English and Gaelic-speaking migrants of the 19th century are thus particularly interesting: It was them that constituted the linguistic base of mAusE. The demographic survey that follows will proceed in three cycles that give ever more depth to an understanding of population changes. Section 2.2 looks at growth and the socio-political or other factors that account for it. It includes a consideration of the social and ethnic groups of which the Australian population is composed. The emphasis is on the 19th century as the period most relevant to mAusE. The composition of the population will be left to section 2.3. There follows a close look at selected communities in section 2.4. Indigenous Australians and Australians of British descent will be discussed in detail. I will then contrast the more established European communities, such as Germans, Italians, with more recent groups from Asia as that bears upon the linguistic texture of Australia. Moreover, I will look at the internal diversity that is due to the fact that language communities in Australia may consist of groups from different places of origin. Section 2.1 begins with a clarification of general topics in demography.

2.1

Demography and the demography of Australia

The Encyclopaedia Britannica defines demography as "the study of the structure of human populations (their distributions by age, sex, marital status, etc.) and their dynamic aspects (births, deaths, migratory movements, etc.)" (1990; vol. 4: 6). The data for demography come from censuses or similar methods and demography shares with the social sciences its methodology on data collection, interpretation and testing.

2.1 Demography and the demography of Australia

47

Data collection has had a long tradition in Australia, says Vamplew: In the early years of penal settlement it was essential to keep a record of prisoners; often more is known about the white Australian population at this time than about the British population from which it came. Other statistics were compiled as the cost and progress of the early Australian settlements were monitored by the British colonial administration. (1987: xiv)

Apart from political factors, there was a philosophical interest in "the quantification of the economic and social effects of British industrialisation and this proliferation of statistical inquiry spilled over into colonial affairs" (1987: xiv). Demographic data were included in the reports commissioned by the ministry in charge of the colonies. The following illustration is from a letter by Governor Phillip to Lord Sydney, Secretary of State of the Home Office, dated 9 July 1788: Of the convicts, 36 men and 4 women died on the passage, 20 men and 8 women since landing - eleven men and one woman absconded; four have been executed, and three killed by the natives. The number of convicts now employed in erecting the necessary buildings and cultivating the lands only amounts to 320 - and the whole number of people victualled amounts to 966 - consequently we have only the labour of a part to provide for the whole. (HRA, Series I, p. 51)

This 'census', brief as it was, contains figures on totals, disappearances, and 'special' deaths, i.e. executions, murders and diseases. It records births, the gender distribution, the labour situation from the angle of social care and comments on public health. From 1822 such data were collected in the Blue Books, so named for the colour of their cover. They were followed by more detailed statistics. The first intercolonial census was done in 1861, but rivalry made it impossible for censuses to be conducted regularly so that the second one followed as late as 1875. Only after Federation did the states agree upon standardized questionnaires and established the Commonwealth Bureau of Census and Statistics in 1905.3 To understand Australia's population growth, I must look at three aspects of data interpretation, viz. (i) what is the geographical area covered; (ii) who is counted; and (iii) what categories are used to describe the composition of a population. Regarding the area, the entire continent, i.e. 3

The Commonwealth of Australia Year Books (1908-) became a model for all British colonies. The Commonwealth Bureau of Census and Statistics was founded in 1956 and renamed Australian Bureau of Statistics in 1975.

48

Chapter 2 The demography of Australia's language habitat

the states and territories, are taken for granted. But few people are aware that Australia includes offshore areas such as Norfolk Island. Christmas Island reached international attention after an Afghan refugee boat was stopped there in 2001. Even fewer people know much about the history of the states and territory boundaries. When Britain made plans for a colony it did not claim the whole continent. It took 43 years for that to happen. New South Wales, formerly New Holland, referred to an area between Cape York and the South Cape in Tasmania. It included several Pacific islands in the east and in the west its border extended from Adelaide to Darwin. When the first settlement was established on Melville Island in 1825, the western border moved to a line south-east of the island across the Nullabor Plain. Only in 1831, two years after the foundation of the Swan River colony, was the whole continent claimed by Britain. State boundaries, too, underwent numerous changes (Camm and McQuilton 1987: 252f). New South Wales, at first, included all settlements, except Van Diemen's Land (renamed Tasmania in 1856). South Australia was founded in 1836, Western Australia in 1829, Victoria in 1851, Queensland in 1859, the Federal Capital Territory (renamed Australian Capital Territory in 1938) in 1911, and the Northern Territory in 1926, which had had a chequered history itself. In other words, data on the location and distribution of languages, numbers of speakers and the like very much depend on the colonial statistics used. The dynamics of a population is expressed in terms of the ratio of natural increase - the balance between births and deaths - and net migration - that between immigration and emigration. There are considerable differences between countries on who is counted. Australia counts residents but, Jupp says, what is measured ... is determined by the political and sometimes administrative imperatives, rather than by the intrinsic or long-term interest of the data in isolation. During the operation of the White Australia Policy between 1901 and 1966, the census recorded ... all those of non-European or partly European race... In 1933, after a small influx of southern Europeans, a census question was inserted on knowledge of English. So few spoke any other language that the question was dropped until 1976. As immigrant settlement and much welfare and educational policy is now based on language needs, this information has become much more important for official purposes than it was in 1933. (1995: n.p.)

That may be undergoing change again, but it is clear that information on languages used provides crucial information for social justice, education,

2.1 Demography and the demography of Australia

49

welfare, law and order, etc., as well as for the intrinsically valuable effort to support or hinder the maintenance and loss of languages. Such information must be related to segments of the population but demographic composition is difficult to measure. To see its complexity, one may think of an Italian who moved to Germany in the 1950s, when there was a demand for guest workers, or of the Indian who came to Germany recently as a high-tech specialist. Within a year or two they may have moved to America where such specialists are also in demand. Eventually, the Italian and Indian migrate to Australia. Or imagine the Irish peasant who migrated to Liverpool during the potato famines in the 1840s, married an English wife, but poverty made it impossible for them to go further. Their children finally make it to Australia. How would these migrants be categorized? There are different ways. Jupp explains that different countries seek ... to measure ethnic and cultural diversity in terms of birthplace, language, religion and the like. The Indian Census ... measures language, religion and caste... The United Kingdom Census, in contrast, measures language use only for Welsh and Scottish Gaelic and religion only for Northern Ireland... In Canada and the United States at various times measures of race, language use or ethnic origin have all been incorporated into census data... In recent Australian censuses, compulsory questions have been asked on birthplace and language, while the question on religion has always been optional. In 1986 a question on 'ancestry' was also asked... This question ... was useful for locating ethnic groups which are not tied to a single birthplace, such as the Chinese... It was less useful in locating those of Celtic origin, such as Scots and Irish, many of whom preferred to call themselves 'Australian'. (1995)

Khoo and Price (1996) have discussed several measures. Country of birth, for instance, counts someone born in Australia as Australian, those born elsewhere according to the categories for countries of birth used. The Italian and Indian would count as Italian- and Indian-born, respectively, the children of the Irish as Australian. But information is being lost in the process, especially the children's Irish ancestry, which could be taken care of if the census included parents' birthplace. Country of origin, another measure, wrongly counts the Italian and Indian as German and American, which would have been elicited correctly by country of birth. Other things may go wrong with country of origin. Had the children been born in England, they would count as English - neither birth nor origin elicits the Irish descent. One may ask where one should stop measuring. Should one go far beyond the second generation? There may be a danger of ending up

50 Chapter 2 The demography of Australia's language habitat

measuring 'descent by blood' rather than by 'origin'. Ethnic strength yields interesting long-term data - though for the purposes of linguistics a time depth beyond the third generation turns out to be immaterial. Ethnicity, a disputable term, is often vaguely used to refer to race and other aspects of people's descent. Ethnic origin may be defined as "the ethnic group or culture of a person's parents or grandparents and other ancestors" (Khoo and Price 1996: 2). One way of eliciting ethnicity is a direct question that people can respond to by saying, e.g., 'Italian' or 'Greek' or 'Aboriginal', irrespective of other components of their descent. But a direct question may not reveal what one wishes to elicit. For many people it may be impossible to give a straight answer, people may wish to hide their origin, as was the case with indigenous Australians up to the recent past. Home countries may be multi-ethnic and people may lack information. Mixing through intermarriage poses the most serious problem. What ethnic origin should one claim? The children of the Irish peasant and the English woman are of mixed descent. What is their ethnicity when they marry a Greek or indigenous person? They may decide to say 'Australian', which is what 60 per cent do (Jupp 1988). In light of these problems with objective measurements, one will have to resort to complementary techniques to arrive at more accurate findings. Marriage registers, passenger lists of ships, court registers, etc., have turned out to be useful. Qualitative techniques such as questionnaires, 'diaries' or guided interviews can also narrow the gap between the objectively measurable and the subjectively perceived diversity (Smolicz 1999). They have more 'depth', but cannot have the same quantitative reach as a census. To study the cumulative effect of ethnicity on the composition of a population over many generations one can measure total descent or ethnic strength. To give an example, the daughter of German-Italian parents whose parents were German and Italian-Dutch, respectively, would be counted once for the German descent line, once for the Italian and once for the Dutch ones. Aggregating the data, one arrives at the total descent of a population. As each person is counted once for each descent, the figure will be higher than the total population. Ethnic strength divides a person by the number of components. The girl would count 1/2 German, 1/3 Italian and 1/6 Dutch. "Ethnic strength is", Khoo and Price say, "the best measure for comparing relative strength of the various ethnic groups. It is basically a genetic measure and provides an indication of the group's contribution to the total population" (1996: 8). The lower the ethnic strength figures or the higher figures for total descent, the more a population is mixed. Extensive mixing has far-reaching implications on the maintenance of languages.

2.2 The growth of Australia's population

51

As language is a crucial aspect of diversity, accurate measurements are important. As mentioned above, Australia introduced a language question in 1976 and after a period of 25 years - there were censuses in 1976, 1981, 1986, 1991, 1996, and 2001 - it is possible to describe long-term trends and iron out methodological errors of data collection. Australia is one of the best sampled countries worldwide, yet qualitative techniques on smaller samples are still important to gain a more precise picture on the extent to which, and the contexts in which, languages are used. 2.2

The growth of Australia's population

This section explores the political, social and other factors that correlate with demographic data. Diagram 2-1 gives an overview over the growth of the population, which will be broken down according to such factors as states/territories, ethnic composition and other categories below:

Diagram 2-1. Total population growth"'

Note, in passing, that Aborigines were included only from 1971. As to the pre-colonial period, all that needs to be said at this point is that the 4

There are two dates for counting, i.e. June 30 and December 31. I used ABS data and the December figures, where possible, but have rounded them to the nearest 10,000. Other sources used are Vamplew (1987: 142-3) regarding the period to 1860; Jupp (1988; 1995) for the 1980s, Shu et al. (1995) for the period since the 1970s and the ABS's website for up-to-date figures.

52 Chapter 2 The demography of Australia's language habitat

population apparently remained fairly stable and small. The Convict Period, which ended in 1851 in the east, saw slow growth, with barely more than 400,000 convicts and free settlers coming in the first 60 years. But the first decade of the so-called Imperial Period to 1861, when the sole source of immigration was (assisted or free) settlement, saw a steep rise and the one million mark was passed in 1861. Another million was added by 1880; the three million mark was reached by 1892. By 1960 there were around 10 million people. At the end of 2001 the population stood at above 19 million. To explore the socio-historical context that fed developments, Jupp's (1988) periods of population growth provide a useful framework. The slow growth during the Convict Period raises questions about what the political expectations and priorities were that influenced progress. As far as population growth in Britain is concerned, Wrigley and Schofield (1981:529; 595) noted a rise from 8.6 million in 1801 to 16.7 million in 1851 and a shift from a rural to an urbanized population during that time. The urban growth is particularly important to the understanding of Australia's population as it helps identify the potential dialect origins of Australian speech. And the level of urbanization was striking. Thompson, for instance, maintains for the 18th century that "London was the sole town of this size, and with its population rising from just over half a million to just under one million" (1990: 12). "But", he continues, "by the 1820s London had been joined in the 100,000-town league by Liverpool, Manchester, and Birmingham. By 1851 four more towns Bradford, Bristol, Leeds, and Sheffield had passed this mark; in 1901 there were twenty-eight towns, outside London, with more than 100,000 people" (1990: 12). Urbanization, population growth and the economic decline after the French Revolutionary Wars (1792-1815) are related to unemployment, rising levels of crime, social unrest, immigration from Ireland and Scotland and emigration to the colonies. There were plenty of push factors, then, for the British government to send people, and, in time, for people to want to leave. One might have expected that the colony would be used to relieve the negative effects of urbanization on the social texture, but that did not occur. During the first half of the 19th century when the population in England doubled, Australia grew by a mere 800,000. After convicts could no longer be sent to America, Australia, the terra incognita, appeared a practical choice: convicts would be far enough away to not cause concern and they would be put to useful work. But less than 12,000 convicts had come to New South Wales by 1811. The number quadrupled by 1820 and peaked in 1828-35 with nearly 41,000 transportées (Jupp 1988: 25). Thereafter, it ebbed off. The convict system brought a

2.2 The growth of Australia's population

53

mere 147,307 convicts to the colonies in the east by 1851 and 160,000 at the end of transportation in 1868. Such a small number cannot have done much to alleviate the problems in Britain and must have been more of a psychological valve than a political remedy. Slowly Australia lost its image of a penal colony. It acquired one of free settlement and enterprise, an image that became a factor in the emergence of an Australian national consciousness towards the end of the 19th century. The background to the controversy about the advantages or disadvantages of convictism over free settlement is well covered in Jupp (1988) and Clark (1962). The solution to problems of crime and the aim to secure long-term strategic interests by the establishment of a colony were potentially conflicting goals. The 'Imperial' perspective should have supported, one would have thought, an American type of policy. And a proposal along these lines had indeed been made. Mario James Matra, an American loyalist and Midshipman on Captain Cook's Endeavour, for instance, proposed a colony for American loyalists along the lines of the Virginian and Maryland model. Convicts would be sold to ship owners, who, in turn, would sell them to employers in the colonies. They would have the right to recruit free settlers who would encourage the inflow of private capital (Jupp 1988: 37; 266). Phillip suggested one settlements for convicts and one for free settlers, but that idea was discarded, just like Matra's had been. It was the idea of a penal colony that was pursued - not with full vigour as the small numbers of convicts suggests. Given Phillip's preference, it is not surprising that he called for free settlers whenever an occasion presented itself. Complaining about the working morale of convicts, he maintained that free settlers would work harder as they would work for their own benefit. They would be necessary anyway as store keepers, who would prevent thefts, and as magistrates and jurors. In a letter to W.W. Grenville dated 17 July 1790 he wrote this: In them [i.e. free settlers; GL] I should have some resource; and amongst them proper people might be found to act in different capacities, at little or no expense to Government, for as the number of convicts and others increase civil magistrates, &c., will be necessary. (HRA, Vol. I, ρ 196).

He believed that "amongst the convicts we have few who are inclined to be industrious, or who feel themselves anyways interested in the advantages which are to accrue from their labours, and we have many who are helpless and a deadweight on the settlement" (HRA, Volume I, ρ 196f). Criticizing the basis of the settlement policy, he argued that

54 Chapter 2 The demography of Australia's language habitat it is obvious that this settlement, instead of being a colony which is to support itself, will, if the practice is continued, remain for years a burthen to the mother country. (HRA, Vol. I, ρ 197) There had been a small, steady flow of free settlers from the beginning, but they remained peripheral. It was the coming of 24 settlers with their families in 1803 that foreshadowed a shift, Jupp says: "A new generation of Cabinet ministers was in power, and these seem to have had more sympathy with what might be called the North American model of colonisation" (1988: 37). Things did not turn out the way Phillip had hoped and there was a good deal of disillusionment: "What I feared from the kind of settlers I have been obliged to accept has happened in several instances. They have grown tired of a life so different from that in which they had been brought up...", Phillip wrote in a letter to Dundas, 19 March 1792 (HRA, Vol. I, ρ 339). Phillip called for "superior settlers", i.e. farmers and other experienced labour. But they did not come and attitudes towards free settlers changed, when it became obvious that they did not make much of a difference, as this quotation of 31 October 1807 shows: The Free Settlers, hitherto, have been in general a thoughtless set of Men, yet nevertheless, not sparing in their labour to clear their lands; many of them are still addicted to Liquor and disposed to get in debt; while others are becoming cautious in their concerns, and, uniting with acknowledged honest Men, do their utmost to procure domestic tranquillity. (HRA, Vol. I. August 1806-December 1808, ρ 149) Such experiences culminated in calls for a review of the situation. In 1819 former Chief Justice of Trinidad Thomas Bigge was commissioned to look into the efficiency of the colony. Bigge had ample experience with large landholders in the Caribbean who employed convicts and slaves. He soon saw that an 'American'-type of system with large landholders would increase the benefits to be reaped from the colony (Jupp 1988: 377). And gradually, a commercial view gained ground and greater weight was put on self-subsistence and the colonies' potential to contribute to the wealth of the Empire. Companies such as the Australian Agricultural Company and the Van Diemen's Land Company, which were founded in 1824 and 1825, were to increase commercial benefits. Yet, other policy-makers favoured steps to create an English 'class of yeomanry' which could improve the general social conditions. A conflict between profitability, associated with an American model, and the creation of traditional and cherished British model of social order characterized the subsequent development.

2.2 The growth of Australia's population

55

Both sides agreed on one point, viz. the changes in the thinking about the benefits of large populations. The export of people was now considered similar to capital investment that would benefit the nation; earlier thinking that linked population growth to prosperity and population decline to a decline in prosperity was rejected (Jupp 1988: 37ff; 368-70). There was now a fertile ground for politicians to turn to practical issues such as emigration programs and land management. There were calls for assisted migration programs whereby parishes would pay the expenses of the poor who opted to migrate. Some proponents went as far as to argue that one should encourage 'systematic colonisers' and concentrate investment and people to well-defined areas. (Jupp 1988: 40). By bringing whole communities and the diversity of labour that existed there, one would solve both the problem of social order and the lack of skills. One would even remedy another imbalance that the convict system had generated, viz. that of gender. Government would thus meet the needs of the colony and the Empire rather than respond to overcrowded prisons. The review of the situation in the colony, then, was part of a wider debate about population growth and the aims of colonization. Yet, subsequent changes were by no means direct translations of the new thinking but reactions to the local needs and the political agenda in Britain. The abolition of convictism, for instance, occurred only after the discovery of gold in NSW in 1851. The Secretary of State argued that it '"would appear a solecism to convey offenders, at the public expense, with the intention of at no distant time setting them free, to the immediate vicinity of those very goldfields which thousands of honest labourers are in vain trying to reach'" (Clark 1986: 109). The Gold Rushes brought streams of adventurers to Ballarat and Yackandandah (1845), Maryborough and Amherst (1848), and Clunes (1850) in Victoria. Prominent among them were returnees from the Californian goldfields and Americans. There was a large influx of British settlers, many of whom were rich enough to finance their own sea passage. The influx of non-British migrants was increasing. There were migrants from continental Europe, not just from Germany. There were gangs of indentured labour from China, labour was imported from India, the south-west Pacific, etc. As a result, Australia experienced the first big change in the composition of its population and linguistic texture. Private joint-stock companies looked after their own labour demands. The Van Diemen's Land Company, for instance, also managed the Swan River settlement and involved investors themselves. South Australia, which was managed by investors, followed the widely discussed Massachusetts,

56

Chapter 2 The demography of Australia's language habitat

Pennsylvania, and Virginia models (Jupp 1988: 40). That policy shift triggered a change in the economic outlook and brought about a significant growth in the pastoral industry, in the road and communications industries and building. The Imperial Period could begin with a sense of optimism, which was a major 'pull' factor for more people to want to come to the Antipodes. And pull factors were complemented by 'push' factors such as the potato famines in Ireland, political and religious persecution in continental Europe and the effects of the forced opening up of China and Japan. Jupp elaborates on the period 1851 to 1860 in these terms: [n]early 500 000 emigrants (36 per cent of whom received government assistance) left Britain for the Australian colonies. They were joined by 60 000 gold-seekers from continental Europe; at least 42 000 from China; perhaps 10 000 from the United States of America (a significant proportion of whom were Canadians or re-emigrating Britons); and just over 5000 people from New Zealand and the South Pacific. (1988: 50)

By 1890 around 100,000 Chinese had come to the goldfields. But "only a small percentage of the Chinese moved to these areas on their own initiative" (Jupp 1988: 298). They "were driven to emigrate for internal and external reasons", Jupp adds (1988: 298), and shared the fate of Afghan camel drovers, who had been imported from 1860. Sugar cane farms in Queensland required cheap labour in the 1860s to compete with exports from Fiji, Java, and South Africa. The import or 'blackbirding' of labour from the South Pacific islands was the solution. Though just about 11,000 Kanakas were imported, plantation owners were accused of introducing a new slave system and Italian migrants soon replaced the Kanakas and met the labour needs in the agricultural industry in Queensland in the 1880s. Ethnic diversity was now a reality everywhere and not only in towns. It was taken for granted. There was one exception, viz. the attitudes towards immigrants from Asia and the Pacific. But the situation differed for the two groups: Pacific Islanders were pitied for the poor conditions which they had to endure, while anti-Chinese attitudes were "so marked by 1887", according to Jupp, "that the Chinese government sent an official commission of enquiry to Australia and tried to exert pressure on the British government" (1998: 74). That visit had no consequences as the colonies were largely self-governing and Chinese immigration effectively ended around 1888 anyway. The import of Kanakas or 'black' labour had been discontinued three years earlier in 1885. Both decisions foreshadowed the White Australia policy, which was introduced with Federation in 1901. Even continental Europeans, who had not been subjects of negative

2.2 The growth of Australia's population

57

attitudes, felt a need to assimilate, to disappear in the mainstream. The myth of a white, Anglophone Australia, that Jupp had mentioned, became a near reality with immigration mainly drawing on Britain: "Between 1901 and 1933 the English-born population of Australia rose from 393 321 (including Wales) to 486 831." But that rise was not only due to the new policy. There was economic decline, unemployment and unrest in Britain and relative prosperity and a demand for labour in Australia. Though assisted programs brought in tens of thousands of migrants, they turned out to be unsuccessful in the long run as re-emigration was so strong that "there was no net English immigration between 1929 and 1947" (1998: 87). Jupp adds that "[B]y 1966 about 23% of assisted British migrants were returning home" (1998: 95). The British contributed little to population growth, then, and made it possible for other communities to (re-) emerge as significant proportionally - not in total numbers. The White Australia policy and the predominance of British settlers had not then, as one might have expected, made it impossible for non-English communities such as the Jews, Italians, Greeks, Germans to maintain a strong sense of identity or for new immigration to occur. Though small proportionally, Russians immigrated after the October Revolution of 1917, Jews, Germans and other central Europeans fled the Nazi regime and came to Australia. They had no real impact on the overall diversity of the population and the self-perception of Australia as English'. It was only in the aftermath of World War II that real change took place. Australia felt it "was too thinly populated and too reliant on primary industry to resist attack or invasion from Asia. It must 'populate or perish', a theme which goes back to the previous century though given greater force by the threat of Japanese invasion", says Jupp (1998: 102). The need for people was expressed at a time when anti-Asian sentiments were still strong and when continental Europeans, too, met with some reservation. Australia again looked to Britain first to meet its needs and British migrants were the first to benefit from assisted programs. The Displaced Persons camps in central Europe soon became a second source. DPs or 'New Australians', as they were called, adapted quickly and accepted low-paid industrial jobs, as they could not find the skilled positions they had held before the war (Holleuffer 2001). DPs were required to work in national programs, such as the Snowy Mountain project, for several years before they were free to do what they wished. Estonians, Latvians, Lithuanians, Poles, Ukrainians, Croatians, Hungarians, Czechs, Germans, Italians, Greeks, and Russians could now form communities and create infra-structures that would guarantee a sense of cultural identity. To speed up the process of assimilation, Australia had

58

Chapter 2 The demography of Australia's language habitat

introduced citizenship services, welfare and language programs. The assimilationist rhetoric did not only target migrants, says Ozolins: However, while rhetoric of control was clearly directed towards migrants who might be seen as not wanting to assimilate, much of the rhetoric was not directed at migrant groups so much as at the obstacles to assimilation posed by the Australian population. Calwell, the then Prime Minister, pointed out that blame for failure to assimilate (...) was to be laid squarely with the attitudes of Australians: The trouble which Australians experience with aliens is not unconnected with their attitude towards foreigners, which cannot be regarded as welcoming or encouraging... If we want thousands of immigrants we will have to liberalize our whole outlook towards non-British people and be prepared to help them to become assimilated to our way of life. (...) Calwell stressed in 1947 that 'a very important aspect associated with the assimilation of aliens is the necessity of 'conditioning' of Australians to the reception of migrants'... (1993: 11)

That rise in immigration was not enough to remedy the demographic needs. Two more responses were formulated. One was a 'second wave' program that targeted people who were seeking better economic conditions and employment. It was effective till around 1975 and led to a range of European communities (Jupp 1998: 109). Due to the economic recovery in Europe there was a level of re-emigration which left poorer countries like Turkey and Sicily as sole sources of continued immigration. The higher than expected returns were one factor that led to the third response in the mid-1970s, i.e. the abandonment of the White Australia policy. But, as so often in the past, there was a confluence of several factors. There was a foreign policy need to enter into a meaningful relationship with South-East and East Asian neighbours, intellectual debates and public opinion realized that much of the past policies had been racist. The old policy was being phased out by the mid-1960s when the major parties removed it from their platforms. It formally ended when Gough Whitlam's Labour government declared in 1973 that immigration would no longer discriminate on the basis of race, ethnicity, religion and cultural background. In practical terms it ended in 1976 when the first Vietnamese 'boat people' arrived in Darwin and when Muslim Lebanese were accepted as civil war refugees.5 "Since 5

Lebanese Christians have always been accepted and there have been small communities since 1900 (Jupp 1998: 122). The Muslim component, which numbered around 200,000 in 1996, has been seen as more controversial.

2.2 The growth of Australia's population

59

1976", writes Jupp, "the proportion of immigrants which has come from Asia has reached between 35 % and 40 %, having been negligible before that and largely consisting of those of European culture and descent" (1998: 120). Asians were followed by migrants from the Middle East, South America and Africa. Population growth was now fed by countries from all over the world. And today's migration policy components, vizhumanitarian or refugee programs, family reunion, and skilled or economic migration, have enhanced the multicultural outlook of Australia's population. Details on the ethnic composition of the population will follow in section 2.3, where data on the proportions of the overseas-born population will be given.6 Natural increase was low up to the end of the Convict Period. When immigration was speeded up it stood at around 35 per cent. In the first decade of the Imperial Period it rose above 60 per cent and never fell below that level again. In the latter part of that period, when restrictions on migration were in place, it reached the 90 per cent mark. Turning to the urban/rural distribution, statistics distinguish four categories, viz. those (i) from 1,000 to 10,000, (ii) from 10,000 to 100,000, (iii) beyond 100,000 category, and (iv) non-urban (or rural) locations. Several studies show that the non-urban type, i.e. below 1,000, was the dominant one in New South Wales during the Convict Period. Sydney and Hobart were the only towns. The expansion into the interior led to urban centres such as Parramatta (now in Sydney), Launceston (Tasmania), and Newcastle (New South Wales) after 1840. Towns also developed in coastal areas, witness Geelong (Victoria). In 1861 a mere 41.9 per cent of the population lived in towns, by 1911 it was no more than 57 per cent according to ABS (1999a). Berry (1989: 23) adds that about 38 per cent of the population were in capital cities in 1911, a proportion that rose to 47 per cent in 1933. By 1950 75 per cent of the population lived in metropolitan cities. The late 1940s also saw a rise in the 100,000+ category in Queensland, New South Wales and Victoria so that 86 per cent of the population lived in such cities by 1976. The third factor, is that Australia's population tends to live in two large coastal regions, the ABS explains: Most of Australia's population is concentrated in two widely separated coastal regions. By far the largest of these, in terms of area and population,

6

Camm and McQuilton (1987: 142) discuss the differences between those born overseas and those born in Australia.

60 Chapter 2 The demography of Australia's language habitat lies in the south-east and east. The smaller of the two regions is in the southwest of the continent. In both coastal regions the population is concentrated into urban centres, particularly the State and Territory capital cities. Half the area of the continent contains only 0.3% of the population, and the most densely populated 1% of the continent contains 84% of the population. (1999a)

Metropolitan cities had been growing fast, capital cities like Adelaide, Hobart and Canberra remained stable and projections even predict losses. In terms of the percentage of the states' population, all capital cities accounted for upwards 60 per cent for the period to 1976 (Berry 1989: 49). The Gold Coast-Tweed and Sunshine Coast had, however, seen the most significant proportional increases and are expected to grow further, followed by the Cairns region. The ABS notes a decline in some regions, especially in old mining towns, while the Kalgoorlie-Boulder region has experienced a rise of 3.1 per cent. Such changes signal high levels of internal migration, moves to the west and the tropical north. As for the motivation to go north, Berry writes this: Migration north, especially to Queensland, is not just - or even primarily due to natural resource development, since the latter projects are generally capital intensive with limited direct effects on employment. Thus, the fastest growing region of Queensland, the Gold Coast to the south, and Sunshine Coast to the north of Brisbane, depends not on mining or manufacturing (directly) but on intensive urban development and speculation set off by the influx of permanent residents and the lucrative tourist trade. (1989: 47)

2.3

The composition of the population

The data above provide a bridge to the composition of the population. Though I confined myself to broad categories such as migration versus natural growth and patterns of settlement, a good deal has been implied about the diversity. I will now look at the ethnic composition of the population from a short- to long-term perspective. Concepts like ethnic strength or total descent are attempts to measure objectively long-term effects of ethnic diversity and mixing, though these concepts do not adequately cope with what must be cognitive decisions or attitudes ultimately. Seemingly objective categories like region or country of origin may hide factors that bear upon diversity. Migrants from Vietnam, Singapore, China, or Indonesia, for instance, may share the same Chinese ethnicity, those from former Yugoslavia have different ones. That may not

2.3

The composition of the population

61

be dealt with adequately if one measures country of origin. Various methods have been proposed to bring to light such ethnic undercurrents, but I will confine myself to those that are measurable by quantitative techniques and omit qualitative approaches (Smolicz 1999). There is no space to deal with the development of diversity throughout Australia's history (Jupp 1988; 2001). I will look at some aspects of the early period to provide background for the development of mAusE and the decline of indigenous languages, but most of what follows will be on the post-World War II period, as it is that period which chiefly accounts for the current language diversity, language policies and other language-related issues. It is worth quoting Jupp on the diversity during the early period: It seems likely that over 3000 foreign convicts arrived in the Australian colonies as bonded labour. Ian Duffield has suggested that there were at least 800 Afro-Asians, and other estimates ... indicate the figure for 'nonwhites' could be as high as 900.... Most recent estimates indicate that some 1000 Jews were transported as convicts. (1988: 32) While Australia always encouraged British immigration, there was an important German input from the earliest days of free settlement. Other national origins were rare until the gold rushes of the 1850s. (1998: 57)

The little diversity among the earliest settlers can be used for folkloristic purposes to declare one's commitment to diversity. On the entire Convict Period, Jupp quotes a figure of 2.6% of non-Anglo-Celtic convicts. The few Jewish convicts were mainly British, but some may have migrated there to escape prosecution elsewhere and were sentenced to transportation. One might add that some American, French and Russian whalers and sealers remained in the colony after whaling became unprofitable. But overall, the non-British component to the mid-19th century was small and did not make the colony multi-ethnic or multilingual or shape the colony's selfperception in any way. The real beginning of diversity was towards the end of convictism, when thousands of Germans left Prussia after the revolutions in Germany failed (Vondra 1981: 29) or when gold-seekers came from all over Europe, America and China. The ups and downs of the diversity that followed then will concern us, though some words will be added on British migrants and, naturally, on the indigenous population. In order to structure the presentation I will have data for the period from the mid-19th century. Diagram 2-2 (next page) shows the development of ethnic composition. 1861 was the year of the first inter-colonial census. Carried out ten years after the first discovery of gold, the proportion of non-British settlers was

62 Chapter 2 The demography of Australia's language habitat

higher than before. And yet, the diagram shows that it was small overall. The picture had not changed much by 1881 regarding migrants from Germany and China. But the European segment, which now consisted mainly of Germans and Italians, grew faster and surpassed that of the Chinese and other Asians by 1881 and more so after Federation and the implementation of the White Australia policy. The Asian component declined further to 1947, while that of Europeans levelled out more or less. Figures for Britons peaked in 1881, stayed high to 1921 and declined rapidly to 1947. The year 1947 marks the beginning of radical change and it is this that has had major effects on linguistic diversity. The first stage of change, which is evident in the 1981 Census, is the enormous growth of the European segment. The second stage, which lags behind some 20 years, is the enormous growth of the Asian segment. It was just visible in 1961 and was due to the immigration of Lebanese Christians. It was more than obvious in 1981 when the consequences of the lifting of the White Australia policy were becoming visible. The 1996 and 2001 censuses show the on-going decline of the British and (other) European components, while that of Asians, Africans and from the Pacific (including New Zealand) is still rising. One should add that the number of indigenous Australians, which reached an absolute low in the 1930s, has been rising fast in the last decades. They now account for 1.5 per cent of the population. • BrltishTsles • Asia • America 1400000

«Europe ] Foreign Birthplace by region • Africa *t LO 001 BPacific/N.Z. ι goo 0 ™

'-co ·*~

into m

1200000 1000000 800000 600000 400000 200000

0 1861

1881

1901

1921

1947

1961

1981

1996

2001

Diagram 2-2. Ethnic composition from 1861

What has been said so far applies to the composition of migrants and is, in other words, about the first generation. But as I pointed out in section 2.1, population growth consists of net migration gain and natural increase. To assess the full picture, one must return to diagram 2-2 above and point out that the role of immigration has had its peaks and troughs. True, it has

2.3 The composition of the population

63

been increasing somewhat in the past few decades, but its role is small compared with that of the second half of the 19th century. That, one should add, highlights the extent of integration that has been taking place. And integration has had long-term effects that are best studied in the context of the age structure of communities and the proportion of second and later generations. Higher median age and large second generations promote the shift to English and lower the level of language maintenance. Birrell et al's (2002) study of second generation Australians revealed that the number of second generation migrants rose by 1 million between 1976 and 1996 and that their proportion of the total population rose from 16.8 per cent in 1976 to 19.1 per cent in 1996. The largest segment was that of those with one or two parents born in the United Kingdom, who numbered about 1.5 million. Second generation Australians of Italian descent were the largest nonBritish segment with about 300,000, followed by Australians of New Zealand, Greek and Dutch origin. On a comparison of the main regions of origins in diagram 2-2 above, Birrell et al. say that all second generations groups that had more than 50,000 people in 1996 were of English-speaking or other European or Lebanese origins whose parents immigrated during the 1950s and 1960s. Among the second generations groups of Asian origins whose parents mostly migrated after 1975, none exceeded 50,000 in 1996. The largest, those with one or both parents born in Vietnam, had 46,756 people. (2002: 10)

Table 2-1 below is adapted from Birrell et al. (2002: 12) and illustrates the generational differences between European and Asian migrants in the 1996 census. It confirms that the medium-term effect of Asian migrants on the composition of the population was still small in 1996 but that, according to Birrell et al. (2002: 10), "there is momentum for growth as the groups have a relatively young age structure (...) and the proportion of second generation will increase in the forthcoming years". They found three distinct patterns in the second generation that reflect the parents' migration history and accentuate the role of Asian descent. European migration peaked in the 1950s and 1960s so that the second generation now clusters in the 15 to 34 age bracket (there are far fewer in both the younger and older brackets). The Irish are a special case and have the highest second generation number in the 45+ years group. Migrants with a more continuous stream of immigration history, such as those from Croatia, Asia, the Middle East and New Zealand, have more young than older children. Migrants from Sri Lanka, Malaysia, the Philippines, Vietnam and subSaharan countries reflect a third pattern with very high numbers of children

64 Chapter 2 The demography of Australia's language habitat

in the 0-14 year bracket and few old people (Birrell et al. 2002: 13ff). They tend to maintain their languages the best. Kipp, Clyne, and Pauwels (1995), who looked at that sub-set of migrants, found that those speaking a LOTE had either immigrated recently, were of Asian descent or were second generation descendants in young working age brackets. Those of European descent had a higher median age and only few groups had many speakers at working age. In other words, descendants of European migrant communities are well advanced in the integration to the mainstream society, both in general and in language terms. The so-called Asianization is well under way. But it is important to remember that the Chinese, to take an example, do not constitute a homogenous group, just like migrants from Britain never did. Table 2-1. Percentage of second generation Australians: 1996 Country of origin Ireland Netherlands Italy United Kingdom Germany Poland India Malaysia Philippines China Vietnam Hong Kong

Second generation 95.154 142.356 334.048 1.444.444

First generation 51.501 87.894 238.263 1.072.774

Total 146.655 230.340 572.311 2.517.218

139.288 55.383 43.841 30.723 35.169 40.340 46.756 19.336

110.390 65.102 77.689 76.359 92.902 111.124 150.941 68.350

249.678 120.485 121.530 107.082 128.071 151.464 197.697 87.686

% of second generation 64.9 61.8 58.4 57.0 55.8 46.0 36.1 28.7 27.5 26.6 23.7 22.1

Other factors, too, will bear upon the medium to long-term maintenance of languages and the shift to mAusE. A crucial one is the internal cohesion of migrant communities. Have they formed concentrated settlements and created infra-structures that facilitate the practice and retention of culture and language? Is that an obstacle to the participation in society, education and employment and does that make people shift to mainstream practices?7 The 19th century did indeed see the emergence of some non-Englishspeaking concentrations. The Germans formed village-based, rural 7

Birrell et al. (2002) look at the role of residential patterns and family ties on language maintenance.

2.3 The composition of the population 65 communities in South Australia, western Victoria, parts of New South Wales and elsewhere. Italians did so in New South Wales and Queensland. The Chinese, who came in gangs to work on the goldfields, were fairly unstable groups that dispersed easily. But few of 19th century concentrations have survived and most of those that have are being maintained for business reasons as tourist attractions. To mention the German Hahndorf in South Australia, the Italian Lygon Street area in Melbourne. The China-towns emerged late in the 19th and 20th centuries. The role that such demographic centres have played in the maintenance of languages in the 19th century has not been studied, nor has the issue of whether places like Hahndorf constitute a sort of dormant base, waiting to be rejuvenated at some time in the future when the situation is more appropriate. Many Australians of German descent, I recall, refrained from speaking German to me in the 1980s, while they may do now. Settlement patterns of recent migrants differ significantly from the 19th century. Victoria and New South Wales were similar in the European-type composition of their populations up to 1981 but are now drifting apart. New South Wales attracts the largest number of migrants from Asia and the Middle East, Victoria remains more traditional. The situation was more or less the same in 2001 as in 1991 in the other States. Turning to metropolitan cities, one finds that the drift between New South Wales and Victoria is largely due to their capitals, Sydney and Melbourne, as Sydney attracts more migrants from Asia and the Middle East than Melbourne (Clyne 1991; Clyne and Kipp 1998). A controversial issue is whether Asians form "ghettoes" at the level of local government areas (LGAs) in cities. Taking a concentration of 10% as a clear indicator of "ghettoes", Viviani (1997) has shown that it is only the Vietnamese that do and only in a few LGAs. They are, in fact, comparable to the British, who cluster in some LGAs. Other groups do not co-settle. Now, if that is a sign of a lack of demographic concentrations, language maintenance and shift cannot depend too much on settlement concentrations. Ethnic mixing has been mentioned above. There are different motivations for people to mix or to avoid it. An obvious factor is the lack of a sufficient number of partners from the other sex, which was an acute problem in the early 19th century, especially for men. Most sealers, convicts, diggers, sugar cane labourers, etc., were men. The Chinese were almost entirely male. But most of them had come as indentured labour, not as permanent migrants, and returned for marriages. In contrast, there were proportionally more women amongst the Irish, Jupp writes:

66 Chapter 2 The demography of Australia's language habitat No less than 20 per cent of Irish-born transportées sent to New South Wales were female, compared to just 7 per cent of other groups.... The combination of the highly skewed sex distribution and the predominance of the Irish among the women meant that the children of convicts were far more likely to have Irish blood than the aggregate figures would suggest. (Jupp 1988: 28)

The Irish mixed with members of other communities. But mixing occurs eventually with all groups so that over longer periods the level of diversity decreases and the sense of ethnic affiliation of individuals is turned into a cognitive, subjective decision. Mixing, however, is a difficult factor to measure objectively across generations and various methods are in use. One of them is the so-called increase factor, which is arrived at by using figures of 'total descent' and 'ethnic strength' (cf. Jupp 1988: 124 et passim). For instance, of about 10.7 million Australians of English descent in the second and later generation only 1.9 million (or 27 per cent) were unmixed, 8.8 million were mixed. The Irish had mixed even more since only about 10 per cent were unmixed. In contrast, the Greeks, Italians and Chinese showed little mixing, they are all in the range above 80 per cent of unmixed descent. Aborigines, Germans and others are in a middle category. A related question is whether communities that out-married have had preferences for a particular community. And this is indeed the case as Jupp's (1988: 15-17) data reveal. Calculations for third and later generations show that the English were the preferred partners for most groups and constituted the main single mainstreaming factor. On average 12.8 per cent of all groups had one English partner. On the behaviour of selected groups Jupp says that [p]attern A [in table 5, GL], that of the Scandinavians, Welsh, Channel Islanders and other small, long-established non-Catholic groups with little geographical concentration, shows a very low in-group proportion and a general scatter through the other categories [ethnic groups, GL], but with a certain preference for the English and Scottish mixture rather than the Irish... So also with the Germans (...), another long-established, mainly Protestant group... (1988: 126)

Religion was another relevant factor. Catholic groups from Italy, former Yugoslavia and Malta mixed more easily with the Irish and did not for regional concentrations. Italian settlers on the other hand did concentrate in north Queensland, etc. The Chinese, the Poles and other groups, Jupp says, are scattered throughout other groups, but did avoid mixing with the Irish.

2.4 A profile of selected communities 67 To add a historical note, the types of mixing in third generation and later that Jupp refers to seem to be the result of patterns at the end of the 19th century. His data on the fourth and fifth generation take us back to the mid19th century. And Jupp concludes that over 60 per cent of the third and later generations, and about 45 per cent of the total population, have three or more ancestries, while over one-quarter of the third and later generations, and nearly one-fifth of the total population, have four or more. Moreover, the non-Anglo-Celtic columns [his table 6, ρ 127; GL] show that a considerable proportion of these are not simply mixtures of English, Irish, Scottish or Welsh, but have at least some element of non-Anglo-Celtic... (1988: 126)

The 'two-ancestry group', however, is smaller today than the 'threeancestry one', which means, says Jupp (1988: 127), that "this very mixed ethnic pattern is a purely pre-war phenomenon, true of the third and later generations from the past but unlikely to continue because solid post-war ethnic communities will procreate unmixed third and fourth generations". Today, mixing is decreasing, though Jupp cautions that that applies more to groups such as the Vietnamese than to others. The foreseeable ethnic diversity will have implications on the level of language diversity. While I have emphasized the extent of diversity, it would be foolish to disagree with Jupp's (1988) view that one may expect renewed trends towards homogeneity: "Although the census question on ancestry in 1986 is invaluable for distinguishing smaller groups, and for giving those who feel strongly a chance to state their ethnicity, it means very little to several millions of Australians today" (1988: 127). The greater the levels of mixing, the more the question of identifying with any specific ancestry rests on a conscious decision, not on 'descent by blood'. Many just state their identity as Australian, pure and simple. Even those for whom descent is important cannot be assumed to follow the value systems of any one of their inputs. They may align with the values of the mainstream fully, partly or else create a syncretized version of their own. Such cognitive and cultural elements will be given due weight in later chapters in connection with, e.g., the acceptance of mAusE, language maintenance or loss, etc.

2.4

A profile of selected communities

I can now come to a characterization of selected communities and begin with indigenous Australians, turn to numbers, mixing, changes in

68

Chapter 2 The demography of Australia's language habitat

settlement due to colonization and recent trends. Regarding British migrants and their descendants, I will focus on regions of origin during the early period, internal diversity and the ways they saw their role in the colonies. Since British migrants ceased to be a special group after the formation of AusE, I will not go beyond the end of the 19th century. I will contrast European and Asian migrants and add detail on specific countries of origin to bring out the fact that even groups that apparently belong to same community on the basis of, say, language are diverse internally and are the product of their being in Australia. 2.4.1

Indigenous Australians

The indigenous population is difficult to characterize with precision for the pre-colonial period for the paucity of data. Inferences draw on what is known about the physical condition of the continent, climatic conditions, fauna, flora, and cultural developments that are reflected in archeological sites or in languages (Bemdt and Berndt 19963:; Jupp 1988; 2001; Walsh and Yallop 1993). Their post-colonial history is better documented but even here there are many gaps. On population size the ABS's held that in 1930, the anthropologist Radcliffe-Brown postulated a minimum figure of 300,000. In 1980, L.R. Smith estimated the absolute minimum pre-1788 population at 315,000. Other estimates have put the figure at over 1 million, while recent archaeological finds suggest that a population of 750,000 could have been sustained. (1999b)

Vamplew added that colonial, state, and Commonwealth records avoid the vexed question of how many Aborigines were in Australia in 1788. Some recent estimates are as high as 900 000, but until they have been more completely assessed it is sensible to work with more certain minimum figures; the 314 500 given here is the minimum size of the population ancestral to those currently defined as Aborigines. (1987: 2)

Population density was high in the north and along the eastern coast line where resources were plentiful. A D. Sc. W. Ramsay Smith is worth quoting on what it says about estimates in the 1840s: [w]hat impresses one in the writings of each and all of these observers is the extreme difficulty the authors encounter in arriving at even an approximation of the number of the aborigines. Eyre despairs of forming an

2.4 A profile of selected communities

69

opinion, even approximating the truth, of the aggregate population of the continent, or the average number of persons to be found in any given space. A district, he says, that may at one time be thinly inhabited, or even altogether untenanted, may at another be teeming with population. The wanderer may at one time be surrounded by hundreds of savages, and at another, in the same place, he may pass on alone and unheeded. (ABS 1999b: 5; fr. Year Book Australia 1910)

Based on the total of 314,000, there was a fast decline till the lowest number was reached around 1933. Dislocation from the land, alcohol, diseases and the drop in the fertility rate were major causes. A smallpox epidemic in 1788 killed hundreds of people and reached out to areas remote from Sydney Cove. In a letter to Lord Sydney dated 12 February 1890 Phillip pondered whether smallpox was a local or an introduced disease: "Whether the small-pox, which has proved fatal to great numbers of the natives, is a disorder to which they were subject before any Europeans visited the country, or whether it was brought by the French ships, we have not attained sufficient knowledge of the language to determine" (HRA I, Vol. I, ρ 145). In April 1789 "numbers of natives were found dead with the smallpox in different parts of the harbour". By 1830 smallpox had spread throughout New South Wales, Victoria and into Queensland. Other diseases followed, but diseases "could never have destroyed the Aboriginal population", writes Jupp, "since every human society in the world has been beset by epidemic diseases and has recovered, given the opportunity" (1988: 137). What really undermined Aboriginal societies was the colonizers' intrusion and "the physical frontier of European settlement" (1988: 137). About 6,000 Aborigines lived in the area where the First Fleet landed with its approximately 1,500 people. Within days the population had grown by 25 per cent. The effects on land use could not, and did not, escape notice, particularly at times of drought, as these reports show: The scarcity of food must at times reduce the Natives to the greatest extremities; several of those seen had live lizards which they signified were to eat, and the sods in every swampy spot were turned up, probably in search for worms, as no root was to be found there that could serve for food. (HRA, 1803, Vol. I, ρ 121) Owing to the drought in the pastoral areas, many able-bodied aboriginals have been necessary to supply them with rations. In many parts of the country the natural food supplies of the aboriginals have completely disappeared. (Mattingley and Hampton 1992: 24)

70 Chapter 2 The demography of Australia's language habitat

The land, barely rich enough to support the local population, could not feed both, them and the newcomers. The clash about land use and methods of food collection became a source of conflicts. Europeans wanted to cultivate and exploit the land - for their physical needs, commerce and export indigenous people saw themselves as caretakers who would use as much as necessary to meet their needs. Tasmania is a good case to illustrate the situation (Crowley 1993). As life was extremely difficult, the settlers came to rely on kangaroo meat, which was also the main resource for indigenous people. Hostilities broke out and a variety of 'solutions' was resorted to. One of them, the partition of land failed - Aborigines could not 'read' the signs that had been put up. Those caught disobeying were shot or, if they could not be found, members of their clans were killed. Ultimately, the few remaining Aborigines were relocated to Cape Barren Island. Put differently, a subsistence society was intruded upon by a pastoral one. Aborigines were deprived of their land, their sacred sites and of the control over their environment. As they could not encroach on other tribes' land they had no retreat away from the invaders. The demographic effects were disastrous and the population was halved within 70 years. Numbers declined by 73 per cent in the Southeast, by 36 per cent in the North and 28 per cent in the West. Traditional life-styles were made virtually impossible. Aborigines were forced into reserves and missions which did not respect tribal patterns and catered for people from unrelated, distant lands. The uprooting of the indigenous population forced a counter-reaction, i.e. adaptation, to avoid annihilation, Jupp argued: A series of introduced frontiers spread over the continent and engulfed the Aboriginal population in a demographic and social catastrophe. The devastation of the Aboriginal population would have been almost complete if this were the whole story. However, the attempt by Aborigines to reach accommodation with the settlers was the real foundation for population recovery. (1988: 139)

That accounts for a part of the population recovery after the 1930s. But part of the growth to 1996 is due to a stronger identification as indigenous and part of it is due to birth rates which are higher than for the rest of the population. Identification and natural increase is stronger in the southeastern states, which are also the main targets of Aboriginal in-migration. For instance New South Wales had twice as many indigenous people in 1991 than in 1788, though the proportion of indigenous Australians was a mere 1.22 per cent of its population in 1991. Today New South Wales has more indigenous Australians than Queensland and twice as many as the

2.4 A profile of selected communities

71

Northern Territory and Western Australia.8 In terms of a state's proportion, the Northern Territory and the Torres Strait still come out top with 77 per cent and 75 per cent of indigenous people, respectively. Regarding settlement, the Aboriginal population is less urbanized than the rest of the population: While most of the total Australian population is concentrated along the east and (to a lesser extent) the south west coasts, the indigenous population is much more widely spread. About 90% of Australia's Indigenous population live in areas covering 25% of the continent whereas 90% of Australia's total population are contained within just 2.6 % of the continent. This reflects the fact that Indigenous people are much more likely to live in remote areas than the rest of the population... (ABS, 18 June 2002)

Yet, states differ from one another. In a report entitled "Blacks in move to cities" The Australian says that "Sydney holds the highest indigenous population in Australia, with 37,529 indigenous residents" (27 June 2002). Coffs Harbour, New South Wales, has increased its proportion by 30 per cent from 1991, Brisbane by 28 per cent. Tennant Creek north of Alice Springs, in contrast, is the only town to report a loss. Aborigines do indeed participate in the nation's move to the cities, though they tend to concentrate more in some LGAs than migrant communities do in general. The ABS argued that "[t]he Australian Indigenous population is becoming increasingly urbanised" and adds that "[a]t the 1991 Census, 67.6% in Indigenous people lived in urban areas; by the time of the 1996 Census this had increased to 72.6% (...). In comparison, 85.1% of the total population lived in urban areas in 1991, increasing marginally to 85.9% in 1996" (1999a). But the ABS adds cautions that urbanisation does not reflect a mass movement to cities and towns. Classifications are population based and "some of the increase is a result of changes in the classification of some smaller urban centres (ABS 1999b). "There are other factors that single out Indigenous Australians as a distinct group. The median age, for instance, was much lower than that of the population at large, according to the ABS: "In 1996 the median age of the Indigenous population was 20 years, compared with 34 years for the total population. With 40% of the population aged under 15, and 2% aged over 65, the Indigenous population 8

The Indigenous population increased by 86 per cent in New South Wales, 79 per cent in Victoria, 71 per cent in Queensland, 55 per cent in South Australia, etc. (cf. National Review o/[etc.] 1994: 8).

72 Chapter 2 The demography of Australia's language habitat of 1996 had a younger age structure than that of the total Australian population at the beginning of this century" (ABS 2001). Factors like high birth rate, young age structure, low life expectancy, increasing urbanization and the presence of very small communities converge to make language maintenance or revival an uphill struggle that requires political support and community efforts.

2.4.2

British settlers, including Celtic settlers

Australia's self-perception as Anglo-Celtic could be expressed nostalgically as late as the 1980s, when some academics would tell you, "Of course, I could have gone back but decided to stay." Whether they really had the chance to go back is immaterial, but their being there contributed to what foreigners saw as a mirror image of England that they would not always feel comfortable with. Yet, those who were seen as English were quite heterogeneous - they may have been from Ulster or Southern Ireland, the Scottish Lowlands or Highlands, Wales or the English regions. They may have been migrants or Australians of British descent in the third or later generations. To contextualize that diversity, I need to begin with a look at the Britain of the late 18th and early 19th centuries, which coincides with the first formative period of AusE. Britain underwent enormous demographic changes, the reader will recall from section 2.1, with its population growing 70 per cent from 8.3 to 14.2 million within 50 years. London, the Empire's centre, was Europe's largest, most thriving city. Birmingham, Manchester, Liverpool and Newcastle emerged as manufacturing centres in the Midlands and North, Glasgow and Edinburgh in Scotland, Belfast in Ireland. Such developments caused an unprecedented level migration into the cities and mining areas. Most migration was over short distances, from a village to a nearby town. But there was also a considerable level of long-distance migration - away from Celtic regions into London, Liverpool or Manchester. Established communities ceased to be viable, rural ones became conurbations of growing cities and old urban populations mixed with rural migrants from Ireland, Scotland and elsewhere. Mixing was the hallmark of the period and had enormous consequences even on the dialect map of Britain, though Görlach (1999) is right in saying that migration - he is referring to shortdistance migration - did not abolish the broad dialect boundaries. Social problems acted as push factors, while the opportunities of the colonies made Australia a target of migration. How did these factors affect

2.4 A profile of selected communities

73

different dialect groups who emigrated to Australia? The influence of the Celts has intrigued scholars for decades. Lieutenant Philip Gidley King and Captain William Bligh of the ill-fated Bounty, were Cornishmen and made important careers. King was governor of Norfolk Island (1788-96) and New South Wales (1800-06), Bligh of New South Wales (1806-8). The majority of Cornish and Welsh migrants were, however less educated and were miners. Most of them were non-conformist, i.e. Wesleyan Methodists, Baptists, Bible Christians and Calvinists. The Welsh did not have a history of migration, the Cornish did. "[T]he major influx of Cornish people", says Jupp, "coincided with the foundation of the colony of South Australia in 1836, and the discovery of the continent's first metal and mineral deposits" (1988: 327). With Cornwall's mining industry being on the decline and mining picking up in South Australia, push and pull factors concurred. In the late 1830s nearly 1,000 families applied for assisted passages - about 10 per cent of all applications at the time (Jupp 1988: 327). Of 22,000 Wesleyan Methodists, 6,000 Primitive Methodists and more than 6,000 Bible Christians in South Australia in 1866, most were Cornish (Jupp 1998: 5 If); they often came from areas where language and cultural identity had been maintained better than elsewhere. Yet, "[T]he Cornish sense of difference did not extend to any close affinity with other Celtic people, although there were Welsh present in some areas settled by the Cornish and many of them were Methodists", says Jupp (1998: 52). And the Gold Rushes also acted against the formation of a sense of an Australian identity. The Welsh had not been fervent emigrants, as I just said. The mining and iron industries had led to economic prosperity during the early part of the 19th century and made emigration unnecessary. But if the Welsh did migrate, they tended to go from the rural north to the industrial south, to London or the cities in the Midlands. There were fewer than 2,000 Welsh convicts and only few settlers before the gold rushes (Jupp 1998: 53). Like the Cornish they did not establish links with fellow country people, even though non-conformism and language tied them together. Jupp adds that inevitably perhaps, the assimilation of the geographically dispersed and numerically small Welsh population proceeded apace, with the ageing of a Welsh-speaking first generation who were unable, in the absence of institutional support outside the home, to transmit its values to the second generation. Clearly, these values, in Australia as in Wales, were held together by the bond of the Welsh language. (1988: 844)

Scotland and Ireland had not been integrated into Britain as much as Wales and Cornwall were. Scotland had a legal and education system and

74 Chapter 2 The demography of Australia's language habitat

religion of its own, Ireland retained a link between Gaelic and Catholicism as a bulwark against Protestantism and English well into the 19th century. Both groups accounted for large proportions of convicts and free settlers, but their numbers peaked at different times. The majority of Scots came between the 1820s and 50s, the Irish between 1850 and 1890 (Jupp 1999; ch. 3). South-eastern Scots had a farming background, a good number were in the professions, leaning towards the National and Liberal Parties, which was a guarantee that they were intent on maintaining their identity. "All Scots, except the Gaelic-speaking Highlanders," says Jupp, "were better educated than their English or Irish counterparts" (1999: 49). Many Highland Scots came to the gold fields but by the end of the century many Scots had gone to Queensland and elsewhere and gradually disappeared in the mainstream. Gaelic became a marginal factor. There were two Irish communities, viz. the Ulster Protestants and the Catholics. The Protestants were well educated, well represented in the professions and soon integrated into the mainstream. Many Catholics remained Gaelic-speaking till late in the 19th century. Yet, the Irish did not form close-knit settlements and the few that were established in the southwest of New South Wales, the north and the north-west of Victoria, e.g. in Boorowa and Koroit, are exceptions. As to numbers, "[b]etween 1840 and 1914 over 300,000 Irish men and women emigrated to Australia", says Jupp (1988: 560). Though that was a small number compared with those that went to England, the USA or Canada, Australia had the highest proportion of Irish-born immigrants with around 25 per cent in 1871. The Irish had a greater impact on the population than they would have had in numerical terms, since, as I said earlier, nearly 60 per cent of female convicts came from Ireland so that there was a great likelihood for convict children to have Irish blood. Yet, the impact of the Irish on English in Australia was smaller than in America as they came at a time when an Australian form of English was already well under way. But many issues are, as I will show in Chapter Three, still in the dark. The Gaelic language, too, survived for longer in Australia than is commonly assumed. Summing up, the Celts differed from each other in educational background, religion, affinity to England and attitudes to language. They did not come with a shared regional sense, let alone one of Celticness, nor did they develop one. They came tended to come as individuals, families or village groups and were willing to out-marry. Gaelic was unlikely to be maintained beyond the second generation. The background of the English is often reduced to the belief that most of them came from the south-east. Indeed, the south-east and especially

2.4 A profile of selected communities

75

London did provide the largest number and there was no obvious concentration of south-western or northern English, as there was in North America. But Celtic in-migration and the general mobility into the cities adds to the problem of getting accurate information on the background of English migrants. But various sources suggest that "transportation from Britain was not a random process. The likelihood of ending up as forced labour in a far-distant penal colony differed according to where the crime was committed (and tried)" (Jupp 1988: 23f)· With London courts sentencing around 18 per cent, Lancashire and Dublin 12 per cent in the period 1787 to 1852, 30 per cent of convicts came from just three areas: It was the expanding urban metropoles of London, Glasgow, Manchester, Liverpool, Birmingham, Leeds and Dublin that provided the bulk of the bonded labour upon which Australia's maritime and pastoral economy was to be built. (Jupp 1988: 23)

Jupp sums up a study of New South Wales for the years of 1817 to 1840 in these terms: Comparison of the counties of birth and trial... suggests there is a difficulty in defining the geographical 'origin' of convicts. Most of the urban counties at the forefront of British industrialisation were more significant as places of trial than birth. Thus, Middlesex accounted for 24 per cent of all English convicts by place of trial, but for only 19 per cent by place of birth. The counties of Lanark and Midlothian, in which the growing cities of Glasgow and Edinburgh are located, supplied 47 per cent of Scottish convicts by birthplace, but 65 per cent by place of trial. (1988: 24)

This conclusion is reached on the basis of random studies and on estimates. Measured in terms of place of trial, there is a reasonable match for Cornwall, the South-West and the Midlands (columns 2 and 3), but there are discrepancies for London and the North. London accounted for 4.3 per cent more convicts than its contribution to Britain's population would make one expect - crime was, after all, not evenly spread in the country. The North had 1.2 per cent. Of course, such measures can only be tentative, but they do suggest that places of trial had an important impact on transportation. What were the reasons for such differences? Jupp believes that Edinburgh, Glasgow or Dublin had slums as squalid as London and crime as high so that social problems could not have been the sole cause. What made the difference was the legal system that favoured transportation or was applied differently. Take Scotland. The Act of Union left the legal

76

Chapter 2 The demography of Australia's language habitat

system intact, which provided for less severe punishments for first and minor offences (Jupp 1988: 25). In contrast, the Irish system sentenced more first and minor offenders to transportation: "Almost three-quarters of the Irish were first offenders" (Jupp 1988: 26). Differences in the legal systems and in their application did not guarantee that those trialled were Scottish-born, Irish-born or English-born, says Jupp (1988: 23). Such criticisms seem fair. Yet, it seems safe to conclude that (i) convicts and early settlers came from all over Britain, not just from the south-east; (ii) that the over-representation of south-eastern convicts was not compensated for by long-distance migrants into London from Ireland and Scotland; (iii) that towns accounted for more convicts than the country, and (iv) that internal migration was into the cities, not away from them, so that the proportion of rural migrants was larger than place of trial figures suggest.9 It is also fair to assume that townspeople were speakers of the new urban dialects and accents and that many had a background in or, at least, passive knowledge of rural varieties. The regions of origins and, by implication, likely dialect backgrounds of free settlers after 1851 show much the same pattern as those of convicts: "The bulk of English free migrants seems to have come from the southern counties, along with the coastline from Kent to the West Country" (Jupp 1988: 375). For evidence, Jupp points to the number of ships that left from the ports of London, Plymouth, Liverpool, Portsmouth, and Bristol to take settlers to Australia. Crime did favour London and other cities, but it is also true to say that the knowledge about the possibilities of the Australian colonies was more accessible there than in rural regions (Jupp 1988: 376). As for age, English convicts were generally young, writes Jupp (1988: 23): "[t]heir average age was 26 years, and only 14 per cent were over 34 years". From a linguistic angle, they were not far away from a malleable age and the male dominance may have contributed to the formation of a male peer group idiom. Convicts were generally working class, if with rural backgrounds. A finding that many find surprising in light of cherished ideas about Australia's convict past is that the level of education was higher than in the population in general and that, while they were tried as criminals, 9

A remark is in order about the care with which the data have been edited. Jupp's account of the Irish, Scottish and English convicts and settlers is marred with conflicting findings, even when he refers to the same studies. One map (Jupp 1988: 26), for instance, suggests Leinster and Munster to be relevant sources, another one (Jupp 1988: 557) has Dublin on top, followed by Limerick and Tipperary. It has the entire Gaeltacht and Ulster as sources of convicts.

2.4 A profile of selected communities

77

most did not pursue criminal activities and tended to lead normal family lives. "It can be said", believes Mitchell "that at no stage was English speech and language in New South Wales the product of an untutored or illiterate society" (2001: 5). The colonial administration and the church saw to it that educational opportunities were provided for the children. As early as 1804 settlers at Windsor, North-West of Sydney, paid a modest sum for the education of their children. The Church became particularly active in providing a Christian-type of school system, which - one should note - was extended to Aborigines from the late 1810s. While the social background of convicts and settlers may have been working class, there was a level of literacy, there was diversity of skills, a high level of mobility, an attitude that favoured egalitarianism and a desire to take the opportunities offered. The dominant social texture of the early colonies is thus clear. But another class must be mentioned, viz. the members of the middle class at the higher echelons of colonial power. And as convicts were pardoned or released and as free immigration was made possible, three social classes emerged by the early 1820s, i.e. convicts, emancipists and free settlers, some of whom added to the middle class origin of administrators and Church people (Mitchell 2001: 14). By the mid-1830s, the proportion of exconvicts and free settlers rose and a sizeable proportion of "born-free" emerged. The 1841 census counted a population of 130,856. Convicts numbered a mere 21 per cent, ex-convicts 15 per cent and new immigrants and born-free made up 62 per cent. The society had, by then, stratified along distinct Australian lines - the English class systems was not copied. The Gold Rushes may have shifted the texture further by encouraging a growing number of low and middle class migrants from Britain to come and try their fortune. The pastoral expansion, which had begun before the Gold Rushes, led to a rural class of land-holders and rural labour, and gradually to a split between the urban and rural population. Camm and McQuilton (1987) have data that show that even during the 19th century urbanization was on the increase. Camm and McQuilton (1987: 102), for instance, point to the emergence of the category of "over 1000,00", i.e. of cities that were called "metropolitan" from 1861 to 1901 for New South Wales, Queensland and Western Australia, while that category already existed in Victoria by 1861. In terms of other regional patterns, the received canon was that there were no obvious concentrations of English settlers, but Camm and McQuilton (1987) argue that there may have been some: In many ways, these maps [in the Atlas, GL] throw into doubt some of the past assumptions made about the distribution of different ethnic groups. The

78

Chapter 2 The demography of Australia's language habitat tendency for the Scottish born to settle in a limited number of districts has been well documented. But the levels of concentration for the English born are higher than has been commonly accepted and the levels of the concentration of the colonial born and, particularly, the Irish are lower than has been assumed in the past. (1987: 147).

Convicts could not form coherent settlements anyway. But it is important to add that people tended to stay where they were. "The colonial born", says Mitchell (2001: 15), "were found in every district in 1841 but had begun to concentrate. Their proportion was higher in the older districts and lower in the newly settled areas", according to Camm and McQuilton (1987). Society was quite stable. Newcomers had to be more mobile and gradually modelled their behaviour patterns on to the old chums. It was the Gold Rushes that brought about a sudden and massive level of mobility and a disruption of society. The Irish, they were under-represented in Western Australia and South Australia, but constituted a large proportion of the population of New South Wales and Van Diemen's Land.10 The Scots preferred the mountain regions of Van Diemen's Land, Victoria and New South Wales and 80 per cent of them lived in Victoria, 10 per cent in New South Wales, 7 per cent in South Australia. Up to the 1850s there were Scottish concentrations north and south of the Murray River, throughout the Grampians and in the Riverina. In the Grampians, in fact, the Scots accounted for over 22 per cent of the population. Due to internal migration, the proportion of Scots dropped to 61 per cent in Victoria in 1860 and to 35 per cent in 1901. In contrast, their number rose tenfold between 1861 and 1891 in Queensland. As to the English, their share was the smallest in New South Wales, i.e. 49 per cent in 1850. Van Diemen's Land had 64 per cent, according to a 1857 census, while Western Australia had 72 per cent in 1832 and South Australia, the most "English" of all colonies before 1851, had up to 85 per cent in the 1850s (Jupp 1988: 375). I have finished looking at the composition of settlers from Britain but omitted details from the beginning of the 20th century for linguistic reasons: the formative period of AusE had ended around the 1870s, according to Mitchell (2001: 2): "These years 1788-1870 were, in our view, the formative years in which an identifiable Australian speech and language was emerging." I will disagree with that (section 3.6), but the formative period does end towards the final decades of the 19th century. Contrary to 10

"The conduct of the United Irishmen has been bad" (letter of Governor King to Lord Hobart, dated 30 October 1802) and "[t]he general quiet and orderly behaviour of the Irish convicts" (King to Hobart, 1 March 1804).

2.4 A profile of selected communities

79

commonly held assumptions, there were concentrated settlements of migrants from Britain - a point that will need to be mentioned in the context of the history of English in Australia. In section 3.6 I will review the demographic, social and linguistic situation and propose a second formative wave of English. But British settlers in the 20th century could not have a formative impact and their linguistic role was the same as that of non-English migrants.

2.4.3

Migrants from continental Europe and Asia

The colonial population was, as I have emphasized throughout this section, diverse from the very beginning. Captain Cook's and Captain Bligh's crews came from many countries and spoke many languages as they sailed the Pacific. I will not pursue this theme here but allude to it in when it becomes necessary to highlight their role as carriers of the maritime pidgin English. I will continue with today's demographic composition which is so important for an account of the current texture of Australia's many voices. I will add detail on the 19th and 20th centuries where that helps the understanding of the current situation of LOTEs so as to pave the way for later chapters.

2.4.3.1.

Migrants from Europe

Germans formed the largest non-British community for most of the 19th century; they played a prominent role during the early period. Governor Arthur Phillip, for instance, was of German descent, his father having migrated to London. Phillip had worked in various capacities for the government before his appointment as first governor in New South Wales. Freiherr Augustus Theodor Alt had served the British in the Seven Years' War in Gibraltar and became the first Surveyor General of the colony. He planned Sydney Cove, the frontier settlements in Parramatta and on the Hawkesbury River, further northwest. Philip Schäffer had fought in the American War of Independence, and was superintendent. He proved unable to cope with the new environment, was rationed off in 1788 and took up wine and tobacco growing." But apart from such highly educated migrants in the service of the government, there were few such settlers to the mid1830s. Non-British settlers were small in number and did not have much of an influence on the linguistic or cultural make-up of the colonies. 11

See 200 Jahre, [etc.] (1988:7-8).

80 Chapter 2 The demography of Australia's language habitat As I said in section 2.2, the turning point came in the late 1830s when free settlement along the line of American models was permitted. Germans began to arrive around 1835 and their numbers increased fast in the 1850s. The Gold Rushes attracted thousands of adventurers. Yet, "the non-British element in early Australia should not be exaggerated, and was nowhere near as important as in the United States or Canada", accoding to Jupp (1998: 57). A mere 5.43 per cent of the population were non-British. The Germans, having fled religious prosecution in Prussia (Camm and McQuilton 1987: 150f), came in groups, as opposed to gold diggers, who came singly. The first wave of Germans in the late 1830s and 1841 went to South Australia, which started a stream of German migrants to the end of the 19th century. They formed close-knit settlements and founded townships like Hahndorf, Klemzig and Lobethal in the Barossa Valley. Victoria attracted Germans in the late 1840s. In the western districts they established Waldau (Doncaster), Neumecklenburg (Thomastown), Harkaway (near Berwick) and Germantown (Grovedale, near Geelong). Hochkirch followed in the 1850s, and the Wimmera saw German settlements from around 1870. In the 1860s Germans settled in Cooktown, Townsville, Mackay, Rockhampton and Brisbane. Immigration apart, there was a high level of internal migration to northern South Australia and from South Australia to western Victoria and New South Wales (Clyne 1985b: 8). At the beginning of the 20th century Australians of German descent clustered in the metropolitan cities. They also formed some concentrations in north South Australia, Gippsland and Wimmera (Camm and McQuilton 1987: 150f). A diverse group of migrants must have been the Jewish migrants. Italians, the second largest group of migrants, came at the end of the century, to work on farms where they replaced Kanakas from the South Pacific Islands. There was a growing number of North Europeans who were welcomed for their cultural affinity. Italian, The real impact of European migration for today's issues, however, was a matter of World War II, when, as I said in section 2.2, hundreds of thousands of Displaced Persons came at a time when Australia felt it needed more people.

2.4.3.2.

Migrants from Asia

No tourist will overlook the "Asian presence" in today's Australia. The Chinatowns in Sydney's Darling Harbour, close to Melbourne's Central Business District, or in Brisbane are popular attractions. The South-East Asian businesses in various suburbs are equally striking.

2.4 A profile of selected communities

81

Most of these sites are quite recent and to comprehend the situation better one must look at the several layers of migrations from Asia. The earliest one was the Chinese gold diggers of the 19th century, and one only needs to go to the Kimberley in the Northern Territory or to the cemetery in Broome to have glimpses of that past. 19th century Chinese migration was related to push and pull factors. The treaties China was forced to sign with European countries after the Opium Wars (1839-42; 1856-60), the failure of the peasant uprisings against imperial tax collectors, e.g. the Taiping Rebellion (1851-1864), the population growth between 1830 and 1850 and the famines and floods between 1849 and 1878 were strong push factors that made Chinese peasants emigrate (Jupp 1988: 298). On the Australian side, the call for Chinese labour was part of the debates about the best way to manage the colonies. The advocates of free enterprise like James Matra and Edward Wakefield supported the import of labour from India, China and the Pacific and were in favour of assisted passages of German migrants (Jupp 1988). It took some time for the government to approve of a small number of Chinese labourers in the settlement of Port Essington in 1839. The scheme came to nothing and was given up within a few years. The Gold Rushes finally brought large numbers of Chinese, Jupp explains: Between 1848 and 1851, 1742 Chinese arrived in the Australian colonies. According to the Shipping Gazette and Sydney General Trade List, nine ships carrying 981 Chinese immigrants arrived in Sydney in this period.... Between 1856 and 1889, 61245 Chinese were brought into the colony of New South Wales and 31850 departed.... In Victoria 40721 arrivals and 36049 departures by sea were recorded between 1852 and 1889.... According to the censuses of 1861, 1871, 1881 and 1891, the number of Chinese in the Australian colonies did not exceed 39000 in any of the years and the Chinese population was predominantly male... The largest proportion of Chinese in the Australian population was 3.3 per cent in 1861... (1988: 299)

"Between the 1840s and the 1890s more than 100,000 Chinese entered the Australian colonies", he says (1988: 298). But re-emigration assured that numbers remained small; they never exceeded 40,000 at any given period of time. While that was true of the six colonies taken together, it is also true that, in 1861, the Chinese accounted for 4.6 per cent of the population of Victoria and of 3.7 per cent of New South Wales. Queensland lagged behind with a mere 1.8 per cent. And as a result of the purpose of their presence, the Chinese played a significant role on the gold fields in New South Wales and Victoria. About 99 per cent of them were on the

82 Chapter 2 The demography of Australia's language habitat goldfields of Ararat, Ballarat and Beechworth; 91 per cent in Annidale, Bathurst, etc. Queensland, the next colony where gold was found, attracted Chinese migrants in the decade from 1880 to 1890. The Chinese accounted for 5.4 per cent of the population then but had dropped to about 1.4 per cent in Victoria and New South Wales. On the goldfields the Chinese formed communities that made them suspicious to Australians, Jupp writes: Most of the Chinese immigrants were uneducated... They were acknowledged as being peaceful, sober, methodical, honest, patient, kind and loyal to their masters, and for learning quickly and imitating cleverly. However, lacking knowledge of the English language and being unfamiliar with Western customs and British law, they were unable to mix with European people and became an isolated group within Australian society. In addition, ... immigrants brought the habits of gambling and opium smoking from China. It was inevitable that the conduct of some would offend AngloAustralian society or violate the laws of the Australian colonies. (1988: 300)

Animosities erupted in Victoria in 1857 and in New South Wales in 1860 when residence and licence fees were introduced so as to restrict mobility and discourage further immigration. When the Chinese opened businesses, local trades-people saw them as unwelcome competitors and formed anti-Chinese clubs. The Immigration Restriction Act of 1901 became the hallmark of the White Australia policy and stopped further immigration. But what it effectively stopped was the system of rotating immigration and emigration. When gold fields became unprofitable by the late 1880s, some 36,000 Chinese left and were no longer replaced by new immigrants. Many Chinese "dispersed and found work where they could farm work, shearing, cooking, market-gardening, fruit-picking, tobaccogrowing and cabinet-making", says Jupp (1988: 304); some went into forest-clearing or rice-sowing, others worked in the construction of the railway line from Darwin to Pine Creek. "The general trend was for Chinese to leave rural and provincial areas and to concentrate in and around Sydney, Melbourne, Cairns and Perth", says Jupp (1988: 305). He adds that [M]any Chinese went into import-export businesses combining the fruit trade (mostly bananas) with the grocery and greengrocery trades, like Wing Sang, Wing On and Wing Tiy in Sydney and William Wing Young (Ch'en Bros) in Melbourne. This new generation was educated and had business acumen. They were also wise enough to cultivate the English language. Their companies were soundly established and soon expanded... The Chinese survived mainly by not competing with Anglo-Australian interests. (1988: 306)

2.4 A profile of selected communities 83 Some Chinese moved up the social ladder and established cultural and economic infra-structures that reflected a level of acceptance of Australian values. Social clubs catered for the aged and provided support for disaster relief action in China. Tongs or affiliations that were tied to the region where their members came from were gradually superseded by pan-Chinese societies. Thus, the Chinese National Alliance of Melbourne was set up in 1904, the Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry followed in 1912 in Melbourne, the World Chinese Masonic Society, and the alignment with the Guomindang, the ruling party in China, in the 1920s. Such institutions became rallying points. But Chinese language schools did not prosper and language thus does not seem to have been a symbol of identity (Jupp 1988: 307). Things became easier still during World War II when Japan was seen as a common enemy. Anti-Chinese racism ebbed off. But that so-called 'golden age' of acceptance was short-lived as Arthur Calwell, immigration minister, decided to repatriate war émigrés and well-established Australian Chinese at the end of the war. Only towards the end of the White Australia policy were the Chinese permitted to join unions and to become eligible for naturalisation (Jupp 1988: 306). The second wave of migration began after discriminatory immigration policies were lifted. And that signalled a significant widening of the origin of Chinese migrants. In the 19th century the largest number of migrants were Cantonese speakers from the southern provinces of Guangdong (Kwantung) and Fujian (Fukien) and, a little later, from Macao and Hong Kong. 20 th century migrants came from a wider range of provinces; others came from Taiwan, Hong Kong, Malaysia, Singapore, Vietnam, Kampuchea and Laos. They are quite heterogeneous, says Jupp and represent a broad range of dialect groups of southern China, although many from Vietnam are from Cantonese-dominated Cholon. Others have come from the Hokkien/Teochiu quarters in Saigon City, where they were members of the wealthy merchant class. A large number of those from Phnom Penh are Teochiu Chinese. Likewise, many Malaysian and Singaporean Chinese are Hokkien/Teochiu speakers, although members of the Hakka and Cantonese groups are included. Many Chinese from Papua New Guinea are of Hakka origin, while those coming from north and northwest China speak Mandarin: Hokkien predominates in the group of Chinese from Taiwan. The Hong Kong Chinese appear to be the only ones to share a linguistic background with the Cantonese old-timers. (1988: 318)

The linguistic consequences will be dealt with in Leitner (2004b). Here it suffices to mention some demographic details. According to the 1996

84 Chapter 2 The demography of Australia's language habitat Census, nearly 2 % of the Australian population were of Chinese origin. It is worth quoting Jupp on differences in Chinese migrants today: The Chinese impact on Australia is quite different from that during the gold rushes... Chinese now tend to move in families, whereas in the past immigrants were overwhelmingly male... While a prosperous Chinese business community did eventually grow in Sydney and Melbourne, it was small, and compared with settlers from Hong Kong and Taiwan in recent years, its members were of moderate wealth. There are few similarities between the Chinese now settled in Australia and those who arrived in the previous century. (1998: 127)

As to age-grading, the Chinese are a young community. According to 1991 data, 62.9 per cent were in the age bracket of 15-34, only 4.9 per cent were between 55 and 64 years old. Many are highly educated, a third have formal qualifications and 53 per cent are in employment. To come to the Vietnamese, a small number came in 1920, arriving accidentally as a part of a larger group of indentured labourers who were to be shipped to New Caledonia. But their ship was blown off course and landed in Townsville. A small number came after World War II as a result of the Colombo Plan's (1950) intention to aid the development of Asia. Students arrived in the mid-1950s, but their number remained below 500 even 25 years later. However, the Communist take-over in Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam triggered a large influx of refugees: In the immediate post Viet Nam War period, arrivals of Viet Nam-born persons ... increased quickly, from a modest 539 in 1975-76 to a peak of 12,915 in 1979-80.... The second phase occurred in the period of 1976-78, and comprised a gradually increasing flow of refugees from camps outside Viet Nam. The third phase, in 1978, was triggered by the closure of many private businesses, especially Chinese, by the Vietnamese government. (DIMA 2002b)

Australia accepted orphans and boat people from Viet Nam in line with a new immigration policy which led to an increase in the number of refugees and economic migrants from some 2,400 in 1976 to over 170,000 in 2001. As for regional distribution, most Vietnamese settled in either New South Wales (= 40.2 per cent) or Victoria (= 36.6 per cent), according to the 1996 Census. Queensland, South and Western Australia follow; there are only small numbers in Tasmania, the ACT and the Northern Territory. A comparison of age-brackets in the 1991 and 1996 Census shows that the population is still young - over 53 percent are below 35 years, but there are

2.5 Conclusion 85 signs of ageing in that this group has dropped by over 12 per cent from 1991. There is also a sizeable second generation of Vietnamese-born Australians, according to Birrell et al. (2002: 11). Worth adding is that Vietnamese-born may be ethnic Chinese and that the Vietnamese are like most Asian migrants today in settling in urban areas and to form ethnic concentrations more than other communities. There are some LGSs, such as Fairfield in Sydney where they make up more than 16 per cent of the population (Viviani 1997; Clyne and Kipp 1998).

2.5

Conclusion

At the beginning of this chapter I listed a number of themes on the demography of Australia that are relevant to an understanding of Australia's language habitat, the expansion and development of English and the role of all other languages. The study of the dynamics of the population, changes in the ethnic composition, the ratio of first and later (migrant) generations, age structure and settlement patterns as well as the loss of ethnic affiliations through mixing all bear upon the development of languages. The more homogeneous a population becomes demographically, the more likely it is that there is a shift and, as a result, demographic expansion of AusE - the national language. But there are other factors that may, but need not, slow down that expansion. In this context I should refer once more to the extent of the Asianization that constrasts sharply with the earlier European British and component and which creates pockets of language maintenance that explicitly slow down that expansion of English. The extent of migration from Asia has been slowing down, though, and by 2003, large numbers of refugees - within the Humanitarian Program - have come from Iraq, the Middle East and Central Africa. That change will alter the demographic and linguistic make-up of the population but its consequences on Australia's languages remain to be seen. The quantifiable census data that have been considered here are not the only ones to study diversity. And as just indicated there are other data, not so easily measurable, which are equally relevant and, perhaps, explain better the behavioural patterns of individuals and groups in the way they use languages, the choices they make in their daily lives. Attitudes, the value attached to a language, the types of interactions and participants are the ones that will be explored in Leitner (2004b). There is one factor that creates a climate of opinion on pluralism that may expand or restrict the 'public space1 for languages. The self-perception of Australia, e.g., as white,

86 Chapter 2 The demography of Australia's language habitat

as Anglophone, as multicultural, or merely as diverse, has been crucial to the kind of linguistic pluralism that was tolerated or promoted in the past and present. Such perceptions reflect the reality of the country on the one hand and shape the responses to diversity on the other. The significance of this political and socio-psychological factor has been especially visible when languages and cultures of migrant communities were mainstreamed and made accessible outside the communities concerned. As I said earlier, the demography of Australia is relevant to all languages. A knowledge of the dynamics inside the Anglo-Celtic segment of the population is particularly important to comprehend the history of English in Australia, the rise of AusE and mAusE and of ethnic varieties (sections 3.1-2 and 3.6). The nature and extent of contact and interaction with speakers of indigenous and non-English migrant languages bear upon particular local features of mAusE (sections 3.3-4). And, the growth of and participation in external relations, especially with the USA, that have been mentioned in this chapter reflect the global dimensions that mAusE has been, and is, subjected to (sections 3.3 and 3.7). The early stages of the diversity of the population reflect the assimilative power of English and the fact that thousands of non-English-speaking migrants have made English in its Australian forms their own (section 3.7 and Leitner 2004b). As I turn to Australian English - the mainstream, the national language today - I will keep in mind the guiding questions from Chapter One: What happens on the linguistic side in an on-going contact situation? What and how much of that is typical of Australia? The emergence of a local variety and its gradual rise to the status of national language, the language that symbolically represents and unifies the society and its diverse segments is, naturally, at the centre of the sections that follow.

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language "The typical mainstream Australian", says Jupp, "is still thought of as a speaker who has an accent and a vocabulary that are distinctive and nationwide, and whose ancestors came from Britain and Ireland three or more generations ago" (1988: 62). In view of the demographic diversity, this is a surprising statement today, but there was a good deal of truth in it in the past as the last chapter has made clear. It is a surprising statement for another reason. Writing in the 1950s, Pringle already felt that the similarities between Britain and Australia were only superficial and that "[b]eneath the surface, Australia is very different from England and that Australians think, feel and react quite differently from Englishmen" (1958: 12). Ward says that the 'typical Australian' is a practical man, rough and ready in his manners and quick ίο decry any appearance of affectation in others. He is a great improviser, ever willing 'to have a go' at anything, but willing to be content with a task done in a way that is 'near enough'. (1965: 2) This image, he believed, originated in the context of the 'bushman's' life, not with that of the 'townspeople', and is a characteristic of Australia's social development, which could not have arisen much before the 1880s. At that time, the word Australian referred to those of Anglo-Celtic descent and excluded those of European, Asian or indigenous descent. They were called by other names: Reff ο, if they were refugees, blacks, Aborigines or, derogatively, Indians and later Abos, if indigenous. The word Aborigine (and Aboriginal) did not always have this reference. During the mid-19th century it could contrast the native-born with the British-bom and excluded Aborigines and non-British migrants. Even Abo could refer to white people. The marginalization of indigenous people was to be expected, given the hostile attitudes towards them. But even European migrants, who had often severed their ties with their home countries and adopted British values came under pressure, as Vondra explains with reference to German migrants: "Within a few years of their arrival many of them took up British nationality" (1981: 56). British nationality was, of course, the only option, but underneath it they felt Australian, Clyne (1985b) showed in his study of 19th century Melbourne. They had brought to Australia a sediment of

88

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

cultural diversity that reshaped the mainstream as their cultures gradually faded into the background and disappeared. One had to be as acute an observer as the German-Australian historian Harmstorf to recognize the subtle differences in humour between the Germans and the Scots (Vondra 1981: 48ff). The former Prime Minister Paul Keating's Irishness is a similar case. Underneath his aggressive Australianness is the Irish element, which came up in his eloquence and abrasive wit. What the early diversity owed to non-English-speaking migrants is hard to identify now that the mainstream has absorbed those who have become a part of it. What, then, has happened on the language side? How much of it is Australian in that? Two things are obvious. The one is that an Anglo-Celtic view is too limited, English is the language of a diverse society. The other is that a particular Australian form of English has become the national language and, hence, this chapter carries that subtitle. mAusE is the language of the mainstream society and that of those who have made it theirs - for all purposes or for the restricted, public domains, while they use other varieties of English or other languages altogether elsewhere. As to the other varieties of AusE - pidgins, creóles, AborE, Norfolk, Cape Barren English, English as a lingua franca - they are also a part of the overall picture of the Australianness of English but are restricted to segments of the society - Aboriginal Australians, migrant NES Australians, or mixed communities, as is the case of Norfolk and Cape Barren. Both will be mentioned in Chapter Three, section 7. This chapter raises questions like these: (1) How have attitudes to English developed over the past 200 years? Is it possible to identify periods of change? (2) What are the properties of current mAusE in phonology, lexis, grammar, pragmatics and discourse? (3) What has been the impact of indigenous, migrant languages other than English and of other varieties of English? (4) mAusE stratifies along social parameters like gender, class, and education. What are the linguistic correlates? (5) When did mAusE emerge as a norm-setting, intra-national epicentre? What were the major standardizing agencies? (6) Has mAusE become a factor in Australia's geo-political region and what is its place in the context of pericentric English worldwide? Before embarking on these questions, a few comments on the structure of this chapter are called for. One concerns the underlying approach.

Chapter 3 Australian English: the national language

89

Diagram 1-2 in Chapter One suggested that mAusE is best described from a comparative and diachronic angle, a common approach to varieties generally. mAusE would be compared with BrE, its parent, to bring out characteristics in phonology, lexis, grammar, and pragmatics. But a derivative approach runs against two principles, viz. that a language must be described from within and that one should isolate temporal slices, so to speak, to unfold its development. As it is necessary to do justice to mAusE, a self-contained description is clearly called for. But the diachronysynchrony distinction has given way to a view that sees variation and change as fundamental principles in any language and rejects the possibility even of synchronic slices. As I sympathize with that position, my starting point will always be what mAusE is like today. I will include diachronic information when that seems helpful to an understanding of where the language has come from and how it has come to be what it is. Secondly, attitudes to language are both reflections of social change and a motivation to act. Section 3.1 will look at them as reflections of the wider social climate and argue that there have been several distinct periods in the way English in Australia was perceived. Attitudes as motifs for action (question 5) will be delayed to the discussion of the standardization of mAusE in section 3.5. Between sections 3.1 and 3.5-6 comes the survey of its texture (questions 2-4) that breaks up the nature of mAusE into its core, looked at from the angle of its Anglo-Celtic heritage (section 3.2), and contact with indigenous and with migrant languages and varieties of English (sections 3.3-4). Section 3.5 will deal with the standardization of English, its origins and history and return to some of the areas discussed earlier. Having outlined what mAusE is, and having dealt with its making, the final section will take a new look at its history and argue that it is untrue to maintain it emerged as a local product out of the mingling of various inputs between the 1830s and 1850s. That would be a simplistic reading of diagram 1-2. I will argue for at least two formative periods and for a more profound and on-going kind of contact with the mother country. This is the place to remind readers that this English has continuously expanded its demographic base - as indigenous Australians and migrant Australians of many backgrounds have embraced it as their language and passed it on to their offsprings, willingly or under pressure. For that reason it is called mainstream AusE, in contrast to the others varieties referred to in diagram 1-2; they are sectional. Saying that creates a problem: Some, like Norfolk and Cape Barren English, are not restricted to identifiable communities and have a mixed speakership. Today they are used by a regionally restricted community, are heavily mixed and increasingly drawn

90

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

into the sphere of influence of mAusE. T o many they appear to be dialects of a sort of mAusE. Leitner (2004b) turns to them from their angle of their origin as migrant and indigenous contact languages.

3.1

Attitudes to English: From colonial cringe to epicentre

Language attitudes are a powerful factor in judging individuals, groups, nations even. Attitudes express beliefs about varieties of a language or a whole language. In Britain, for instance, dialects are rank ordered in terms of attitudinal evaluations, Honey argues: The overwhelming majority ... rated RP [Received Pronunciation, the prestige accent in England; GL] as the most favoured accent on such criteria as communicative effectiveness, social status, and above all pleasantness of sound... All other British accents have less prestige than RP, but they are not equal in their relative inferiority to it.... Next after RP are the most educated varieties of Scottish English accent, and also near the top are the corresponding educated accents of Wales and Ireland. After that there is a broad cluster of English provincial accents such as 'northern' English (...) and the West Country... With depressing regularity, four accents compete for bottom place: London (Cockney), Liverpool (...), Glaswegian, and the West Midlands accents especially associated with Birmingham. (1989: 58f)

Cut off of the normal, smooth development at home, the English language underwent massive, abrupt change in countries to which it was transplanted as its speakers engaged in uncommon levels of mixing. That is one reason why these Englishes have been judged so negatively by those at home and in the new environment. Early AmE is a case in point. Swift, for instance, believed that "[F]rom the Civil War to this present Time, I am apt to doubt whether the Corruptions in our Language have not at least equalled the Refinements of it; and these Corruptions very few of the best Authors in our Age have wholly escaped. During the Usurpation, such an Infusion of Enthusiastic Jargon prevailed in every Writing, as was not shook off in many Years after. To this succeeded that Licentiousness which entered with the Restoration, and from infecting our Religion and Morals, fell to corrupt our Language" (fr. McCrum, Cran, and MacNeil 1986: 131). This section retraces the path from colonial cringe to epi-centricity that is embedded in diagram 1-1. The linguistic changes that have taken place alongside with changes in perception are addressed in section 3.2.

3.1 Attitudes to English: From colonial cringe to epicentre

3.1.1

91

Dimensions of attitudes to language

People have always expressed views about ways of speaking. Socio- and psycholinguists, psychologists and others have taken them as windows onto the way groups cohere or diverge linguistically. Language planners and educationists use such data to gauge the extent of language problems. As observational data may not exist, historians of language often have nothing but them as secondary evidence. But the term attitude raises terminological problems since it contrasts with opinion, ideology or belief. Van Dijk holds that "opinions and ideologies involve beliefs or mental representations" (1998: 21) which are "not personal, but social, institutional or political"

(his italics; 1998: 22) and are best seen from a sociocognitive angle. Opinions, he says, are evaluative beliefs and contrast with categorizations: The same is true for categorizations, for example when someone is believed to be a thief or a terrorist. These may be factual beliefs. If socially accepted, general criteria can be specified for such a categorization... On the other hand, if the factual criteria are less relevant, and the concept is used only or primarily to make a value judgement (...), then we are dealing with an opinion. Obviously, as is the case for all values and judgements, these may vary culturally and socially. And as soon as groups and conflicting group interests are involved, such opinions will be said to be ideological. (1998: 29)

Opinions, then, are lower-order, ideologies higher-order beliefs. In his analysis of language policies, Ager (2001) defines attitudes as consisting of three compoments and refers to although emotion is central and for some the only element of importance: knowledge about the object or person, an emotion such as liking or hatred, and a tendency toward action of some sort in relation to the object or person, (my emphasis; 2001: 9)

Attitudes "can be simply a state of mind"; they are a surface-layer and generally easier to uncover than beliefs and values, the third layer (Ager 2001: 125). Section 3.5 will focus on their role as ideologies. Here I look at them as evaluative beliefs and ask what they express and what they are responses to. According to Cargile et al., research has studied the "process whereby hearers react to both linguistic and paralinguistic variation in messages" and "the different kinds of evaluative profiles that arise from such language variation in different social contexts and cultures" (1994: 211). Put differently, research studies "people's processing of, and dispositions towards, various situated language and communicative

92

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

behaviours and the subsequent treatment extended to the users of such forms" (1994: 211). Attitudes may be reactions to stimuli such as a variety of a language (or a language) as such, a particular level of language, such as pronunciation or lexis, particular features, such as the articulation of some vowel, the meaning of a word, the origin of a language or variety of a language in terms of its social standing or function, and the way groups of speakers, such as women, minority groups, public speakers, use language.12 3.1.2

Views from without on the English in Australia

There is a folkloristic tradition of negative attitudes towards mAusE which meets a ready market, as the quotation from the Los Angeles Times in the preface has shown. Quirk and Stein claimed as late as 1990 that public figures were reluctant to use mAusE: the other native varieties, whether regional (...) or national (Australian English...), are not fully institutionalized.... in most of these native varieties a sense of institutionalized pronunciation exists, so as to make it beyond question that newsreaders and presenters speak with a clearly identifiable Australian ... voice.... But the fact remains that in general the language of the media and officialdom follows the institutionalized form of British English.... (1990:51)

Their view was a singular one that would have been rejected by most experts even then. Australians had no doubt of the appropriacy of their English in national and international contexts. And even if the ABC was and still is criticized for its Englishness, that allegation is more metaphorical than factual, less obviously about the language than the approach to communication. But rejection was not the only response from without. Arnold Zweig, a German writer referred to the ubiquity of English in all its manifestations in the Palestine after the World War II without overt comment. The Australian accent was one of many and was legitimate: "No-one noticed that the two gentlemen spoke German to each other, while all imaginable forms of the English worldwide could be heard around them - coming from Indian, Scottish and South African lips, in London's Cockney, which predominates in Australia, and in the Oxford or Cambridge variety of educated King's English" (fr. Leitner 1990: 191).

12

A range of approaches have been used by, e.g., Bradley and Bradley (2000), Winter (1992), Smolicz (1999) and Secombe and Zajda (1999).

3.1 Attitudes to English: From colonial cringe to epicentre

93

An outside view can often be more neutral and objective. The lexis of mAusE attracted considerable attention in America at the end of the 19th century when Webster's International Dictionary carried a supplement of Australian expressions in its 1900 edition, though there may not have been many words and expressions, as Emily Brewster from Merriam-Webster's Editorial Department tells me: In 1900, a 25,000 word Supplement was added to Webster's International Dictionary. It included words not found in the 1890 edition for one reason or another, whether because of new technologies or an increasing knowledge of dialects. Among the entries of this supplement is a number of words attributed to the English in Australasia. I don't know how many such words are included in the supplement: I looked through it and did not see very many, (personal communication, 15 January 2003)

There was, incidentally, Joshua Lake's (1898) glossary entitled A Dictionary of Australasian Words, which he, an academic at St. John's College, Cambridge (UK), compiled under the supervision of G.L. Kittredge from Harvard University. It was used for the supplement of Webster's 1900-edition. The supplement was fully incorporated into the main dictionary in 1910. As the titles of these works indicate, the interest in Australian words was due to the interest in Australasia, which itself was presumably due to the general interest in English dialects outside England and America. Thus, Australian words were collected within the Oxford tradition of lexicography in E.E. Morris's (1896) dictionary, which highlighted Australia's contribution to the lexis of fauna and flora of English and a few general words. Morris became a consultant and source for the Oxford English Dictionary's later volumes. AusE was thus not unknown at the turn to the 20th century and even met with surprisingly modern judgements across the Pacific. Greenough and Kittredge (1902), for instance, said this on its standing in the Anglophone world: The slang of the United States differs in many particulars from that of Great Britain, and India and Australia shows a multitude of peculiar coinages that differ from both. Yet the lively intercourse of trade and travel, the newspapers, the theatrical 'tour', and the 'dialect sketch' have kept the different English-speaking peoples tolerably familiar with one another's latest coinages. For universal hospitality is the guiding principle of slang. (1902: 76)

They placed AusE well inside the spectrum of standard varieties:

94

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language The language which all educated users of English speak and write is in one sense an artificial tongue. It is what is called a 'literary language' as distinguished from the unstudied speech of people whose mother tongue comes to them without the influence of literature or the schools. This 'literary language' is not confined to cultivated speakers. It is the common property of all but the absolutely illiterate, the regular medium of communication throughout the English-speaking world. Different persons speak and write this standard English with different degrees of correctness and elegance, and there are local and national varieties in idiom and pronunciation which distinguish the English of England from that of America or of Australia. But such differences bear no proportion to the substantial uniformity of English speech. (1902: 81)

AusE was a member of the family of 'Englishes', but it took a long time for such 'liberal' attitudes to be heard within, though Emily Brewster informs me that the 1908 Australasian edition of Webster's International Dictionary contained testimonies on its adequacy for educational purposes in Australia and, by implication, of Australian words and expressions.

3.1.3

Views from within and from the Mother Country

On the 'inside story' there is many serious and popular studies. Some of them ask when differences between the English in Australia and in Britain were first commented upon and which features were foregrounded (Blair 1977). Mitchell and Delbridge (1965b) asked if attitudes reflect linguistic characteristics of mAusE. Eltis (1989) studied the role of attitudes in the evaluation of students by teachers, a theme that Ball, Gallois, and Callan (1989) extended to ethnically marked varieties. Bradley and Bradley (2000) looked at the role of attitudes as signals of linguistic identity. Delbridge (1998) identified several periods in the history of attitudes that correspond to the rise of a national Australian identity: (1) 'English in Australia'Phase: English in Australia was primarily seen as a deviation from BrE; attitudes tended to be negative, positive ones were expressed occasionally and feature the bush metaphors (2) 'AusE awareness' Phase: The interest and pride in Australia's English increased, especially towards Federation (3) 'mainstream AusE' Phase I:

3.1 Attitudes to English: From colonial cringe to epicentre

95

An ambivalent perception of English in Australia made itself felt during the late 1930s that recognized social stratification and an acceptable accent (4) 'mainstream AusE' Phase II: Full acceptance of linguistic independence and identity, starting with accent in the 1970s and gradually covering the whole language These four periods have been changes slightly in light of the needs of a survey of all of Australia's many voices. I remain deliberately vague about the beginning of each phase but it is reasonably safe to say that unmitigated expressions of what the names of the period and the descriptions imply will not be found much before the rough dates given. As for their end, 'new" attitudes seem to have superseded 'old' ones, which then faded into the background but could be re-activated at some appropriate period of time. The ambivalent perception of mAusE, for instance, points to opposing views that are still being entertained and mirror a social attitude uncertain of itself. It would be fair to say that few of them can still be heard. The first period is inseparably linked with Britain, though a sense of Australianness and a mental opposition to the Poms, to put it bluntly, developed when the convict system was superseded by free settlement in the 1820s. Grose's and Vaux' glossaries are a rich source of data, but especially important are the travel books that were written for prospective settlers, as Blair (1975) has shown. Questions of whether life in the colonies was very different from 'home' or whether it was still like in Britain were important. People wanted to know before they embarked on a voyage they were unlikely to make back. James Dixon, a commander on the Skelton, for instance, said that "[t]he children born in those colonies, and now grown up, speak a better language, more harmonious, than is generally the case in most parts of England. The amalgamation of such various dialects assembled together, seems to improve the mode of articulating the words" (fr. Blair 1975: 18f) Such judgements were made at a time when there was no prestige accent and no standard dialect with the kind of prestige and power they had after the introduction of compulsory education in 1870 in Great Britain. Similar criticisms were made of regional dialects (Görlach 1999). Dixon's reference to dialect mixing and his comments on the speech of children thus reflect a deeper-lying belief that extreme features would disappear through mixing. And the growth of the population from inside Australia in the 1830s raised the role of children. And, one might add, that many convicts were in their 20s and still at a

96

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

malleable age (Chapter Two). The willingness to adapt to peer styles must have been higher, mixing easier. Dixon's view was plausible if it is set in this demographic context. He did not comment on which dialects mixed, a gap that was filled by other observers. Peter Cunningham, a well educated Scot with literary ambitions, spent two years in New South Wales. An acute middle-class observer, he warned male members of his rank with dependent families to migrate (Jupp 1988: 43). He was less inclined to pass favourable judgment on the language in the late 1820s: [t]he London mode of pronunciation has been duly engrafted on the colloquial dialect of our currency youths, and even the better sort of them are apt to meet your observation of 'a fine day', with their improving responses of 'Wery fine indeed!' (fr. Blair 1975: 19f)

His impressions reflect the changing tides of the time. The Industrial Revolution was coming into full swing, thousands of people were leaving their villages and moved into the towns and cities. A Scot, he shared the bias against the Sassenachs south of the border, a bias that was accompanied by incongruent claims about the poor quality of the accent. Louisa A. Meredith, a well-educated, middle-class woman with an interest in the arts, found that "a very large proportion of both male and female snuffle dreadfully" - a typical middle class view - and observed in her book (1844) that "just the same nasal twang as many Americans have. In some cases English parents have come out here with English-born children; these all speak clearly and well, and continue to do so, whilst those bom after the parents arrive in the colony have the detestable snuffle" (fr. Blair 1975: 21) An interesting observation on the absence of accommodation! Nasalization is not even a dominant feature of broad mAusE today and was not noticed in 19th century Cockney. Meredith did not mention mixing. In fact, she found that dialects remained unmixed if the children came to the colony at a mature age. Such judgements coincided with the end of the first 'formative' period of the accent (section 3.6), which is commonly dated between the 1830s and 40s and at a time when the shift to free settlement as a source of population growth was under way. Mossmann (1852) noted at the same time that "[t]he Cockney drawl of the hucksters, selling fish and fruit, sounds so refreshing on the ear - so thoroughly English - that we stop in amazement.... To the immigrant from the United Kingdom this is not a foreign land!" (fr. Blair 1975: 22) The London 'connection' and the condemnation of London English became the most pervasive and lasting images that have shaped the research agenda Phase III. The views

3.1 Attitudes to English: From colonial cringe to epicentre

97

expressed from the latter part of the 19th century highlight the climate of opinion towards Federation. Thus, Chief Justice Madden said in 1882 that the "[t]he colonial twang was never at the beginning anything better than the twang of Cockney vulgarity" (fr. Wannan, 1982: 116). Writing around 1887, McBurney, an acute observer of language, found a "tendency ... to a Cockney pronunciation" (fr. Mitchell and Delbridge 1965b: 25f). This allegation referred to an undesirable feature but contrasts with his positive remarks on the colonial speech in a New Zealand newspaper: I think it may be admitted that the pronunciation of the colonies as a whole, is purer than can be found in any given district at Home. (The Press (Christchurch), 5 October 1887; fir. Gordon 1998: 86)

Taylor's (2003) sample of reports from the criminal court in Sydney shows how much these allegations were based on the truth - and yet, one may wonder if that represented the speech of the Australian currency, rather than that of the new chum. It was a period of great diversity that was brought about by the co-existence of the early AusE idiom and the accents and dialects brought in by new immigrants (cf. section 3.6.1). Such allegations were a 'given', 'taken-for-granted' negative assessment that has remained deeply engrained in the public mind and turned into an ideology. A mere allusion to them was enough. To quote Baker: It is interesting to note that between the time when gold was discovered in Australia in commercial quantities and the late 1880s practically nothing, apart from trivial comments, was written about Australian methods of speech. Those thirty-five years or so had seen the population grow from 500,000 to some 3,000,000, they had seen the establishment of city life and home life, the growth of families that were not only Australians but the sons and daughters of Australians, and, ..., the firm establishment of an indigenous idiom.... There was little time for reflection. The end of the 1880s and the 1890s brought the first period of soulsearching in Australia. (1966: 433)

Soul-searching there was and Australia was no longer the country where one happened to be born by the whims of fate. One identified with it, gave up old affiliations of class, religion, gave priority to one's new home and found oneself accepted, as these quotations from public figures indicate: True Australians; not merely English recently relocated, but a peculiar type of humanity. (D.M. Gane, 1886; fr. Jupp 1988: 55)

98

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language By the term Australian, we mean not those who have been merely born in Australia. All white men who come to these shores - with a clean record and who leave behind them the memory of class distinctions and the religious differences of the old world; all men who place happiness, the prosperity, the advancement of their adopted country before the interests of Imperialism, are Australians. (Editorial in The Bulletin, 2 July 1887; fr. Jupp 1988: 55)

One notes a rhetoric not totally unlike that in the USA around 1786. The significance of Federation and its implications - the creation of a national level of government, a federal-state hierarchy, a shift of the cultural orientation away from Britain, the slow emergence of a nation and of a set of Australian values - cannot be underestimated (Delbridge 1998; Leitner 2003b). Their linguistic implications can be seen as quite plausible, natural even, in light of the findings of censuses, such as the Victorian one in 1881, which revealed that 60 per cent of the population were born in Australia. Socio-political and demographic factors concurred and re-enforced the awareness that English had acquired legitimate Australian features. But the more positive uptake of the English in Australia was, it seems, also related to the general interest in the Australasian dialect of English (cf. section 3.1.2). Thus, the 1908 Australian edition of Webster's International Dictionary quotes Frank Tate, director of Education in Victoria, as saying "I have no hesitation in recommending Victoria teachers to use this excellent work", which implied a vague positive attitude to Australian words in Australia. None of that ruled out the persistence of negative views and the hope for better speech-ways. Hal Porter, a Melbourne writer born in 1911, condemned the Australian accent: [t]he accent is defiantly preserved. Wealth cannot taint it nor education undo it.... It is an ineradicable and perverse accent, signal at once of the possible strengths and certified weaknesses of the Australian character, (fr. Bradley and Bradley 2001: 271)

He saw himself as an 'Australian', not an Osstralian'. And Ruby Board asked as late as 1926 if inevitably each country will develop its own distinctive variation of speech, is it necessary to be proud of the fact that ours is ugly... Surely a true patriotism will try to guide that development so that the national speech may be euphonious and worthy of pride. (Australian English Association, Leaflet 4, ρ 5,)

3.1 Attitudes to English: From colonial cringe to epicentre

99

Such soul-searching marks the beginning of Phase II, when the Australianness of the idiom was the cause of pride. AusE was expanding its functions, as creative writers realized that the depiction of Australia's realities and the characters they wished to bring to life required an Australian voice. Many such literary works were written from the late 19th century onwards, Taylor explains: [i]t is only towards the end of the 19th century that we begin to get samples of what explicitly purports to be genuine Australian speech, especially with the beginning in 1880 of the publication of the nationalist magazine The Bulletin, where the variety is used in poems, cartoons and the dialogue of short stories and where there is explicit discussion of the features of the variety, especially lexical features. This is clearly a reflection of the developing sense of an Australian as distinct from an English identity and a pride in things Australian... (1997: 259) He adds that it is only after Federation ... that we actually get longish works written in what purports to be working class Australian English used as a vehicle for literature in its own right. The best known of these works is doubtless C.J. Dennis's The Songs of a Sentimental Bloke, a poem of some 100 pages written entirely - narrative and dialogue - in what is assumed to be Melbourne lower class English. (1997: 259) Fiction projected a realist picture of the people and the adequate portrayal of their idiom was now a bare necessity. Not everyone was successful, as Taylor found in his study of Louis Stone's Jonah: Yet the argument in the present paper suggests strongly that the language of Louis Stone's Jonah, while in general a reasonable reflection of the innercity working class speech of Sidney around 1900, is at many points pretty widely astray as an accurate representation of it. (1997: 269) Born in England in 1871, Stone came to Australia when he was thirteen. He learnt the idiom well, but did not master all subtleties and the novel suffers from imprécisions. The really interesting point though is that an English-born writer now felt obliged to use mAusE and follow its conventions. The 19th century practice of using regional BrE dialects for Australian settings was coming to an end. The impact was seen in dialect literature, whose volume increased by the emergence of a large reading public, as the historian Manning Clark explains:

100

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

The increase in the proportion of the native-born provided a reading public for a national literature, in which the writers could illuminate the experience of the Australian and provide that cheek, wit, and confidence to bolster the morale of people whose talents, way of life, and achievements were belittled as 'colonial'. (1986: 145). There is another noteworthy aspect, viz. Stone's novel was set in the city while most earlier fiction and poetry was set in the bush. The urban setting required non-standard, urban speech, the bush required the bush lingo and the use of Aboriginal and pidgin words in anglicized forms. An early instance of this development is a speech by King John, an Aborigine, who complained about the treatment of his people by the police in 1844. After this summary manner of settling old disputes, whether right or wrong, the cry was 'What for policeman do this? When white fellow fight in Adelaide, black fellow say nothing. When black fellow fight, policeman come and break spears, break shields, break all: no good. What for you no stop in England?' (24 April 1844; fr. Foster and Mühlhäusler 1996: 5) "The greater distance from the Standard Language," add Foster and Mühlhäusler, "is used as a literary device for portraying cultural distance" (1996: 5). It was not until the 1880s that this became a dominant feature: It was in the 1880s, in a period when Australian society was beginning to search for its own 'voice' that pidgin became the standard register of the Aboriginal voice. A notable, but hitherto little commented upon feature of the nationalist writings of the late colonial period was the extent to which Aboriginality was appropriated as a marker of Australian identity. The increasingly common use of pidgin by journalists and authors was a noticeable aspect of this appropriation. In reminiscences, novels, poetry, and the feature columns of newspapers, Aboriginal pidgin was often used in a way that demonstrated the author's familiarity with the bush and its people. In the novels of Henry Driscoll (1905, 1908), for instance, 'bushmen' characters use words and phrases such as 'lubra', 'gin', 'picaninny', 'picaninny sunrise', 'yarraman' or 'nanto' for horse and 'myall' for wild with the same familiarity as 'mate', 'swag', 'bluey' and 'flaming' so and so's. (1996: 6f) Such conventions signalled changes in attitudes and shifts in literary practice. Yet, negative views continued unabated and the real turning point are Baker's The Australian Language (1945) and Mitchell's The Pronunciation of English in Australia (1946). Both agreed that mAusE was

3.1 Attitudes to English: From colonial cringe to epicentre

101

legitimately different from its parent, BrE, and needed to be described and judged from within, not without, and both mark the start of a split in the perception of mAusE, whose effects are still visible. They helped a commercial market to emerge for down-market and serious descriptions. Baker promoted the popular, colloquial, informal, or slang segment, something close to the working class lingo (for a modern popular version see Seal 1999). Mitchell's analyses fed into education, radio training (Craig and Delbridge 1984), language policy and have had a pervasive influence generally as it promised a way out of the cultural cringe attitude. The public absorbed a basic knowledge of the analysis of English in Australia and of mAusE. The transition to the fourth phase was thus as gradual as that to the preceding ones. While Baker's The Australian Language (1945) may not be the first sign of the new era, the search for identity began with a search for mates elsewhere who had already found it. Those mates were, of course, the Americans and it is worth quoting a few passages from his book: Much of our awe about American speech habits today is due to the fact, a little over a century ago, the Americans discovered they had a language of their own. Or, rather, the English discovered it and their feeling of annoyance was just about the same as if they had someone dynamiting the Bloody Tower. (1945: 3) It is scarcely necessary to emphasize that the history of this country is in many ways similar to that of the United States. The original white inhabitants were English-speaking and many of them had little love for the England they had left behind. (1945: 4) If, therefore, there are these similarities between Australia and America, would we be entitled to expect our colloquial speech habits to be similar also? The answer is a partial affirmative.... (1945: 5)

The argument is based on comparison and precedence and the conclusion is that Australia is now at the point the United States were about 150 years after they gained independence. The way that sentiment spread is hard to summarize, but a comparison of the first chapters in the first and second edition of Baker (1945; 1966) signal a crucial difference in approaching mAusE. The 1945-edition carried the sub-heading "What is Austral English?", while that of 1966 was "What is Australian English?". The old view had gone and the existence of mAusE was a given, nothing to search for, even if the Cockney allegation was still prominent. mAusE was still said to have a nasal twang or a drawl or to sound monotonous. A

102

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

follow-up is Reeve's (1989) study of letters-to-the-editor in the ABC Weekly, the ABC's listener magazine, from 1939 to 1959, which showed that many letter-writers mentioned Cockney features that had not been noted in the 1880s by the English Samuel McBurney. For example, the vowels in words like way or might had not remarked upon earlier, but were now (cf. section 3.6): The so-called Australian accent is, of course, various modifications of imported Cockney, (fr. 1945; 1989: 112) The Aussie pronunciation of WAY, HAY, etc. is always WY, MY, HY, etc. Also I's are invariably pronounced as 01, such as MIGHT (MOIGHT)... (fr. 1948; 1989: 112) Few writers supported their views with explicit experiences. An especially interesting writer mentions the weak vowel in words like habit, jacket, captain - as in the second syllable of 'letter'. There were two views on that, one blaming English announcers for the stiltedness when they did not use it, the other referring to it as one of the enduring features of the accent: One of the most irritating aspects of the overseas news service is the forced, stilted and incorrect pronunciation of the British announcers.... These Englishmen all seem to be labouring under the impression that words ending in "ed" should be pronounced "id", "et" as "it" etc." (fr. 1940; 1989: 116) So far no one has drawn attention to the habit prevalent in this country of substituting the vowel sound u for i. Habit becomes "habut", office "offus".... This characteristic of Australian speech is often the last remaining trace in anyone seeking to rid themselves of the so-called Australian accent, (fr. 1942; 1989: 116) Such 'sensual experiences', Reeve believes, express "an ambivalent attitude towards the Australian pronunciation of vowels" and he notes the "almost unanimous" condemnation of broad vowels and the allegation of affectation if someone spoke RP or too 'cultivated': The overwhelming impression is of a critical attitude toward Australian English. The same criticisms were made by Australians in the forties and fifties that were made by nineteenth century visitors to this country. In fact, mid-twentieth century Australians seemed to be demonstrating the same attitude as their nineteenth century counterparts. (1989: 125)

3.1 Attitudes to English: From colonial cringe to epicentre

103

"Most of the letter writers continued to perceive this external [British, GL] model", he adds, "as the standard for Australian speech" (1989: 126). However, Reeve's study suffers from two shortcomings. The first is that he overlooks the fact that such views were gradually being superseded by more positive ones that characterize the subsequent phase. In fact, he seems to deny a development altogether. The second weakness is that he overlooks completely the ABC's role in identifying the socially appropriate mAusE accent. His analysis does not hold for the Australian society at large. The following ABC document expresses the view that, despite some dislike, mAusE accents were no obstacle to positive evaluations of a program and no hindrance to enjoyment, as a study on the reaction of listeners to a broadcast discussion showed: Australian Accent: Very few listeners (> 8 %) found any of the speakers hard to understand, but a considerable number (40 % >) said that they had some general dislike of the Australian accent. This seems to have some, though not a great deal of effect on their enjoyment of the discussion... Naturalness and Sincerity of the Discussion: The majority of listeners (80 %) thought that all taking part... sounded sincere. But a much larger group than is usually the case (39 %) thought they sounded rather [word missing, GL] and in a few cases, very unnatural" (underlining in original; broadcast Saturday, 21 August 1943, on the ABC's Forces Program) [from the ABC archives, section entitled 'Listener Research 1944-1947']

There seems to have been a confluence of contradictory strands of thought, a dislike of the accent but no negative inference from accent to the sincerity or status of speakers. These findings contrast with Ball, Gallois, and Callan's (1989) findings, which they summarize in these terms: In Australia, there has been a tendency to look to British English, in particular Received Pronunciation (RP), as the standard of prestige variety; indeed one form of Australian English, Cultivated Australian, diverges from other variants in this country mainly in its approximations to RP. (1989: 94)

There still was a pronounced preference for an outside standard, then, or, in more technical terms, an exo-normative attitude as late as the 1970s. Such incongruent findings may be due to errors in the design of these studies, I would suggest, but they may also mirror the fact that Australians never have been homogeneous in terms of attitudes to language. That is a good bridge to turn to Eltis' (1989) study of teachers' responses to the accents of their pupils. "Both the experienced teachers and the student-

104

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

teachers", he concluded, "responded to pupils' voices by regarding the Mitchell and Delbridge accent spectrum as a hierarchy, with the Cultivated accent most highly valued and the Broad accent the least highly valued, and this hierarchy directed raters' judgments on all twelve pupil characteristics" (Eltis 1989: 106). He added that students and teacher "[p]erceived such a status for the cultivated accents, and the mean scores showed that General accents were ranked closer to the Broad than to the cultivated end of the scale" (1989: 107). The school was controlled by elitist attitudes, unlike out-of-school environments or peripheral areas like the play-ground. But things have changed, as The Age reported: Recent surveys ... show, for example, that younger people now state a clear preference for the Australian sound which itself has a number of variations. Even the ABC appears to have come round to the viewpoint that its announcers do not have to sound as if they are broadcasting from the shadows of Big Ben to convince people they know what they are talking about. We now have a Prime Minister [i.e. Bob Hawke, Labor, won the 1983 elections; GL] with an unmistakable Australian voice and our actors sound more naturally Australian than the Chips Rafferty of the past. (20 June 1983)

Could one expect anything else after a period of 200 years? Given the composition of the population and the slow-down of migration from England, the only access to RP or educated BrE accents and dialects after World War Π could be had through the ABC's relays of BBC news and school programs, the sandstone universities in Sydney, Melbourne or Adelaide, some private schools, the Judiciary, and the Anglican Church. None of these institutions was amongst the preferences of the majority of young people, even if they were eager to learn. At the close of the third phase, then, one finds unmitigated positive perceptions of the Cultivated and, less so, the General accent. The cultural cringe was not yet gone. The fourth and final phase is closely related to the development of a fully-fledged standard variety and is the best documented one of all. But the sheer mass of data creates a problem. There is hardly a body of experts, an institution, a media or politician who have not commented on English. I will confine myself to expressions not paired with ulterior motifs in mind, which will be deferred to section 3.5. Attitudes that fall under the scope of the following paragraphs cover three themes. The first is that the interest of the public and experts widened so as to include all areas of language, from

3.1 Attitudes to English: From colonial cringe to epicentre

105

accent to the use of language-in-context. Secondly, they mark a noticeable shift in favour of the mAusE accent and dialect as the national form. And, finally, the double perception of mAusE, which had emerged in phase three, continued with no signs of abating. Also of interest is the concern with the non-standard dimension. But the important new factor was that Australia saw itself as multicultural, as Delbridge (1993) argued. Bradley and Bradley's (2001) long-term study still noticed negative clichés about the Broad accent, but it quoted people who believed that broad characters in films were now being "portrayed as much more competent" (2001: 274) than in the past and added that "there are also many leading younger comedians who use broad speech and nevertheless are portraying themselves as highly intelligent and competent" (2001: 274). The goal of their study, however, was to identify the development of attitudes from the 1980s to the late 1990s. In 1980 they had interviewed 40 Melbournians, 27 of whom they found for a re-interview in which they were asked again to say whether they preferred an Australian, British or American accent. The Bradleys now found a significant pro-Australian shift from 46.3 per cent in 1980 to 57.4 per cent in 1995. And importantly, the shift was carried by speakers in the 60+ age range, which seems to suggest they had changed during an older age bracket; change was not only due to young people. Cultivated speech was consistently rated lowest on solidarity and highest on status. The ranking of Broad speech shows an interesting difference since it was rated lowest on status but not consistently highest on solidarity: It is the speaker using mainly the general sociolect who is ranked highest on solidarity. This is contrary to what some SRTs [subj. reaction tests, GL] outside Australia have found, but may be related to the fact that the general sociolect is also used most frequently by the majority of the population including presumably most of the judges. They may therefore be more likely to judge this favourably as it is like their own speech. (2000: 280)

Such an interpretation suggests that a consensus had been emerging in favour of the General accent. In her study on Sydney, Horvath (1985), too, found that broad and cultivated speakers adopted features of the middle one. A former managing director of the ABC, Brian Johns, said in 1995: "[W]e don't want an outdated accent" (fr. Bradley and Bradley 2001: 275). That, one would assume, refers to the Cultivated accent. If one recalls Ball, Gallois, and Callan's (1989) finding that "the prestige accent to Australians appears to be middle class British or Cultivated Australian" (1989: 94), the Bradleys have identified a clear shift to a middle ground.

106

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

At the end of the 1980s mAusE had a secure place in society. Attacks against it are rear-guard actions and, if they are well argued, address matters of appropriacy. No-one would refer anyone to BrE or AmE dictionaries for advice. The most widely accepted form is a middle ground, not the language of the highly educated. Attitudes have finally come round to a position that was expressed nearly a century earlier by the Americans Greenough and Kittredge (1902). 3.2

The British English heritage in mAusE

The Australian ballad "Waltzing Matilda" is about a conflict between those in power, symbolized by the squatter, and those on the fringe, the legendary swagman or itinerant worker. The anthem "Advance Australia Fair" celebrates the opportunities that the continent provides (Gillam 1982). "Waltzing Matilda" projects an inside, "Advance Australia Fair" an outside vision of the colonies. The language of both befits their purpose.13 "Waltzing Matilda" is in popular mAusE as it was in the late 19th century and integrates input from IrE and ScotE, from indigenous and non-English migrant languages (Leitner 1990). "Advance Australia Fair" employs a high style close to BrE and contains few Australian words. It will never be sung in the broad accent, while "Waltzing Matilda" can be sung in any accent, ranging from the broad to a refined style typical of public singing. But it can be "hard to sing solemnly about a jumbuck", said the former Prime Minister, Paul Keating, in an interview with Melbourne's The Age (19 November 1992). The idiom of both songs echoes the fact that mAusE is the result of the transplantation of English. It reflects the experiences of people from different social and educational background and creates an unmistakably Australian setting. Taking a comparative-historical angle, I will begin with the British heritage and look at how it has settled and become a stable characteristic. In line with the received canon I will maintain the distinction between the accent (= pronunciation) and the dialect (= 'everything else') as a structuring principle. That will need some clarification, especially since 13

A letter-to-the editor in Weekly Times (6 July 1995) says: "What we Aussies now consider the traditional Waltzing Matilda has already been altered and made even more Australian than Banjo Paterson's original version ... The original manuscript did not contain "jolly" at all; nor "and his ghost may be heard as you pass by that billabong". But Paterson did use the words "waterhole" and "billabong".

3.2

The British English heritage in triAusE

107

everything else is meant to encapsulate the broad view of language and to include matters of culture and social beliefs discussed in Chapter One. Strevens' (1985) classical definition is a good starting point to show the limitations of the distinction between accent and dialect: [t]he nature of different varieties of English ... can be more fully understood if we distinguish between dialect and accent. Accent refers to pronunciation, to the sounds, the stress, rhythm and intonation; dialect refers to everything else, but principally to grammar and vocabulary, (emphasis his; 1985: 5)

As to English, the dialect can be paired with a range of accents: "The diversity of English can be exercised through a free choice of accent, and the use of local embellishments" (emph. his; 1985: 8). But Burridge and Mulder argue that " [although some linguists insist on a sharp demarcation between accent and dialect, you'll find that most varieties that differ in pronunciation also show differences in other respects" (1998: 5). When arbitrary pairings do occur, they imply more than meaningless choice. Speakers may be wishing to signal loyalty to a group, create a humorous effect or show off their skills. Socially, such pairings may be signs of assimilation, a normal process in the context of migration, such as when an American switches codes in Australia, when they feel a benefit in doing so, or when a diplomat enters his field where it is important to know the professional code. Putting the different choices available to speakers (and writers) in this way, suggests that there may emerge pairings that signal stylistic strategies on the one hand and correlations with broad social characteristics on the other. I will turn to that theme in section 3.4.

3.2.1

The accent

Baker was right when he pointed out that an American will not confuse an Australian with a Briton or that an Englishman will not confuse an American with an Australian (1945: 6f). There is something in the language that makes Australians unconfusably Australian. And that has become the punch-line of many a joke. Asks a London taxi-driver an Australian tourist when he arrived, he gets this response: "I have only come here to die [= 'today']"· The Age's headline "Professor feels the strine" on my inability to appreciate cricket was mentioned in the preface.14 It puns on strain and 14

Strine deletes sounds, blurs boundaries and 'telescopes' words into complex, uncommon units, as Emma Chisit 'how much is it' shows (Baker 1966: 456) (cf.

108

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

strine. Much of what follows looks at phonemes and word phonology, while connected speech, the melody of speech, etc., will be more prominent in section 3.4.1.1. Australia's accent is firmly grounded in EngE. Wells, for instance, maintains that: "[p]honologically, all Australian English is very close to RP, phonetically, it is not" (1982: 595). Pilch was struck by the "high degree of isomorphism with RP" (1971: 275) and that "[t]here is no similar degree of isomorphism between AmE and RP, despite a similar settlement history. Describing AmE in terms of the phonemes of RP, would be hopeless" (1971: 275). What there is are modifications that distinguish, for instance, strain from strine. But I will show that these modifications build up to a system and that mAusE is on the way to showing a level of distinctness that compares with that of AmE. I begin with segmental phonemes, then turn to connected speech and other matter. Diagram 3-1 on the next page shows the vowels differences of mAusE from RP. Short vowels are generally articulated in a higher position than corresponding ones in RP. A word like bed can easily be misheard as bid. A few more specific points can be made. To begin with, /ae/, which is one of the most interesting phonemes in world Englishes, has a number of articulations that raise descriptive, historical and theoretical questions. Like other short vowels, /ae/ can be articulated in a high position and sound similar to words like bed·, it can be articulated with an off-glide [ea], which results in a diphthong and a lengthening of the vowel. An interesting question is whether such articulations are specific to mAusE and are, possibly, evidence on the origin of the Australian accent (section 3.6). As for typicality, they have been observed in NZE, SAfrE, and AmE. Regarding age, they have been noted as early as the 1890s by G.L. James: As to the English spoken in Australia, I believe it has already been remarked how correct, as a rule, it is.... In Sydney, however, more particularly the young girls, especially of the lower classes, are apt to affect a twang in pronouncing the letter a as if it were i, or rather ai diphthong, (fr. Baker 1966: 434)

It looks as if these articulations are not too old, then, and that the raising and diphthongization of /ae/ may have been preserved rather than innovated in mAusE. Let me continue with another allophonic realization of the /as/ phoneme. It has been observed that some words seem to have a long (and section 3.3.1.3). Similar fashions can be found in German where the word "Staatsexamen" (state examination) can be rendered as "Staat + sex + amen".

3.2 The British English heritage in mAusE

109

closish) variant, i.e. [ae:], while others have the short [ae] discussed above. As a result, one can distinguish a ban or to ban [bae:n] from banner [baena] 'flag'. Some experts have suggested that the long variant is an 'extra phoneme' (Bernard 1963), which would create a systemic , phonological difference from RP. Durie and Hajek argue that "the independent status of this half open vowel is often overlooked and sometimes disputed, but it is fairly clear for many speakers, we believe, and the phonemic length distinction seems to be in the process of being consolidated" (1994: 101). But Durie and Hajek agree with Bernard (1963: 55) that it is a "minor pattern" and applies to only a handful of cases (1994: lOlf): heed

u ui

o y

3 Λ

α d Diagram 3-1. The mAusE monophthongs and RP (i)

Words that can be differentiated by a morphological boundary: short /ae/: no boundary long /ae:/: with a boundary Canning (name of a river) banner (flag) Saddy (proper name)

canning (packing things into cans) banner (someone who bans) saddle (a sad person)

(ii) Preferences in very restricted and idiosyncratic sets of words short /ae/ long /ae:/ in front of /d/, / d y , e.g. sad, in front of /g/, Imi, /η/ as in mad; badge fag, lamb, fan

110

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

According to accepted standards in phoneme theory, it is only possible to call /ae:/ a phoneme if there are minimal pairs, similar to fit and feet. Banner with /ae/ or /ae:/ does not qualify since vowel length could be triggered contextually by the morpheme boundary. Ingram (1995: 223) is right in dismissing the claim made by Durie and Hajek's (1994) and others. But the theoretical controversy is not settled and Fudge's (1977) idea that /ae:/ may straddle between phonemic status with a low functional load and an expressive function may be the safest bet yet. It is pertinent to add that the long variant had been noticed as early as 1960 in RP and other EngE accents. Jones argued that some exceptional cases of lengthening of the traditionally 'short' vowels must be noted. The most important is a lengthening of /ae/ in certain words. In the South of England a fully long vowel is generally used in the adjectives ending in -ad {bad, bag, pad, sad, etc.) and is quite common in some nouns, e.g. man mae:n or maen bag bae:g or bieg... Curiously enough the ae appears to be more usually short in nouns ending in -ad (lad laed, pad paed, etc.) (1960: § 874, ρ 235) Turning to a lexico-phonological point, many words such dance or chance can be pronounced with /ae/ or /a:/ in mAusE, which marks a social contrast that will concern us in section 3.4.1. The same words would be pronounced with /a:/ in RP, but could have /ae/ in northern EngE accents. In other words, mAusE re-casts the connotations of the contrast in terms of 'more general or broad Australian' or 'a more British-oriented cultivated variant'. I remarked above that the raising of /ae/ leads to a quality that is close or identical with [ς] and thus similar to the articulation of //J. Words like hut, bud or luck are pronounced with a vowel that is easily heard as a short variant of the /a:/ in heart, bard or lark. Durie and Hajek (1994: 98) define it as central and low and add that it forms a pair with /a:/. They replace the ItJ symbol by /a/ (cf. Bauer 1979: 58). Bernard's (1967) experiment on the acoustic quality of vowels, and on whether length differences are heard, had already confirmed that re-analysis. Presenting listeners with long [Λ:] and short [a], instead of the ordinary short [Λ] and long [a:] in pairs of words like hut/heart and bud/bard, he concluded if "the length cue is reversed, either sound is likely to be heard as the other. Short /a/ is articulated as if it were [Λ:], long /a:/ as [Λ]" (1967: 49). Length is, in other words, "a cue of varying importance in the identification of certain Australian sounds" (1967: 49). A finding is reportet in Horvath and

3.2 The British English heritage in mAusE

111

Horvath (2001). mAusE thus has a low-front pair distinguished solely by length - and that does not exist in RP. I will turn to the long, high monophthongs and rising diphthongs in words like feet/feed or strain/strine. These vowels were involved in the socalled Great Vowel Shift, which explains word pairs like meter/metric and fertile/fertility in today's English. Towards the end of the 19th century, long vowels acquired a centralized on- or offset. Overdoing that effect somewhat makes tree sound like tray. In rising diphthongs, too, the starting point is shifted downwards, which is more accentuated in Cockney, popular London, etc., but not in RP. In mAusE these vowels are diphthongized. According to Bernard, "in 93 per cent of manifestations ... there was an onglide. This onglide is ... apparent to the ear" (1989: 195). But, he warns, the onglide "is not mandatory since 7 per cent of the sample ... did not have it." He says that "the expressions of /u:/ are the most variable of any phoneme ... They lie in a high central position in the vowel space and move either backwards or forwards across its top with occasionally some small amount of raising as they progress" (1989: 196). Oasa (1989) found that the direction of the off-glide differs regionally (cf. section 3.4.1.1). The centring diphthongs in words like bear and hear occur in so-called non-rhotic accents like RP and AusE. In mAusE the diphthongs are often realized as long monophthongs, i.e. /i:, e:, a:, o:, u:/, and, as a result, words like beer and bee become homophones - provided bee words do not have the on-glide mentioned above. Bernard (1989: 198) identified frequency differences in the realization of centring diphthongs. Thus, off-glides occurred in 71 per cent of expressions like ear, in 27 per cent of air, and in 21 per cent of tour words. Off-glides were more typical of Cultivated than of Broad (section 3.4). Despite variability, Durie and Hajek treat the vowels as long monophthongs and argue that "using a monophthongal representation for the whole class of long vowels with a tendency to centralizing off-glides, is more consistent" (1994: 102). Closely related to this theme is the centralizing diphthong /ua/ in words like poor. As in many EngE accents, that vowel has been replaced by one with a mid-high quality, followed by the off-glide /oa/, or else by a long low monophthong, viz. b:/. Words like poor, sure are pronounced as either [poa] or as [po:] in nearly all varieties. Mitchell and Delbridge (1965a/b), Cochrane (1970; 1989) and Bernard (1963) have argued that mAusE lacks the (original) /us/ and maintained that those who do use /ua/ aim at an Australian version of what they believe to be RP. That makes it sound like code-switching, really.

112

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

Summing up, Cox's (1996) tabulation of the vowel system above seems adequate. Though Hajek and Dune (1994) suggest some allophonic changes with regard to /Λ/ and /ae/, it is obvious that mAusE has a vowel system that differs from that of RP in systematic ways, even if the two systems may be considered diaphonie. Put differently, they have precise correlations with each other, but the differences are systematic and located at the sub-systemic, the so-called allophonic level. The consonants of mAusE are commonly considered to be much the same as in RP, but a few points must be made. A well-known feature in many non-standard and regional varieties of English is the dropping of /h/ in words like half or house and the wrong insertion of /h/ in ark to make it sound like hark. Historically speaking, /h/ had practically disappeared in prevocalic position and was re-introduced in educated speech at the end of the 18th century, Görlach maintains: Dropping your aitches was not regarded as a grievous offence for centuries - and most dialects of England apparently lost /h/ at the beginning of words. However, from the late 18th century at least, a social stigma developed (which has remained to the present day). (1999: 57)

The origin and status of /t-dropping in mAusE is controversial. And Trudgill's (1986: 138f) view that ^-dropping was regular but that mAusE is now basically /i-ful is correct, //-dropping was also a marker of religion, as Irish nuns at Catholic schools may have re-introduced it (Ludowyk 1998: 3). Exo-normativity led to hyper-correction in teaching and has had a profound influence. I will return to it in section 3.4. The articulation of /!/ is also very variable in English. RP distinguishes between a clear Ν and dark [1] in words like loud and dull, respectively.

These two allophones can be found in mAusE. There is even a trend now to omit /l/, i.e to vocalize it, after back low or mid vowels, as in school, which has been blamed on the regular rebroadcasting of British soap operas that are set in London's East End. But the clear/dark distinction can be absent and IV then has a dark, velar quality, which is especially noticeable at the beginning of a word (Wells 1982: 603).15 The stop consonants are characterized by two features. In EngE voiceless stops /p, t, k/ are clearly aspirated if they occur at the beginning of stressed syllables, as in pot, cot, etc. But some accents, such as ScotE and NZE, may have non-aspirated stops in these contexts. And mAusE, too,

15

In this respect mAusE is unlike IrE. IrE tends to have a clear [1] in all positions.

3.2 The British English heritage in mAusE

113

may have non-aspirated stops there. The second characteristic merely concerns /t, d/ between vowels, /η/, Iii, etc., where it can be articulated as a flap, viz. a short, voiced tap, l\/, which is sometimes represented as /Λ

[am]

[am]

[am]

A>a

[ai]

[ai]

[DI]

[Dl]

a>D

[BD]

[aeo]

[acD]

[εη]

a>ae>e

[λ

m]

3.4 Internal stratification of mAusE

231

There is a fifth accent, i.e. Accented. Ethnic Broad (EB) carries the phonetic movement identified in the onset of diphthongs further. The long monophthong /i:/, however, does not participate in this pattern. Though table 3-8 is framed within the received framework, Horvath's observations indicate a departure from the consensus. Her statistical analysis, which cannot be dwelt upon, shows that vowel articulations create what she calls a core and a periphery, the former comprising Cultivated (C), General (G) and Broad (B), the latter EB and A. The peripheral groups yet are part of the overall pattern because an average of 1/3 of vowel articulations are the same as in the core; there are some differences between individual vowels. To quote her summary: All of the speakers in the peripheral speech community are adults and are either Greek or Italian: Sociolects 1 (= 29) Sociolect 2 (n= 18) Italians 38% 71% Greeks 62% 29% Neither the gender nor the socioeconomic class variables are important in distinguishing the two sociolects, but ethnicity is. (1985: 73)

Only 27.3 per cent of sociolect 1 variants are the same as in the core, while 57.6 per cent of sociolect 2 are. In other words, 2/3 of the Greek speakers are in A, more than 2/3 of the Italians are in EB. That is an important addition to Mitchell and Delbridge's failure to identify an effect of ethnicity. And that must be due to shortcomings in their research design, since it is inconceivable that there was such a large change in as short a period as 20 years. Horvath suggests that the Greeks and the Italians may be the leaders of that change in progress (1985: 73) and adds that "the majority of migrant parents will fall into the peripheral speech community while the children of migrant parents will be members of the core" (1985: 80). Inside the core she identifies four accents: Far from revealing the Broad, General, and Cultivated varieties commonly described for AE [= mAusE, GL], the linguistic groups defined in this manner are shown to use quantitatively varying mixes of B, G, and C; they vary not categorically, but quantitatively. The G variants are well represented in all sociolects, particularly in SL 1, 2, and 3, where approximately half of all tokens are G. C is also represented in all sociolects but is particularly important in SI 3 and 4. Although not high in any group, Β is highest in SL 1 ; even there, however, it accounts for only a little over one-third of the vowel tokens. (1985: 76)

232

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

What should be emphasized is the prominence of G vowels, which have become something like a standard articulation today (section 3.5). Turning to social correlates, she finds that SL 4, a kind of 'hyperlect' that most closely approximates RP, is only used by women. Age shows that teenagers are dominant in SL 2 and 3, though the former has only male, SL 3 only female teenagers. And "Anglos" are dominant in SL 1, Greeks in SL 4. She still maintains that overt prestige is associated with C, covert prestige with Β (1985: 79), but adds that there is evidence in the speech of Angloteenagers that the lower working and middle class are moving towards the General (1985: 83). The upper working class remains conservative. She argues that making no allowances for ethnicity, there is a clear move away from both Broad and Cultivated variants of the vowel variables and a movement toward the General. The direction of change that has been postulated is that of Β AND C G, representing both a change in the direction that would be predicted from studies of chain shifting (C => G), i.e., a 'natural' change, and at the same time a change that represents a reversal of that direction (B => G), an 'unnatural' change. It will not be until the ethnic groups have been examined separately that this phenomenon can be understood. (1985: 91) That may be well so. But I will show in section 3.5 that the debates about the norm of mAusE in the ABC did indeed conform to this unnatural pattern until well in the 1980s. Some researchers have studied the correlation of consonant articulations with social parameters and it is best to continue with Horvath (1985) and then turn to Tollfree (2001) and Borowsky (2001). Horvath (1985), for instance, identified these variants for some of the features she studied: fh/ /Θ/ !\J in medial position /t,d, s, z/ before /u/ postvocalic Irl + vowels -ing

/¡-retention θ r tíü i+r, etc. aq

A-lessness f th tH or ts tj/l tu: i:+r, etc. an iqk

Some of these variants are highly stigmatized, such as [f] for /Θ/, [iqk] for -ing, and A-lessness, and occur quite infrequently, while those not so stigmatized are more common. There emerged quite close correlations with the accents, //-deletion is decidedly working class, male and Broad. The

3.4 Internal stratification ofmAusE

233

choice between a heavily aspirated (or even fricated) Ν and the flap is gender-sensitive. Males prefer the flap, girls the fricated [ts] variant, though the majority of both groups use the normal [t11], which had been shown to be typical of sociolect 4, the Cultivated. The allophone [ts] is related to age, with adolescents using it more frequently than adults.39 Ethnicities are rankordered, with Italians preceding Anglos and Greeks in this respect. Tollfree (2001), too, looked at the articulation of /t/, but from a different starting point. She began by correlating the phonetic realizations of Iii with four phonetic environments, which can be exemplified in these (sequences of) words: attempt, lot of, lot to do, and in a lot. In attempt IXJ occurs between vowels inside a word, in lot of it is between vowels but at the end of the first word; in lot to do it occurs before another consonant, and, finally, in a lot it is before a pause. Tollfree's (2001: 56f) findings on the correlation of allophone choice with social parameters reveal clear differences between the upper social and the lower level and styles of speaking. The flap is blocked, naturally, at the end of a word or morpheme, whether or not a pause or another word that begins with a consonant follow. Its use is considerable in intervocalic position for the lower socioeconomic group in words like bitter in conversational style (93 per cent), but dropped to 75 per cent in formal styles. It was low in (final, but intervocalic) contexts as in lot of but Tollfree said "still preferred over glottaling (41%) in this position". She added that "[t]apped initial Ixl occurred in what is probably part of a restricted lexical set of to items" (2001: 57), as in go to. For the higher social group the pattern differed in the lot of-type of words. Here tapping was higher in final contexts in formal but lower in informal styles, where glottaling turned out to be more frequent. Her discussion of the fricated variant is contradictory and will be ignored here. In that group glottaling does not occur at all in intervocalic contexts. She concludes: For the 15-16 year age group generally, glottalised variants appear to be competing with the tap in intervocalic final position (...). The fricative was not found in intervocalic final contexts (...), being heard only in pre-pausal final, and intervocalic medial positions.... The age-related material suggests that fricated forms are losing ground in Australia. (2001: 59)

Especially young speakers, she said, referred to the tap as expressing a 'laid back' attitude. Her findings support Horvath's, who did not find tapping in the Cultivated where the fricated variant was preferred. Since 39

Fricated means that /t/ sounds a bit like [ts].

234

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

Tollfree's data were collected some 15 years after Horvath's and in Victoria, one may speculate about language change and regional accents. Horvath's findings on the realization of so-called centring diphthongs in words like peer, pair and poor and the palatalization of It, d, s, z/ in words like tune, due, sensual and visual show that different articulations reflect social stratification and correlate broadly with the prototypical accents, the Cultivated, General and Broad. The findings support a distinction between core and peripheries inside mAusE. The core contains the three accents, the periphery contains EB and A. The fact that ethnic patterns are moving inside the centre of mAusE makes these developments Australian. I will turn to the High-Rising Tone, the prosodie feature alluded to in 3.2.1. Though it has been found in many varieties of English, some experts argued that it was a unique Australian pattern: Rising tones on non-questioning declaratives are not uncommon in other English dialects. They are reported, for example, in Birmingham, Liverpool, Newcastle-on-Tyne, and Glasgow (Wells 1982, 20), and in Irish English (...). However, there are considerable differences in phonetic detail... Differences in meaning are also apparent.... None of these cited examples, therefore, appears to be equivalent in form and meaning to the AQI. (Guy and Vonwiller 1989: 23)

That claim was both unsubstantiated and irrelevant. Though a recent feature, it must have gone unnoticed in mAusE for some time. Early studies, such as Baker's (1945) and Mitchell's (1946), did not observe it. Mitchell and Delbridge's (1965a) data were collected during the late 1950s and did not seem to have a single token. If they had, it would have been noticed. Speculations are that the HRT appeared during the 1960s. Bernard (1974) seems to have been the first to observe it. He mentioned "the rising intonation which is unfortunately becoming more and more common in declarative statements (not only among broad speakers)" (1974, quoted from McGregor 1980: 11). But it was not noted in the ABC's SCOSE Committee, even though L.J. Downer had drawn attention to it in his letter of resignation in 1981: It is probably time for the Committee to review once more what it understands by Australian speech. The Terms of Reference and General Principles mention the matter.... But there is still more to be thought and said. As examples, two very marked Australian speech habits are rarely, if ever, noted by the Committee, that is, the habit of voicing consonants which were originally unvoiced (so that water and warder are pronounced identically), and of ending a sentence which is a statement with a rising

3.4

Internal stratification ofmAusE

235

intonation, as if a question were being asked. These are very widespread features of Australian English and have no necessary connection with education or the lack of it. Yet the Committee takes no account of either practice. (14 December 1981)

It was never discussed in the Committee. On the scant evidence provided, it looks as if the HRT began to be used in the 1960s, at about the time of Mitchell and Delbridge's (1965a) study. Its main characteristics clarified in section 3.2.1, but it may be useful to provide some further examples. (178) is the beginning of a current affairs radio program entitled "Concrete Gang" on the 3CR community station in Melbourne. The male speaker in his 20s speaks Broad and introduces the program in what I consider a friendly, hearer-oriented style. HRTs occur several times in utterances to the audience, i.e. (a), and again when he talks about the content of the program in (c), (f), and (g): (165)

S: (a) Good morning and welcome to the Concrete Gang, (b) We hope we find you bright-eyed and bushy-tailed Τ (c) We're on this time each Sunday morning Τ and uh we might uh we got a full crew this morning Τ (d) We got Fumbles here on the panel and uhm uh we might get into it. (e) Bit of job news eh. (f) Uh the job news from around the traps is many and varied t (g) And uh I suppose that the first thing we ought to be talking about is uh down at the dockyard T.... (Concrete Gang)

(165) expresses a hope and does not require the speaker to commit himself to the truth of what he is saying. But (c) to (f) are typical instances. The next excerpt is from the same speaker: (166)

S: (a) Yeah uh these guys are the plastic gangsters of the uh uh the police, a response to trade union picket lines these days Î . (b) Uhm they got set up in May nineteen ninety-three and there's about a hundred of 'em. (c) They're company strength Î , set up by uh Superintendent Ogilvy and then Inspector Morkse Î . (d) And we first saw them pop their heads up down at Richmond Secondary College, later on at Albert Park T... (Concrete Gang)

In (166) a female student gives a presentation on gender bias in children's literature. Having re-iterated research findings, she concludes the passage marked as (b) with an HRT and continues her exposition as (c): (167)

(a) And in their study uhm two hundred and forty-six occurrences of boy or boys occurred, compared to uhm one hundred and sixtyeight of girl or girls, (b) So it shows that it's very sort of boy-

236

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

orientated Î (c) Uhm and a similar thing happened with the proper names for boys and girls... (sodgg03.ice) The speakers so far have come from the general to broad range of mAusE. The next one is from a cultivated or upper general speaker, i.e. a male radio presenter in his late 30s or 40s, who introduces "Clean-up Australia" on the popular 3LO ABC. Interviewees are introduced with a series of HRTs: (168)

Presenter: (a) But uh her name's Morley Granger t . (lowish rise) (b) And she's had a uhm a what you call an exhibition uhm of her her art Î . (c) And she'll tell you about that too in in various places Τ uh around Australia Î . (d) Uh and it was called 'In Praise of Australian Women'. (sriggr45.ice) It is generally assumed that intonation pairs with grammar, and since declarative sentences express statements and commit speakers to the truth of what they say, they should fall at the end. The rising pattern is 'open', 'awaits' completion and is adequate for non-complete constructions such as lists or questions. If falls pair with statements and rises with questions, the HRT creates a conflict, which is, in fact, experienced by non-Australian (and non-New Zealand) listeners who are unaccustomed to this pattern. Its negative assessment by sections of the middle-aged and older people and those of a high educational background up to the 1980s may be due to this latent conflict. But that conflict has not really been investigated. Instead Allan (1984) maintains that the implication of the HRT in declarative sentences is implicitly deferential insofar as it indicates that S [speaker, GL] co-operatively seeks verification that H [hearer, GL] is comprehending, and doesn't just press... It is often the case that S accompanies the HRT with a paralinguistic gesture such as eye contact with H, a questioning look, or a raising of the head ... and H often responds to this co-operative move with paralinguistic acknowledgement such as a nod of the head, and/or a verbal acknowledgement such as mm, Uh-huh, etc. (1984: 30f)

The examples above show that speakers know very well what they were saying; they sounded self-assured. The utterances in question were in line with the idea that the HRT means something like 'Do you understand?', 'Are you with me?' Such a checking posture may account for the fact that HRTs are typical of certain types of discourse, such as descriptions, explanations or narratives where speakers want to ensure that listeners are following and willing to hold back with contributions of their own:

3.4 Internal stratification ofmAusE

237

The general pattern in this table is that AQI [= HRT, GL] use correlates with the semantic complexity of the text, and therefore the need for checking to see if the audience is understanding what's being said. Narratives, for example, have a relatively intricate generic structure, involving plot and character development and some sort of overall "point".... The Description texts were much the same, in that most of them were descriptions of the rules of children's games... The least favoured text type for AQI use, Facts and Opinions, have quite simple semantic structures. Factual texts were simple short factual answers to questions like 'Where were you bora?'. (Guy and Vonwiller 1989: 25)

These researchers reject the idea of HRTs express uncertainty, hesitancy, or deference (1989: 24ff). The complexity of a text may trigger routine checks for comprehension and, at the same time signal that one wants to 'hold the floor'. Along these lines, Guy and Vonwiller (1989: 26) added that HRT's occur frequently in multi-clause and elliptical utterances and argue that speakers routinely imply the permission to go on speaking, as the following example shows: (169)

Int.er: Inf.: Int.er:

Where were you born? King George the Fifth Τ Hospital Î in Sydney Î Oh yes.

The speaker goes on until the interviewer signals understanding. HRTs are "a request for a 'continuer'" (1989: 26) and have an interpersonal, not a denotative or cognitive, meaning. However, there must be a conversational principle according to which HRTs will not occur whenever a question like 'Do you understand?' or a request for continuation are conceivable. One might argue that HRTs are an explicit expression of a discourse need that is mapped onto an on-going statement. HRTs do similar work to rising tunes and leave a space for hearers to come in, if they so wish. The speaker symbolically offers a re-action slot but does not seriously expect it to be filled. To come to a deeper understanding, I will relate this to the pragmatics of interaction. A falling tune, though normal and not unfriendly in older varieties of mAusE (and other varieties) is re-interpreted as telling and carries with it a strong sense of finality. Telling is a way of talking at interlocutors. Modern norms can be paraphrased as sharing information, which, while they may be seen less committed, offer a greater level of 'freedom' of reaction. There are other sharing ways such as hedges ('you know'), tags ('don't you'), hesitation signs ('uhm'), and the particle eh. They all leave a conversational slot, paired with a seeming impression of

238

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

uncertainty. The change from a fall to a rise is another option for as long as it does not create misunderstanding or leave doubt as to who is responsible for the propositional content of an utterance. The use of the HRT depends, one might think, on the status of information. Telling versus sharing signals a shift in underlying norms of communication. Sharing relates to the concept of negative face (Brown and Levinson 1987), the space that interactants claim as theirs. It amounts to saying that it is recast as smaller, more accessible than with a fall. HRTs thus signal a readiness to inter-act. The concept of asking 'Are you with me?' is a reflection of that more accessible space. That argument is similar to Warren and Britain's (2000: 169) point that "HRTs function as positive politeness markers, serving to overcome interspeaker hurdles and to build and maintain speaker-hearer solidarity." If that is so, it is easy to see that the use of HRTs indicates the variation of age and gender - it is younger people and females that participate in this shift of norms. But the question of why HRTs correlate strongly with lower social class and ethnicity, as has been found with Maori females in New Zealand and with Greeks in Australia (Horvath 1985: 122), remains an open question. Finally, an intriguing question was touched upon by Horvath (1985: 39), when she suggests "very tentatively" that the pattern may have its roots in Ireland. Even if that were true, one would like to know why it was only noticed in the 1970s, when there was no Irish migration. Summing up, it is clear that the phonology of mAusE stratifies in a number of ways. The old canon, which argued for the existence of three distinct accents has, of course, been replaced by a view that maintains that there are quantitative, possibly probalistic differences that correlate with social factors on the one hand and with linguistic ones on the other. However, the reader is advised to recall that Mitchell and Delbridge (1965a/b) argued that the uses of the three accents may be a merely personal matter, a matter in other words to express or even to create an impression of the speaker. That aspect will become even more important in the dialect to which I will now turn. 3.4.2

From the non-standard to the standard dialect

Social variation in the dialect does not pattern the same way as variation in the accent (Hudson 1996). It involves dimensions of variation that have not been shown to correlate nearly as neatly as those in the accent. What makes matters worse is that the dialect is more comprehensive and contains

3.4 Internal stratification ofmAusE

239

features that have not been studied to the same level of delicacy as phonology. It also requires a wide notion of language that includes cultural issues (section 1.3.1). More than that, there is an easy passage for words between different varieties and registers, as Ramson (1966) had argued. That is, he believes, especially true of the formal and non-formal end of the spectrum. The survey to follow will therefore focus on linguistic or stylistic correlates of variation but will be less specific on social (or other) parameters of variation. I will say more about the informal/colloquial/slang end of the dialect range than the standard, which will be dealt with in section 3.5. To clarify the situation the following tentative diagram sets out the correlations that are assumed to exist between types of accents and the stylistic and social range of the dialect: DIALECT

ACCENT cultivated

A

formal

Λ

A

Ψ

'

standard dimension

A

general

A informal-colloquial Ψ broad

A

J non-standard dimension

slang

Φ

sub-standard dimension

Diagram 3-7. Varieties of mAusE dialect

The cline from the formal via the informal-colloquial spectrum on to the slang is well-known. What is less clear is how the contrast between the standard and non-standard and the sub-standard relate to this cline. Given that the standard is not, and cannot be, monostylistic, I subsume the formalinformal spectrum under the label standard (see section 3.5) and assume there to be a bottom-layer called non-standard, which gradually blends in with the sub-standard. The correlation with the accent types is loose but could be visualized like a similar hierarchy. Since Cultivated can co-occur with an informal dialect, General is located more closely to the terms informal-colloquial. The correlation has not been investigated in depth, but accents could be seen as stylistic choices that may, but need not, pair at all

240

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

with choices made in dialect. Yet, there may be conventional correlations which are a yardstick for such marked departures. Bernard illustrates the differences between the formal and the informalslang dimension with a short text that he describes as "carefully cultivated narrative Ocker" (ABC 1992: 25). It says .... colloquial language is the highest in rank, because it is the broadest, and it sometimes slips into 'standard' speech undetected. Slang is colloquialism that has gone over the edge, but, as Eric Partridge points out, 'as it originates, so it flourishes best, in colloquial speech'. The difference between formal, colloquial and slang usage may be illustrated endlessly: man, fellow, bloke·, doctor, doc, quack·, police, cops, pigs. (1992: 24)

The linguistic dimension thus described is not as straightforwardly related to social parameters as the Cultivated-to-Broad accents are. But most, if not all, speakers will occasionally exploit the full range of linguistic choices that is open to them. Even slang will have to be expected in the speech of Australians who speak Cultivated and standard mAusE otherwise. An unfamiliarity with that rang of the dialect would signal nonmembership 'in the club', so to speak, which may lead to serious sanctions, according to Seal (1999). The following table illustrates some of the correlations between the Broad accent and non-standard lexis and grammar that I assume to be fairly uncontroversial: Table 3-8. Non-standard features of the dialect Pronunciation Α-dropping (section 3.4.1.) in Qk-

Lexis Grammar swear words, such as go to buggery, multiple negation them as definite article 'go away!', bloody; fuck a duck or use of ain't for 'have/be fuck me dead 'exclamation of not' pronunciation surprise', don't get bitchie haitchidoms, metaphors, e.g. madwoman, strong verb forms, such t0 as brung pronunciation be in complete confusion' fi ve clause-final but of "h" finger discount 'stealing', fair cop poss. absence of the a/an 'just sentence' distinction lexical fields for people, ethnic poss. absence of groups, mate, pal adverbial marker common words, e.g. mackers/ macpronoun she for attack 'for McDonalds' inanimate things

3.4 Internal stratification of mAusE

241

Baker (1945) defined the Australian Language as slang; most of his illustrations were lexical. At the end of the 19th century appeared The Detective's Handbook (ar. 1880) by an anonymous author, followed by Crowe's (1895) slang dictionary and others (cf. Leitner, Taylor, and Fritz forthc.). The Bulletin had started to collect and publish lists of what were seen as Australian colloquialisms or slang expressions at the turn to the 20th century. And even today's desk-size dictionaries of mAusE must give sufficient space to such expressions. Given the abundance of idiomatic expressions, all I can do is quote a few iconic examples: ( 170)

(a) genes and species and all of this sort of gibby-gob (b) What kind of arrogant bumdribble's (srtaarl6.com)

Swearing and derogatory language are closely related (Taylor 1975; 1976). Here are a few examples from the press and private correspondence (the relevant passages are in italics), including what has been called the famous Australian adjective, i.e. bloody in real language: (171)

(172)

(173)

(174)

I'm prepared to put some of next year's study leave aside to try to get that bastard of a bibliography ('pet' indeed!) finished and off my back... (Brian Taylor, email, 17 May 1999) It seemed to be a case of a jingo's got my baby. 'To hell with the cringe,' cried Neil Mitchell on 3AW, Ί reckon flying the flag is a good start.' ... The wily jingo, meanwhile, was bidding its time. 'Some people are saying, 'Slam it up Saddam,' which I think is a very good idea,' said Cordeaux... (The Age, News, 19 October 2001) Mr. Crichton-Browne forced out of the Liberal party in disgrace in 1995 after telling a female journalist he would "screw her tits o f f ' , pleaded guilty to fraudulently claiming $ 4500 in travel expenses. {The Age, 9 April 1998, News, ρ 3) [Judge to a defendant in at Magistrate Court in Adelaide] You're a druggie and you'll die in the gutter... I don't believe in the social worker crap .... I'm sick of you sucking us dry... We dicks pay for your life. It's your choice to be a junkie and die in the gutter. No one gives a shit... (The Australian, 2 May 2003, "Magistrate condemned for abuse")

There are some features to comment on. The slang expression pet in (171) contrasts with bastard in that pet 'darling' is used cynically and bastard as an honest expression of despair, though it has positive connotations. A bastard is someone or something you do like, after all, if said in the appropriate tone; otherwise it may be plain rude and

242

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

inacceptable.40 To hell with in (172) is a mild insult in possibly most varieties of English, while to slam it up sb's arse 'to push sth up' is severe and brings out the hostility against the person referred to in the situation of speaking. Example (173) has less to do with swearing than with unseemly, obscene language. Senator Crichton-Browne made that remark to secure confidentiality after showing a female journalist a confidential note. Was it a threat? "Abusing reporters is common, it's routine", says the paper, and asks rhetorically, "Who cares? It's not news." It became news and the sandgroper senator - he came from Western Australia - had to quit. One should note that this kind of language can occur legitimately inside passages of public speech, where one would expect more formal mAusE. As Baker (1945) had argued, slang and unseemly language are common ingredients in mAusE generally and signal one's rootedness in 'the soil'. Example (174) is quite similar and, used by a magistrate in court, was considered extremely offensive, though it did not lead to any consequences for the magistrate in question at all. The adjective bloody, which is common English, is said to be the Australian adjective. Its pragmatic implications and use have been studied by a number of experts (e.g. Wierbicka 2001). The poet W.T. Goodge wrote a poem entitled "The great Australian adjective", which is worth quoting from: (175)

The sunburnt stockman stood And, in a dismal mood, Apostrophized his cuddy; "The nag's no good, He couldn't earn his food"

Unseemly language is loaded but expresses various degrees of offence. And the lingo was defined as including racist expressions; it was, in fact, a carrier of racism. Amongst them are names for non-English migrants, such as wog, Bait, Arab; terms for indigenous people like gin (a woman taken as a sexual object), coon, and compounds like gin jockey. Arab, which is not obviously a racist term, was felt to be one in the aftermath of September 11, 2001. Racism is a matter of a "them vs. us", Thomas Taylor explains in The Sunday Age in an interesting essay on Abo and similar terms:

40

I recall a conversation with Brian Taylor where I referred to a piece of work of his as "dieser Scheißaufsatz" ('this shit of an article'), which made him quite offended. When I referred to an earlier draft of this book with "dieses Scheißbuch" ('this shit of a book'), he said: 'Oh, you do say this about your own work also.' 'Of course, I do', I said. Slang is not just a property of Australians.

3.4 Internal stratification ofmAusE

243

'Boon' was another of those words. The ANU team thought it was an Aboriginal word, but now believe it is Malay. Even early on, 'boon' was usually derogatory to Aborigines. During World War II Australian soldiers stationed in Malaysia referred to the native bearers as the 'boon-line'. It was, said Dr. Ramson, an appreciative name. The Malays were part of the team. (The Sunday Age, July 29, 1993, ρ 3)

Swearing and unseemly language is, of course, peripheral to the informal-colloquial dimension and I must turn to its more characteristic spectrum. The following example contains several expressions: (176)

No-one was more surprised than John Howard's frontbench team when Beazley went doggo from the Ryan by-election.... Instead he bunkered down with his chief of staff.... Instead of a leadership icon, he forged his own future as a symbol of the selfish and selfindulgent baby boomers. This was vintage Bomber Beazley... (The Canberra Times, "Bomber Beazley", 13 November 2001)

Go doggo 'disappear, go out of sight to escape detection' is colloquial, if one follows Macquarie's labelling of lie doggo. Neither Wilkes (1990) nor Baker (1982) have an entry and NODE labels it as 'British informal, dated'. To bunker down 'to hide' is not entered in any of the Australian dictionaries. NODE suspects a 16th century ScE origin and cites the expression 'be bunkered'. Vintage (Beazley) transfers the word from its usual referents, such as cars, to the leader of the Labor Party to show that he's had his time. The accusation of the Aboriginal woman of white men as bludgers 'person who avoids responsibilities' is marked as AusE and NZE in NODE but related to 19th century BrE slang. Here are some more examples: (177)

And you'll know what I mean if you've ever sort of been on the wallaby around Australia and had the misfortune to sort of head your caravan and your car and your caravan in tow into Toowoomba (sriggr45: Australia All Over, program on 3LO)

To be on the wallaby means to be travelling around in an aimless fashion. As to word formation, derivations in -i(e) or -o, clippings, etc., were noted earlier and do not need further discussion, except to emphasize the colloquial flavour they add to a text: (178)

Melbourne's "ambos"... Being an ambo, as ambulance officers call themselves ... (The Age, 19 February 1994, ρ 13)

The paraphrase of ambos shows that ambulance officers themselves take pride in this word and do not, by no means, see it as feature of disrespect,

244

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

which is a connotation that has sometimes been claimed to be associated with the -o suffix. There are, it is true, doublets which do suggest negative connotations with -o and positive ones with -ie, as in sickie and sicko or commie and commo (see section 3.2.3). The first means 'a sick day', the second 'a pervert'.41 Adjectives in -o, note birko 'violently insane' and troppo 'passively insane', too have negative connotations. In contrast, event nouns like smoko 'a cigarette break at work' do not. And insto 'institution' which occurred in this headline in The Australian clearly shows that they need not have negative connotations after all: (179)

AMP lifts as instos pick up after shortfall (The Australian, 17 June 2003, section Marketplace, ρ 28)

Regarding morphology and grammar, a number of other characteristics have been studied and I will begin with a literary text that shows some of them in context (in italics). (180)

A: Where's your mum an'dad? B: Haven't got a dad. A: I haven't neither.... B: Me mum doesn't live here no more. She said I'd disturb the old lady... B: Look at 'im! He's useless. A: No, he ain't. B: Sometimes in the mornin' he tries to take a piss but it won't come out. I've seen 'im. Both of them are useless and old. They can't do nothin'... B: Don't make no difference. Ma'd send Bob after us. The blacks learnt him to track anything through the bush. Bob lived with 'em. A: He lived with the blacks? B: Och. Jah. Έ lived with the women, you know, doodled with them. Once a whole lot of blacks come here.... (fr. A. Facey, 1981. A fortunate life; this is from TV script)

Notice multiple negation, ^-dropping, the pronunciation of -ing /ir)/ as [in], the use of me for my, the invariant negative don't for doesn't, the disuse of the adverbial marker -ly, them as the definite article, and some words like learn for 'teach'. All these features are common elsewhere in 41

Sicko was used in The Sun in a headline "Sicko. Bali bomber grins his way to the firig squad", a story about the court verdict on the Bali bombing in 2002. (internet version, August 8,2003).

3.4 Internal stratification ofmAusE

245

non-standard English and show the common heritage of non-standard grammar. One might add the double marking of comparison and the use of ain't, as in these examples: (181) (182)

much more quicker and much better (srtggr 18 .com) ... the John Howard concept, the average Australian, the average punter ... Show me the average Australian, the average punter. There ain't no such thing.(siilmil3)

What is more characteristic of mAusE is the animate pronoun she for inanimate things, as in (196): (183)

She'll be alright [= it'll be alright]

It is a typical marker of the non-standard, though it appears to be more conservative, hence more rural today than in the past. Another non-standard Australian feature is the clause-final but, as in (197), which are extremely rare in mAusE and my corpus contains only a few examples: (184)

(185)

Mother and my father had both died before that. I don't know if my mother had died before Noel came. But my father was still alive when Noel came on the farm but. (siiggi28.com) That's a good idea but [shop assistant to customer, tourism shop in Kalgoorlie, 16 June 2003, GL]

But has the characteristics of the clause-final conjunct however. Apart from being rare and informal, it may be more frequent in rural areas than in the cities. It has been argued that it is also found in north-eastern dialects of EngE, IrE and ScotE (section 3.3.3.2; Trudgill 1986: 140), which may well be the case. It also occurs in AborE, as this example from a Dyirbal speaker shows: (186)

When I talkin', say when I talk to Uncle, Uncle or anything [like that]... If I say 'Oh, that's my gaya there'. She'll probably say 'You can't say gaya to me. That's thing ... You gotta say mugu to me'. It still mean uncle but.

And it occurs in Hawaiian Creole, as the following passage shows: (187)

Narrator: My Ungko ... he tink my Antee steh going deaf. My Antee ... she no like go doctor, but. One time ... my Ungko wen go look da doctor. My Ungko wen tell da doctor ... 'Hoy, doctor. I tink Mada steh going deaf. She no like come doctor, but. What can do, eh?' Doctor: 'We will need to determine the seriousness of her hearing loss.' Narrator: 'How can, but? ...

246

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language Narrator: 'Still yet... my Antee still steh wash da dishes, but.' (fr. Sebba 1997: 172f)

Sebba (1997), unaware of the significance of that feature, did not comment on it. But has thus been carried to a wide range of varieties of English and Pacific pidgins. It is connected not just to Australian settlers but, prior to that, to British sailors. Yous, another prominent non-standard feature, was discussed in section 3.3.2.1 as a characteristic of northern types of EngE, Here are two more examples to illustrate its use in non-standard mAusE: (188) (189)

... very careful with what yous check out when you go over there. (siiggi26.com) One day he said to us, look, you give me a list of what yous want and I'll give it to yous, rather than have yous comin' in and do this. (Aboriginal speaker, interview.byb)

Having illustrated a number of features, I can move forward to an investigation of correlations with social parameters and, thus, show some level of parallelism between the accent and the dialect. There are only few studies that address this theme. Eagleson (1976), an early study, argued that there are social dialects and turned to the issue of divided usage at the upper end of the dialect scale (section 3.2.3). In a study in Cessnock, New South Wales, Shnukal (1978; 1989) included forms of to be, irregular past tense and past participle forms and the deletion of subject relative pronouns, most of which count as non-standard. Eisikovits (1981; 1989) studied the use of similar features in styles of working class adolescents in Inner-city Sydney and found, for instance, that seen and done in examples like (190) (191)

He woke up and seen something (Eisikovits 1989: 3) They don't say nothing (Eisikovits 1989: 3)

mark a clear division between girls and boys. While girls used fewer tokens as they grew older, boys didn't and, in fact, tended to use them more frequently. The use of multiple negation, see (204), too, increased amongst boys, but not with girls. Eiskovits concluded that "at least two separate but intersecting factors are involved here: one developmental and the other relating to sex differences" (1989: 41) and argued that this pattern may reflect the fact that the two genders differed in the degree of prestige they assigned to standard mAusE and the way they see their future life-styles. "Among the older girls there is", she said, "a serious and conservative acceptance of the responsibilities of adulthood" (1989: 42) They are willing to settle down. Boys, in contrast, moved towards 'self-assertiveness',

3.4 Internal stratification ofmAusE

247

'toughness' and an 'unwillingness to be dictated to'. These findings are in broad agreement with what was said in regard of name formations like Maz (section 3.2.4). And the gender cleavage re-affirms the role of socialization as a differentiator in language use. As a result, a good deal is now known about the informal-colloquial and slang speech and the correlations with the social background of students. In contrast, little is known about adults and people in working life. Neither does one know much about the range of variation in mAusE above the nonstandard, whether in terms of the opposition with the standard or in terms of the formal/informal dimension. What is known was reported in connection with the discussion of the core and peripheries of mAusE (in section 3.2.3). More telling results may come from corpus-based studies, and it may well turn out that the standard/non-standard opposition made in diagram 3-7 is less relevant than one might think and that it interacts with whether language is used in speech or writing. An indication that this may be true comes from Engel and Ritz's (2000) study of the present perfect in radio news programs and chat shows. They found that adverbials that refer to a definite past time co-occur with the present perfect, as in these examples (Engel and Ritz 2000: 130): (192) (193) (194)

Police confirm that at 6.30 hours yesterday the body of Ivan Jepp has been located. (92.9 FM radio Perth; news, 17 March 2000) He has now met with Ayres this morning (96 FM radio Perth; news, 24 August2000; spoken in afternoon) After the collision the vehicle has sped off (96 FM radio Perth; news, 30 August 2000)

This example shows that the present perfect indicates a progression of a series of events in time: (195)

A lone male offender has gone into the service station, he was armed with a samurai sword and a knife, he has bound the wrists of the console operator with tape and then stolen a quantity of cigarettes and cash. He was seen last on foot heading north along Fifth Avenue. (92.9 FM radio Perth; news, 28 March 2000)

The news item from which this excerpt is taken contrasts with another one about the same story of the same day and radio station that had the simple past throughout. Engel and Ritz conclude that mAusE can use the present perfect in cases where the event has a definite past time marker, which is less common in BrE and AmE, and where, in narratives, the reference time switches forward. There is, then, variation in scripted and unscripted speech that contrasts with Anglo-American usage.

248

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

3.4.3

A note on ethnicity

The ethnic dimension will be discussed more fully in Leitner (2004b), but it is pertinent to mention the possibility that ethnicity is a factor inside mAusE. Recall Horvath's (1985) finding that Greek and Italian migrants of (mainly) the first generation had developed an Ethnic Broad accent, a finding that contradicted earlier claims by Baker (1945; 1966) and Mitchell (1946) to the contrary. Mitchell and Delbridge (1965a) had not found any significant effect when they looked at the data on children born of one or both parents born outside Australia, but not in an English-speaking country. They added that of the children of parents born outside Australia about an equal proportion - between 19 and 23 per cent - were in the Cultivated and Broad group, while of those whose parents were born in Australia 36 per cent were in the Broad and only 8.8 per cent in the Cultivated range. Clearly, ethnicity played a role, if a small one. Later studies excluded ethnicity again. Harrington, Cox, and Evans (1997), for instance, defined mAusE "as a regional dialect of English spoken by non-Aboriginal people who are born in Australia ...." (1997: 155). But Kiesling (forthc.) has identified some effects and complemented Horvath's earlier findings. He focussed on second generation Italian, Greek, Vietnamese, Lebanese, and, for comparative purposes, Anglo-Irish language background speakers. With the exception of the Vietnamese, he included males and females, the lower, upper working and middle class, and two age groups, viz. above and below 30 years of age. (For details see section 3.4.2): The areas in which interviews were carried out is a multiethnic region of Sydney which encompasses the band of suburbs bounded by Auburn in the east and Fairfield in the west, dipping into the Bankstown area. Migration to the Auburn/Fairfield area in the past decade or so has been extensive. The 1996 census reports that in Fairfield, 53% of the population was born overseas, and 51.5% in Auburn. In addition, in Fairfield, 64.1% spoke languages other than English at home, and 62.6% in Auburn. The majority of the overseas-born population in these suburbs are thus from non-English speaking countries, (forthc.: 3)

To sum up the relevant findings: (1) There is a correlation of sex and ethnicity, except for 'Anglos' (2) Greek women differentiate most clearly (3) For the (ow) variable in house both Greek and Lebanese women tend to move towards "the standard" (sic\) in contrast to men

3.4 Internal stratification ofmAusE

249

(4) For the (ay) variable in hide, Italian and Greek women move towards "the vernacular" (sic\), again in contrast to men The two overlapping groups of migrant women diverge, with some moving towards the "standard", others to the "vernacular" - in other words, the Cultivated and Broad accent. Kiesling's comment that some groups of women do not behave as a group in terms of accent calls for further research into attitudes and identity formation. Despite these suggestions, Clyne and others are critical of the concept of ethnolects, though Clyne, Eisikovits, and Tollfree (2001) consider it plausible that ethnolects may be connected to individuals and groups that have a strong sense of language identity: Ethnolects of AusE which are yet to be examined in detail by linguists include Scottish, Irish, Northern English, Sri Lankan Burger and American. (2001:225) Thus an ethnolect, like a community language, offers a means of expressing linguistic identity, of demonstrating solidarity with one's ethnic group. Importantly, it provides a means for those who may no longer be fluent in their ethnic language to continue to express their identification with, and sense of belonging to, their ethnic group. (...) Thus, we might expect a greater use of the ethnolect in groups with strong ethnic identities (for example, Dutch-Americans). (2001: 226)

mAusE exerts a strong pressure on non-English language speakers.

3.4.4

Regional variation

Who could not tell a Cockney from a Glaswegian, a Liverpudlian from a Geordie? A New Yorker sounds different from a Texan or a San Franciscan or a Bostonian. England, Ireland and Scotland are unique with their intricate dialect patterns. The USA and Canada, in contrast, have fewer dialects, though they seem to be on the increase even in the USA (Labov 1997). What about Australia? Australia constitutes such a vast landmass that foreigners find it hard to believe that there are no dialects. It is only when foreigners are told that people arrived at only a few ports until well into the 19th century, viz. Sydney, Hobart, Perth, and moved from there up and down the coasts, or into the interior and across the continent, that they lived in contexts that enforced or, at least, encouraged, assimilation, that they are beginning to find the absence of regional patterns plausible. They then accept the powerful consensus on the absence of regional variation

250

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

that has developed over the years and was reinforced, once again, by Mitchell (2001). I will address two questions: (a) W h y and h o w could such a powerful consensus of uniformity emerge in the first place and why has it eventually been supplanted by one that recognizes regional variation? (2) What is the evidence of dialectal stratification and h o w much credibility do these findings have? Uniformity could be praised and deplored. Dialects can be obstacles to nationwide communication, as studies on the intelligibility of accents in Britain have shown. That is also true of North America, in particular if one includes ethnic varieties such as A f r o - A m E . The absence of such obstacles has made communication across the continent of Australia easy - one could be proud of that. If that is the one side of the coin, the other deplores the lack of local colour. Australia cannot, like the mother country, boast of rural characters, rural identities, subtle shades of local meaning, of words that make you feel at home. All there is is a national (or a social) identity, the dinky di Aussie-ness, which, at that time, was no reason to b e proud of. The Broad accent and the non-standard dialect were and are the only means to create local characters in literature. There w a s no mention, then, either of social or regional variation in the early days (cf. sections 3.1 and 3.4). The thought of it w a s raised for the first time by Baker, w h o believed that "[o]ur slang is already beginning to fall into dialectal groups, however" (1945: 263), and added that [a]lready - pace Mitchell - we are beginning to develop dialects within this dialect of ours. Our accent may be generally uniform throughout the entire continent, but certain differences are beginning to appear, especially between the remote west and the remote east, the inland and the city, between the far north and the far south. (1945: 351) The regions he thought of were the four points on the compass and the bush and the city. Though Mitchell and Delbridge did notice some pockets of distinctiveness, e.g. in old German settlements, they said that "[t]here is no evidence in our material of any purely regional variations... the only regional variants found being socially determined as well, and in any case, small in n u m b e r and scope" (1965a: 87). With that Baker fell in line in the second edition of his The Australian Language: It seems possible to me that observers who have postulated the existence of sundry regional dialects have in fact been comparing one of the types in one

3.4 Internal stratification of mAusE

251

part of the country with another of the types in a different part of the country (1966: 453f; cf. also pp 342-9)

Bernard supported this consensus forcefully in the first edition of the Macquarie dictionary in 1981: Paradoxically, while Australian pronunciation is everywhere various, it is various in much the same way across the length and breadth of its vast domain. The few truly regional differences that do exist - a sound or two in Adelaide, a small number of words in the Bass Strait Islands and so on - are all too insignificant and low in frequency.... Rather the picture is of a widespread homogeneity stretching from Cairns to Hobart, from Sydney to Perth, a uniformity of pronunciation extending over a wider expanse than anywhere else in the world. (1981: 19)

That view was hard to challenge, but when it was, it was challenged on several fronts. But no-one cast doubt on the popular wisdom that grammar, usage and style do not stratify regionally. Accent and lexis have been found to do so.

3.4.4.1.

Regional accents

The first attack came from Bradley (1980), who maintained that Australia had reached the stage that the United States had reached around 1800. He suspected that Mitchell and Delbridge's data may hide dialect patterns and that, especially, the Broad accented was under-represented. Taking a close look at the data, he found that 64 per cent of Broad speakers had tentatively been classified as borderline cases between Broad and General, 67 per cent of those in the General category had been General/Cultivated. In other words, nearly 30 per cent of the total did not fit neatly into any one of the three Mitchell and Delbridge accents; General had been 'depleted'. In contrast, if one recalls that speakers tended to 'upgrade' their accent in the type of situation investigated (Bernard 1969), it followed that the Broad was under-estimated. Bradley (1980: 80) also found a bias in favour of New South Wales and against Victoria and Western Australia. As Sydney had about the right proportion of its share of New South Wales, the imbalance was due to rural and small town areas. That would explain why Sydney had so many fewer Broad and more Cultivated speakers. That closer look constituted a reasonable basis for investigations into the 'real' situation and the theme of regional variation. David and Maya Bradley carried out studies in Canberra (1975-78), Melbourne (1979) and added

252

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

data from Sydney, Adelaide and Brisbane at various periods of time. As in Mitchell and Delbridge's studies, vowels were largely responsible for regional variation. To address the underlying systemic patterns of variation, Bradley (1980) found short monophthongs (or lax vowels), rising diphthongs and centring diphthongs to be sensitive to regional variation: [T]he lax vowels... show more or less continuous variation in tongue position, with raising (closer/higher alternatives) increasing in lower sociostylistic contexts. The vowel nuclei which end in a glide towards a fairly close (high) front vowel... show a range of realisations which cluster in certain positions; that is ... there are two preponderating alternatives; while there is a continuum between these two for each vowel nucleus, the proportion of intermediate realisations is generally not too high.... The vowel nuclei which end in or glide towards a fairly close (high), fairly back vowel show continuous variation in tongue position of the first element, ranging from fairly back in some environments to front and central.... Finally, there are six vowel nuclei which have alternative realisations as long monophthongs, or as diphthongs with an offglide towards a central position of varying height. (1980: 82) Frequency differences in the patterns of variation, he added, would come to light when what speakers report about themselves is compared with what is found: "In addition... there are region-specific tendencies which are reflected in the pattern of variation. That is, in some regions a larger proportion of a given alternative will be used" (1980: 82). Let me mention some of Bradley's (e.g. 1980) and Bradley and Bradley's (e.g. 2001) findings. The phoneme hi, for instance, is being centralized in Sydney and is getting close to its realization as hi in NZE. That same tendency could be found, they said, in Canberra, Newcastle and elsewhere in New South Wales. But it was absent in Victoria. The phoneme lui, too, has a higher quality in Sydney. Bradley (1980: 83) noted that the short, front monophthongs /I, e, EC/ had a very high quality in Melbourne especially in lower stylistic contexts. Variation could also be found in centring diphthongs and long monophthongs. The phonemes /ia, ua/, for instance, tended to become monophthongs in low socio-stylistic contexts in Sydney, not in Melbourne. Articulations of /ea/ and /oa/ as monophthongs were common in high socio-lectal contexts. What Bradley and Bradley and Bradley fail to say is that the variations in Sydney amount to an 'unbalanced' realization of the phonemic sub-system of short vowels: I I I is

3.4

Internal stratification ofmAusE

253

being centralized, lui is raised (not centralized, as it is in some varieties). That requires, I would suggest, further investigation. Bradley and Bradley (1979) contrasted actual usage with what speakers from Melbourne, rural Canberra and Sydney reported on how they articulated the vowels in words like here, there or pour. Female speakers from New South Wales over-reported the use of off-glides. Two-thirds of females from Victoria correctly reported the use of one or another variant but one third over-reported the glide. On the vowel in /Λ/ Bradley said that [a] s various sources have noted, ltd is quite an inappropriate transcription for the Australian vowel in words such as "but". This vowel is actually central or even fronter for most speakers. It tends to be relatively fronter in Hobart than elsewhere, though this difference is less prominent than that between Melbourne and Sydney /i/. (1989: 265)

The Bradleys found other regional patterns in, e.g., the palatalization of It, d, s, zl before /u:/, which is a property of the Broad and shows regional patterns that correlate with the socio-demographic texture of cities and the country areas. In other words, palatalization is common in Brisbane, less so in Adelaide, etc. Flapping, they claim, is more common in Sydney than in Melbourne and, more so, with voiced Idi than for l\l. A few other studies on regional variation support the claim of evolving regional accents. Thus, Oasa said that "Adelaide speakers have a quite back vowel /u/ in such words [i.e. school, pool, GL], while Sydney speakers have a central vowel with an onglide, [ju]. Many vowels show variable near-mergers before IM, such as IM, III, and /ia/; .... in Melbourne" (1989: 267). He believes that lui is articulated in a more front position, but less so in Adelaide and Melbourne (1989: 274). The choice between the two phonemes /a/ and /ae/ seems to depend on the lexical items used in particular areas. Bradley found that the lexical sets concerned differ regionally, as Table 3-9, which is adapted from Oasa (1989: 287) below reveals. These findings complement rather than contradict Mitchell and Delbridge and do not bring home clearly the extent to which pronunciation differs between metropolitan cities, let alone states. Neither do they prove the alleged conflict between actual usage and self-reports. Moreover, the diphthongs in light, late, loud and void, which were the most revealing for social stratification, do not seem to stratify regionally at all. In other words, the significant Australian features are non-dialectal, it would seem, and regional patterns are still at an early stage of development, if at all.

254

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

Table 3-9. Phonemic alternation between /ae/ and /a/ Example words

castle Newcastle graph France chance dance 3.4.4.2.

Adelaide /a/ /a/

lai lai lai lal>lxl

Sydney

Brisbane

Melbourne

lai lai lxl>lal Ixl Ixl Ixl

lxl>lal lxl>lal lal>/x/ Ixl Ixl Ixl

Ixl Ixl Ixl Ixl Ixl Ixl

Regional dialects: Lexical variation

The issue of regional dialects has aroused considerable interest. Many Australians would like to express and experience a sense of linguistic belonging - to a State, a region, or a town. Brisbane's Sunday Mail, for instance, headlined an article with "By Jingo, that lingo is a dead giveaway". Words like doily, a dressing table elsewhere in Australia, may 'give away' a Queenslander. Things can be worse, says Bryant: "I got a letter from one little girl who moved from the south coast of New South Wales to Queensland. At little lunch on her first day she confused everyone by saying she was going for a drink from the bubbler. In Queensland it is a drinking fountain" [The Mail]. Yet, Bryant agreed that "Australian English is remarkably uniform across the whole country" (1993: 31). But remarkably uniform is not the same as completely uniform, and she has looked into the matter in a series of investigations (e.g. 1989; 1991; 1992; 1993). On the basis of 67 items, she concluded that (1) there are distinct dialect areas that are defined in terms of lexical expressions; put it differently, they do not rest on social evaluation. (2) dialectalisms may, but need not, be complemented by "panAustralianisms", which occur nationwide; put differntly, there may be words that are merely dialect words (3) dialectalisms come from well defined onomasiological clusters As for regions, she insisted that they are "not co-extensive with the States" (1993: 33) and reflect the complex "original settlement patterns" and "later trade and social networks". Map 3-1, which is adapted from Bryant (1992: 58), identifies four dialect areas: (i)

the South West (SW), i.e. the southern part of Western Australia

(ii) the South Centre (SC), more or less identical with South Australia and (in some cases) eastern Victoria

3.4 Internal stratification of mAusE

255

(iii) the South East (SE), roughly Victoria, Tasmania, Riverina in southern New South Wales, parts of South Australia (iv) the North East (NE), roughly Queensland and (northern) New South Wales

Map 3-1. Dialect areas

The map shows clearly identifiable areas of the SW, NE, SE and SC. The low population density in many regions produces gaps (not marked) between identified locations and vast so-called transition zones between the SE, SC and NE; their hatching patterns are somewhat blurred. As a result, it is somewhat difficult to identify precisely the region or orign of some vocabulary item, Bryant maintains: This is seen most clearly in the transition zones, as in the Riverina area. For example, in the Riverina, the area in southern NSW between the Murray and the Lachlan River, both North-East and South-East words are used. This area was opened by explorers from NSW and Queensland in the 1840s and 1850s (...). From the 1860s, settlers from Victoria also moved in and established trade links with Melbourne (...). As well as trade links there would have been family links that kept the settlers from both north and south in contact with places they had come from. (1993: 34)

256

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

Due to the persistence of such links, competing terms for the same referent were retained. But new realities created new links, such as those between small towns and townships with commercial and cultural centres in a State closer to their own State capital. Along the Murray River and in South Australia, for instance, people look to New South Wales or Victorian centres, respectively. In even less densely populated areas it is impossible to set up any boundaries. "Demographic and geographical conditions in Australia hinder the recognition of regional usage areas", Bryant concludes (1989: 303). In fact, servicing networks, distance teaching centres, area hospitals, etc., connect such habitations with locations away from surrounding ones and produce patterns that differ markedly from settlement patterns. In some way there are overlapping layers of historically and economically conditioned networks. The late settlement of much of the north and the relatively greater weight of Aborigines led to further peculiarities. Bryant distinguishes two types of dialectalisms. The one is optional or, in her words, elective, and are complementary to pan-Australianisms, the other is expressions that have to be used in the absence of such a word in the standard language (1993: 36). Table 3-10 is abbreviated from Bryant (1993: 36) and contains illustrations from the two types of regionalisms and standard words: Table 3-10. Types of regional Australianisms Australia-wide rockmelon rubber band suitcase harvesting

Elective regional cantaloupe (SE) Lacker band (SE) Lacky band (SW) port (NE) stripping (SE) reaping (SC)

Obligatory regional slippery dip (NSW, SA) slippery slide (Qld, Riverina) Murray magpie (SC) footpath (NE, SC) nature strip (SE)

It is not surprising that elective and obligatory dialectalisms occur in a number of onomasiological areas. Prominent among them are 'food' with 109 tokens, "household items' (77), 'rural terms' (47), iDirds' (29) and 'plants' (28), while 'topography', "business services' and 'weather' rank low (Bryant 1991: 290). I will discuss some cases to bring out the facts and highlight problems associated with transition zones and out-of-area uses, and address questions she ignores. Potato cake (Bryant 1989: 89+94; map 1) refers to thinly sliced raw potatoes that have been fried in oil. There are other terms for that, witness

3.4 Internal stratification ofmAusE

257

potato fritter, potato scallop and scallop for short.42 Bryant believes that "[t]he SE term potato cake is synonymous with potato fritter in most of the SC region, "though it is the only term in the SE-influenced eastern part of South Australia. The heterogloss extends west of Renmark and Tasmania towards the SW where it is one of the terms used" (1989: 89). Her map is difficult to match with this description, but what Bryant seems to be saying is that the gloss turns south from of Renmark, meets the coastline near Lake Entrance and reaches along the coast to Tathra in the mixed SE/NE area. Potato cake and potato fritter are used in SC, scallop and potato scallop in NE. There are some out-of-area uses, viz. occurrences away from the nearest isogloss. Thus, potato cake occurs in Canberra, potato scallop in Keith, potato fritter in Tabitha and in Melbourne (Clyne pers. comm.). As to dictionaries, the OED has a quotation of potato cake from 1747, but defines it as a cake made of mashed, boiled potatoes, which is not the same as an Australian potato cake. The EDD identifies the relevant sense in Cheshire, England, and IrE. The noun scallop, of course, refers to a crustacean, but Webster's Third International has the verb to scallop 'to make something like potatoes in a sauce', which resembles the meaning of the mAusE word. Potato scallop is not found in non-Australian dictionaries - nor in the AND. It would seem, then, that only potato cake and {potato) scallop underwent Australian developments, the former a referential shift, the latter motivated by the shape of the resulting 'cake' or the process of making it. In either case the senses of these words must be recent in the areas identified and they have not spread far outside. Potato scallop might show some AmE influence. A picture of the referent of frankfurt 'a small red variety of sausage usually eaten with tomato sauce (ketchup) at parties' (1991: 293; map 20.1.) elicited sausage, banger, cheerio, hot dog, sav(eloy), and compounds formed with frankfurt, such as cocktail frankfurter, frankfurt or frank. Other compounds are based on cocktail, e.g. cocktail sausage, saveloy, sav, or on party, notably party frankfurt/frank, sausage. Bryant believes that frankfurt names are found nationwide, cheerio occurs in Queensland, banger in Melbourne, Canberra, Wagga (near Canberra) and a few other places. The AND has cheerio, meaning the farewell 'cheerio'. It seems that the relevant sense is again recent - the AND's first citation is as late as 1965. Banger is the BrE word for a variety of small sausages, and the 42

These words may not be referential synonyms. Some say that fritters contain onions, others that they have more batter, etc. Clyne thinks that potato fritter is part of a higher sociolect (pers. communication, GL).

258

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

OED's first quotation is from 1919. When it is used in Australia, it may be that respondents gave a superordinate rather than a specific word. Frankfurter (sausage), a German loan, was attested as early as 1877; hot dog is an Americanism; saveloy a Briticism (Webster's Third). Nothing specific can be said about periods of first attestation, though the evidence points to the late 19th and early 20th century. Purely Australian formations may bt frank and sav, but these clippings may also well have been coined elsewhere. Franks are small, German sausages large, and Bryant notes that "[e]ach region has a different name for a 'large, smooth, bland sausage, usually thinly sliced and eaten cold'" (1989: 89). The sausages may differ in taste. As there is no competition between the referents in most cases, the terms can be taken as referential synonyms. They refer to the meat from which the sausages are made, viz• beef, beef sausage/luncheon, pork, pork fritz, or to the origin of the product, such as belgium sausage, bologna and polony, empire sausage, devon, Stras(burg), or the nickname fritz. There seem to be two reasonably clear dialect areas, viz. the fritz area of SC and the devon one in the NE (excluding Queensland). The SE is quite heterogeneous with (pork/beef) German (sausage), Strasburg, etc., a diversity that Bryant attributes to various manufacturers that serviced particular regions. Dictionaries have no evidence for British dialect survivals, except polony, a corruption of Bologna, which the EDD mentions for Yorkshire. The OED says that Bologna is a clip of Bologna sausage, common in AmE. As the first occurrence is around 1600, it must have become established in England prior to convictism. Stras(burg) and fritz are late 19th century formations. For three-pointed burrs "any of a number of plants with fruit which break into spiny pieces", Bryant elicited bindi-eye, bindi, cat('s) head, cat('s) eye, bull-head, three corner jack, jack, caltrop, California puncture weed, double gee. The words' referent is well-known to children, and to adults from childhood memories, and Bryant identifies three regions: "The SW; the SC; and the eastern mainland, which has two, or possibly three, subregions" (1992: 68). SW has double gee, SC three corner jack, but the "name extends further into Victoria than is usual for SC terms, along the southern coast as far as Melbourne" (1992: 68). Other terms used there are prickly!e jack, jack, California puncture weed and caltrop. The Eastern Mainland has bindi-eye or bindi from southeast Queensland down to Victoria. Some informants tended to distinguish two kinds of the weed, reporting bull head for a larger kind in Queensland and bindi-variants for a smaller type. The AND has entries for bindi, bull-head, cat('s) head, double gee, pricklyle jack, three corner jack, and jack so that the terms qualify as

3.4 Internal stratification ofmAusE

259

Australianisms. But they are attested quite late. Double gee, for instance, is first attested in 1872 (section 3.3.2.4), bindi-eye in 1876, three corner jack in 1897, prickly/e jack in 1903, cat('s) head in 1910 and bull-head in 1938. Bindi-eye or bindi are of Aboriginal origin, double gee is Afrikaans, California puncture weed an Americanism, while caltrop goes back to OE and appears to be the traditional BrE word. It may have been felt that it was inadequate so that new words have been coined or loaned. Whether that is true awaits historical study, however. As dictionaries do not mention a dialectal distribution for any of these words, Bryant seems to have found fresh evidence. Once again, the words are recent and the evidence thin. Yabbies and lobsters refer to freshwater and seawater crustaceans, respectively. There is a panacea of partly distinct, partly overlapping terms and referents for these related animals (1992: 59ff, map 2/3), cf. table 3-11: Table 3-11. Crayfish terms

NE

Marine lobster crayfish lobster

Qld NSW

Sth'ern

SE

Mainland

SE SC

Tasmania

sw

crayfish lobster crayfish crayfish, lobster crayfish

Freshwater lobby crayfish, crawchie, clawchie yabbie, crayfish, craybob, craydab, crawchie, crawbob crayfish yabby lobster yabby jilgie, marron

There may be confusion, if, for instance, lobster, which refers to a freshwater crustacean in Tasmania, is used on the mainland where it denotes a marine one. That confusion does not, of course, occur in the regions themselves. Dictionaries do not cover the crawlcray-type words well, apart from craydab. Crayfish, freshwater lobster and lobster are common in BrE and mAusE; jilgie, marron, and yabber/ie/y are loans from, and derivations based on, Aboriginal languages from West Australia and Queensland, respectively. While the Western Australian loans have remained dialectal, yabber has become more common in SE and SC than in most of NE, where lobster-, cray/craw- words abound. Lobby and crawchie are Australianisms, the latter is confined to Queensland. The action of giving someone a lift on the bar of a bike elicited a number of verbs, which are all informal. Nine items occurred, i.e. dink,

260

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

dinky, donkey, bar, double, double-dink, double-bank, dub, pug which produced a confusing isogloss structure. Bryant considers the twin cities of Canberra/Queanbeyan an area of its own on the grounds that it is separated from the main SE region "by mountains to the west and by NE usage to the south" (1989: 92). It must be borne in mind that this is a mixed demographic area, populated by people from all over Australia. The other regions are the dink-usage area of the SE, which extends into the SC area of eastern South Australia and appears to produce a sizeable transition area in, and north of, the Riverina. The double-area consists of the remainder of NE. The western part of South Australia forms the SE donkey-region. Bryant notes dink in several locations well inside the SC region and believes that they are due to younger people's usage. Baker (1966: 68) believed that dink, double, double-bank, double-dink, etc. may be related semantically: State preferences also vary in terms of giving a second person a lift on a bicycle built for one. The oldest version seems to be double-banking (used generally throughout Australia), but donkeying is currently preferred in South Australia, double-donking in Victoria, double-dinking in Western Australia and doubling in N.S.W. (1966: 283)

The AND has a quotation from 1876 of double-banking. But dink is attested as late as 1934. There is, it seems, a reasonable number dialect words, and the public interest they give rise to can be seen in the growing number of dialect glossaries (see Leitner, Taylor, and Fritz forthc.). The number of dialect words may, in fact, be even larger if one remembers that some indigenous loans and derivatives, such as jarrah jerker 'a timber-getter' (section 3.3.1.2), are not used across Australia and that some other words like spats for 'sparrow' (see above) were. More recently, the ABC established a website http://www.abc.net.au/wordmap/, which is interactive and contains numerous expressions suggested by experts and listeners alike that are said to belong to a certain region. An interesting one is knock 'em down 'a violent thunderstorm (in the Top End)', as in this example: (196)

Looks like we're in for another knock 'em down tonight (fr. http:// www.abc.net.au/wordmap/)

Section 4.4.3.4 will explain how the pronoun 'em has become a marker of transitive verbs in the contact languages in Queensland and the far north. That use is visible, for instance, in the compound knockem down rains, which clearly illustrates the minor influence of pidgins on mAusE. The

3.4 Internal stratification of mAusE

261

ABC website is probably the most persistent attempt to collect data and may, in the long run, lead to a concept of regional dialect that may be shared by the regional communities themselves. 3.4.4.3.

Uniformity vs. regional variation

Studies on regional variation leave little doubt, at first sight, that regional accents and dialects are emerging, at least in the southeast. Yet, Bryant's data are limited and her findings raise four questions. The first concerns her idea that the regions mirror settlement patterns and economic and communication networks. Did settlers perpetuate BrE dialect features or have there been local, Australian developments? The second one is about the criteria by which an item can be called a dialectalism. Is it sufficient to find it used? Thirdly, are the developments as recent as Bryant argues? Finally, how compelling are Bryant's methods? It is difficult to establish with any precision the formative role of English dialects in the creation of regional dialects as we know too little about settlement patterns. Recent research has argued that the early society was more stable and that there was less mobility than had been assumed, at least until the Gold Rushes (Jupp 1988; Mitchell 2001). Camm and McQuilton (1987) added that the English settled more closely together, but whether that also implies that English dialect speakers co-settled and provided a basis for the maintenance of dialects over longer periods, perhaps up to the late 19th century, requires further research. In light of a likely second formative period (section 3.6) and the significance of English migrations after 1850, it may be that not all words they brought with them spread to all colonies; they may well have ended up as dialectalisms. Moore (2004), in fact, found that many EngE dialectalisms have survived. Have they become dialectalisms in Australia? Words from Afrikaans, German, AmE or Aboriginal languages might, at times, have remained local, too. How much can we, then, rely on Bryant's claim about the role of early settlement? The overview showed that only few British dialectalisms are involved. They belong to the core of English but became dialectalisms in Australia. Some words did undergo Australian developments, if as late as the late 19th or early 20th century. Take trolley as an example. The word was part of the core of English, and if it is a dialectalism today, it may be that its usage area has shrunk, leaving it behind as an archaism. In relation to AmE loans, internal migration or other avenues may have been more important than settlements. Some words - recall yonnie - are not used in

262

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national

language

the area where they must have occurred first. Bryant's studies really point to the role of local Australian developments and, possibly, emerging communication networks, rather than to settlement patterns. It would follow that dialect areas may have existed unrecognized for a longer time than she assumes. To come to the criteria for recognizing dialectalisms, clear definitions are hard to come by, but two spring to mind. Both of them derive from the definition of language as a set of expressions (langue2) and as a code (languei) in Chapter One. The first is grounded in actual usage, the defacto currency of a word in a dialectal area. Problems arise with words that have recent referents. If they are admitted as dialectalisms, it would seem logical to include established idioms like Pitt Street farmer, Collins Street cockie, or Buckley's chance, even if they are known outside Victoria or New South Wales. They will only be used to referents in the region. You cannot be a Pitt Street farmer in Melbourne, nor can you be a Collins Street cockie in Sydney. By contrast, Buckley's chance originated in Sydney and may have become more generally used today. What about recent coinages like Koori, Nyunga or (to be) jeffed ('to be ill-treated, as if treated by Jeff Kennett', which derives from the name of Victoria's former Premier, Jeff Kennett)? Would recent borrowings from AmE then start out as dialectalisms do? If they are not used in the media or the national entertainment or science domains, etc., they may all start out in restricted areas before they, possibly, gain national currency. The second criterion to recognize dialectalisms is that a word must have undergone a measure of institutionalization, be accepted in the community to be characteristic of it. On that criterion a word can only count as a regionalism if there is a community that defines itself along such lines and if it is aware of words restricted to it. If psycholinguistic awareness is a criteria, few of Bryant's words would count as regionalisms. Yet, as there is an interplay between actual, unnoticed, use and awareness, de facto use may trigger awareness and words may come to be seen as regional markers in the future. Bryant's studies may acquire a psycholinguistic or psychopolitical function that resolves the tension between awareness and use. To finish with methodology, with no Australian tradition of dialectology to draw on - in fact with a tradition that was hostile to such research Bryant had to develop her own methods. The vast, sparsely populated continent forced her to adapt to Australian realities methods developed in North America. A range of informal and semi-formal observations, such as conversational topics, newspaper searches, etc., led her to a tentative list which was reduced the list to 72 on the basis of more focused methods.

3.5 Standard mAusE and Australia 's national language

263

Those items went into a third phase of formal, even on-site investigation. To speed up the investigation, the elicitation of past (= recalled) or current (= actual) usage through pictorial stimuli was resorted to. But visual stimuli have limitations (section 3.3.1) as they contain more information than may be at stake and respondents may focus on uncontrolled aspects. As Bryant used the 'first response', 'second responses' were excluded though they might have revealed other terms that are used now or were used in the past. Second responses, too, belong to speakers' knowledge and may support regional patterns. Bryant's findings must be treated with caution, but it is obvious that there must have been both Australian and regional developments that were probably ignored until recently. Before leaving this topic, I should point to the frequent observation that the 'bush' and rural areas differ from large towns in the more frequent use of non-standard grammar - recall clause-final but in (184-7). Like the Broad, non-standard grammar characterizes the urban/rural areas and reflects a regional pattern, but does not permit the inference that there are distinct regional dialects.

3.5

Standard mAusE and Australia's national language

Standard languages have been variously defined. Some experts refer to explicit norms laid down by academies or else to conventions that developed, formally or informally, by the continued praxis of elite sections of the community. Usage guides, dictionaries, grammars and the like often serve to characterize what is, or isn't, a part of the standard. Standard varieties are not 'natural' like rural or other dialects are said to be; they are a response to appropriate socio-political conditions. Haugen's dictum that "[e]very self-respecting nation has to have a language" (1972: 103) makes exactly the point that a standard language responds to a nation's needs and has more symbolic than communicative functions. Standards are said to be widely intelligible, viz. across a whole nation, and to serve as a focal point for speakers of other varieties of the language. They are able to express the 'full range of meanings' needed for public and private communication and are, by virtue of that, appropriate for high functions in public contexts. Though fairly homogeneous, standard languages are by no means monostylistic, as I said in section 3.4.2. Other attributes of standard varieties that have been mentioned are their (alleged) historicity, i.e. the link with a nation's past, their use in literature, and their creativity and flexibility. Such a characterization veils an inherent conflict in that standards can create social disadvantage. With their use being distributed unevenly, some

264

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

segments of a nation have little access to, or use for, it and, by implication, suffer social disadvantage (Romaine 2000). Haugen's view on the interaction of social and linguistic forces provides a reference frame for the survey to follow: The four aspects of language development that we have now isolated as crucial features in taking the step from 'dialect' to 'language', from 'vernacular' to standard', are as follows: (a) selection of a norm, (b) codification of form, (c) elaboration of function, and (d) acceptance by the community. (1972: 110).

Four processes, then, are crucial to the rise of standard languages or varieties. But one must add a fifth one, i.e. acquisition, that will play a role in the survey to follow that will retrace the story from variety formation to standard mAusE - recall the path headed 'modification' in diagram 1-1 (Chapter One) - and address these themes: (1) When did a form of English emerge that was considered sufficiently Australian to be accepted as the English in Australia? When did it stratify sufficiently for relevant institutions and experts to be certain it would be acceptable as a base of a standard variety? (2) What have the major issues and results of standardization been? What reference materials, such as in dictionaries, usage guides, have been developed? (3) Who were the major agents in the codification of mAusE? What was the role of government? Taking up the thread from section 3.1.3, it may be helpful to recall that the late 19th century saw the emergence of an Australian variety that was to act as a base for a standard to develop subsequently. There is some justification for calling this a local development, the English in Australia was legitimately seen as different at the level of linguistic form from other varieties. Global pulls have become more forceful in the recent past. I will survey the areas that attracted more concern in the codification of mAusE to answer question (2). The third question will provide the conceptual grid to structure this account in that it is possible to relate the work of some codifiers to particular linguistic levels. Moreover, it will be interesting to see that relevant agencies of codification, such as the ABC, may begin, but also cease, to function as codifiers.

3.5

3.5.1

Standard mAusE and Australia 's national language

265

The Australian Broadcasting Commission

Radio introduced a new domain in the 1930s that relied on speech and triggered a development that would eventually shift the emphasis on 'good English' - mainly RP-like pronunciations - and to the adoption of (a range of) educated mAusE styles.43 Though there never has been a public service radio monopoly, the framing of problems was closely related to the goals of the Australian Broadcasting Commission, later renamed Corporation. The debates connected with it, as they marked an explicit transition from BrE norms to mAusE ones between the 1940s and the early 1990s. At the end of that period the ABC had ceased to be a codifier and relied again solely on indirect mechanisms on norms of language and communication which are spelt out in program policies, editorial guidelines, etc. The ABC's crucial role during the relevant period can be amply illustrated on the basis of its archive materials. I will draw heavily on Leitner (1984) and archive work done in 1995 and 1996. Recall from section 3.1.2 that there was a measure of pride in mAusE at the end of the 19th century and that, at the end of the so-called awareness period in the 1940s, Baker (1945) and Mitchell (1946) marked a decisive shift towards the recognition of mAusE. Yet, despite a shift in attitudes, complaints about mAusE did not ebb off and reached the level of government in 1941 - well before American soldiers were stationed downunder. The language of radio drama was considered unacceptable by many. The government responded by the creation of a Joint Parliamentary Committee on Broadcasting, the so-called Gibson Committee, which made this recommendation: In order that the work of teachers ... may be assisted instead of being hampered, we consider it of great importance to maintain correct and properly pronounced speech on the radio and perhaps the most effective way of securing the desired improvements would be an influential approach to the two sources where the lapses are most likely to originate. We therefore recommend that the Minister issue a circular letter for transmission ... to radio script writers and radio actors, explaining the ideal and soliciting their co-operation in its attainment, (fr. Leitner 1984: 65)

That letter was clear in targeting commercial radio, script writers and actors, but was not so clear on what the Post-Master General thought was 43

Radio was a new technology, but the emphasis on 'good speech', on spoken styles and national norms was not confined to it. The theatre was a major force.

266

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national

language

'the ideal' and what the complaints had been about. They probably were not against AmE - that would have been said. Leitner (1984) suggested they were against exaggerations of Broad speech, an interpretation based on a remark by R. Redshaw, then Head of Presentation. But readers may recall from section 3.3.3.1 that complaints may have been against the deAustralianization of English for foreign markets. 'Over-doing' and 'undoing' an accent are, of course, related, and it is possible that both played a role. Mitchell noticed the potentially high profile of the controversy and pushed the English Association's Sydney branch to write to the ABC and to recommend a well-proven approach, the one by the BBC, to ensure high standards. The ABC was a good target since it pursued the same goals of, and was run along the same lines as, the BBC. Both aimed for high cultural standards, fulfilled a national service, and were non-profit organizations. The Labor leader, Bearsly, agreed that the ABC "would be able to create a public taste which will tend to lift the intellectual life of the community to a higher plane" (cf. Leitner 1984: 60). Australian talent should be encouraged, orchestral and choral groups be formed. The public service ethos has remained remarkably stable throughout the years and was so flexible as to be acceptable in the commercial context in which the ABC operated. Editorial and program guidelines required that programs were to be presented in "the form of entertainment" even if their primary objective was educational (1940). Light entertainment was to be provided "as an addition to, and even in competition with, commercial stations' programmes" (1952). The guidelines were open to a multicultural interpretation when that became necessary in the 1980s. A slavish imitation of the BBC would not have worked in a context with vast underpopulated areas, a strong rural audience and three time zones. High-level presentational and program norms had the added advantage that they called for diversity in presentational style that would not solely address the cultivated and urban spectrum of the audience. Rural programs had to use a language not too far removed from that of the country, a form bordering on Broad and including some features of non-standard mAusE. The climate of opinion of the day was open to a new approach to raising Australia's cultural level and uniting the regions and communities into a nation that was still very young. When the chairman of the English Association, McLoskey, encouraged the ABC to take action, he said this: My Committee is of the opinion that the best way to secure this desirable object would be to follow the method adopted by the British Broadcasting Corporation, which resulted in the publication of a series of

3.5

Standard mAusE and Australia 's national language

267

recommendations to announcers under the title of "Broadcast English", and urges ... the appointment of an Advisory Committee to draw up, on international phonetic principles, a list of recommendations for Australian Announcers in the light of variations of English pronunciation current in general Australian speech. (1943; fr. Leitner 1984: 66)

That proposal was hard to reject, based as it was on sound principle. It was confined to the task at hand, referred to current Australian speech and was in perfect harmony with the ABC's objectives, though intentionally out of touch with the intentions of the government. The Gibson Committee had targeted commercial radio and, by implication, the broad end of mAusE. There was much intentional vagueness in Mitchell's reference to 'variations in general Australian speech', and it was not clear whether he referred to nationally defining features or the common way of speaking English. An abstract phrasing of his position could, at any rate, avoid conflicts about details. The ABC's memos were equally cautious: (i)

Caution should be taken regarding regulations of the pronunciation of ordinary words.

(ii) The codification of Australian place names and, more generally, onomastics, should proceed as an area that did not arouse much, perhaps even no, hostility against Australian lines. Though Mitchell's (1946) Cultivated accent could have been thought of as a base, early statements do not seem to imply a shift towards Australian speech at all. What might have been meant was high quality, consistency in speech, and a consistent orientation on a BrE model. But the Acting Manager for New South Wales wrote in 1946 that "[i]t is felt... that pronunciations acceptable in England are considered pedantic and unacceptable in Australia" (Leitner 1984: 68). A committee was, established in 1951 that looked at the differences between the BBC and the ABC. Somewhat later one reads this from the Pronunciation Committee: It must be recognized that a national form of English is developing in Australia, as Professor Mitchell has shown ... just as national forms of English are evident in Canada, USA, N.Z., and South Africa.... The Committee urges that the A.B.C.'s general pronunciation policy should acknowledge the reality of Australian English. The acceptance of that principle will have a particular effect in drawing the A.B.C, and the Australian people closer together in their language. More generally... the A.B.C, [can] help in the dissemination of the best form of Australian English, (fr. Leitner 1984: 70)

268

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

The growing awareness of national varieties in the English-using world made an Australian variety no longer a far-fetched idea. It would be able to unify the nation and, in fact, assist the ABC to fulfil its brief. Remarks on the artificiality of non-Australian pronunciations now became more frequent: In a considerable number of words Australian usages is so widespread that to use the standard English pronunciation might be regarded as precious or affected. Such a word as beret is pronounced in Australia with a silent "t" as in French, while the majority of English people sound the final "t".... (minutes of the Pronunciation Committee, 7 April 1952, ρ 2) Soon after, the revised terms of reference of the Standing Committee on Pronunciation stipulated that it should "study and advise the Commission [i.e. the ABC, GL] on what the Committee regards as an acceptable educated Australian speech, with the ultimate purpose of encouraging the use of such speech in Australian broadcasting" (my emphasis; minutes, 18th August 1952). There still was a problem on how much mAusE could diverge from BrE. One wanted to avoid the danger noted by Lloyd James, the BBC's pronunciation advisor in the 1930s, that national varieties may diverge so much as to become mutually unintelligible. Mitchell cautioned in 1953: "While the object of the Committee ... is to encourage the use of an educated Australian speech, the Committee constantly bears in mind the importance of speech which is understandable throughout the Englishspeaking world and is a link between its members" (First Annual Report 1953; fr. Leitner 1984: 71). The ABC did not, and not for some time, propagate the Cultivated accent, let alone the General, as its norm. The committee extended its scope of reference and was renamed Standing Committee on Spoken English in 1954. Its brief now included the use of English expressions and conventions in the Australian setting and, by implication, the differences between mAusE, BrE and AmE. The door for the shift to Australian norms was now wide open, but the demand for international intelligibility continued to favour BrE-type decisions. It may not be too wrong to suggest that, while one disliked foreign-sounding pedantry, one still preferred a minimal distance from the "parent". The signs of conflict became stronger. The Canberra Advisory Committee reported the view of Mr White, who thought that "if the A.B.C, attempted to make pronunciations acceptable internationally it might violate some well-established pronunciations in Australia" (minutes from a meeting on 1 February 1955, ρ 2). Information about differences between

3.5

Standard mAusE and Australia 's national language

269

BrE and mAusE was thus crucial, and it was proposed in the late 1950s that a new committee should look into that: The Cttee recommended that the A.B.C, be asked to publish a pamphlet setting out an alphabetical list of the differences in pronunciation between Australian usage and English usage. (43rd meeting, 12 November 1957)

An Australian policy could take precedence over the requirement of international intelligibility and the link with BrE. The nation had been ready for some time, especially when Mitchell and Delbridge's (1965a) nation-wide investigation identified three accents. The Cultivated could form the basis for broadcasting, the ABC could adopt an Australian policy and respond to the realities of the nation. Implementation coincided with a slow shift from pronunciation consistency to a position that held that the spoken style should respond to topics and audiences. That made a closer consideration of Australian usage, lexis and grammar unavoidable. The role of British sources was diminished and BBC practices had now to be considered on a case by case basis. Even the insistence on BBC pronunciations for foreign names was rejected in favour of a general pronunciation policy and "a simple organisation within the ABC" should look after the distribution of the decisions (60th meeting, 6 July 1966; cf. Leitner 1984: 69). In the early 1970s the chairman, Delbridge, could call for a full Australian stance, a loosening of the requirement for pronunciation consistency, and for the committee to "advise the Commission on what the Committee regards as acceptable, educated Australian speech". But there was more: In terms of professions, one would normally expect to find announcers and newsreaders using the variety called Cultivated Australian, in company with some academics, and teachers, some professional and business men, some men in government and public service. But it seems entirely right that some A.B.C, staff broadcasters would be speakers of General or even Broad Australian, so long as they are clear speakers...; and so long as listeners like listening to them. (Terms of Reference of 17 August 1971)

That shift was not uncontroversial. Downer, for instance, thought the committee had moved too far to a local position: I do not recall, in any discussions which I have attended, that there has been an acknowledgement of the fact that English is an international language, and that this consideration should be weighed against the strong tendency of

270

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

the Committee now to "nationalise" the language. The Terms of Reference understandably lay some stress (...) on the use of Australian speech, but are silent on the question of the broader issue of being comprehended beyond the national borders.... In preferring what is believed to be a native Australian pronunciation or idiom, the Committee gives prime consideration to the interests of Australian speakers and passes over the question of international intelligibility (14 December 1981). A shift to mAusE was irreversible. In 1983, two years after the publication of the Macquarie, the committee's brief was rephrased: 1.

To advise the Corporation on the pronunciation of English and nonEnglish words and phrases...

2.

To advise the Corporation on principles of word choice and grammatical usage

3.

To advise the Corporation on what the Committee regards as acceptable styles of educated Australian speech, with the ultimate purpose of encouraging the use of such speech in Australian broadcasting. (SCOSE's policy after 151st meeting, 23 June 1983)

The Macquarie was adopted even for pronunciation issues:44 (i) The usual educated Australian pronunciations of ordinary English words are found in the Macquarie Dictionary. Normally these can be accepted as standard. Note: As our standard is local, the pronunciations recorded in British and American dictionaries are of subsidiary interest. (ii) Nevertheless Macquarie entries may be challenged by any Committee member.... (151st meeting, 23 June 1983) In 1994 a SCOSE document sums up the development since the 1940s: The Committee has existed in one form or another since 1943. Initially, as the PRONUNCIATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE, it was concerned with the maintenance of standard English pronunciations as the most suitable ones for broadcasting. In 1952, on the recommendation of an internal committee set up to examine the desirability of the ABC making some departure from BBC practice, a STANDING COMMITTEE ON SPOKEN PRONUNCIATION was established. ("The ABC's Standing Committee on Spoken English"; no date, but in the second half of 1994, GL) 44

See The Voice of the A.B.C. Announcers' Handbook, October 1944, ρ 6. The ACOD (1987) was added as a reference source somewhat later.

3.5

Standard mAusE and Australia's national language

271

It added that committees worked within a framework of "an acceptable educated Australian accent". The ABC, still the only institution involved in the codification of the accent and the biggest provider of a codified accent, in practice rarely and unambiguously referred to any particular variety as its norm, while linguists like Delbridge, SCOSE's chairman, and Gunn could do easily: There is no reason to believe that this responsibility demands a particular choice of one of the three varieties of Australian English. The classification Cultivated-General-Broad certainly has social connotations, and if we related it to Fries's criteria (....) we should probably find that General Australian would be the inevitable choice.... In view of what has been said of the distribution of the varieties, it might seem unrealistic to choose Cultivated. But it must be remembered that the classification was made in terms of vowel quality, and that this is too limited to be a sufficient basis for the choice. (Delbridge 1967: 24) This prompts one to suggest that if there is a standard Australian, it would approximate the upper section of the general accent. (Gunn 1992: 215)

Instead of being a disadvantage, the ABC's lack of precision created a flexibility for style that enabled it to respond to topics, program formats, personality, etc., and permitted the ABC to stay in tune with sociolinguistic developments in society. It could, for instance, drift from the Cultivated to upper General mAusE as Gunn had argued. That is indeed today's preferred choice. Before I turn to an illustration of individual areas of norm setting and codification, I need to discuss two points. The first has to do with the fact that the widening of the activities of the committees made the ABC vulnerable to pressures to act pre-emptively. The issue of whether committees should act pre-emptively or wait for issues to be brought to their attention was raised many times and answered with a half-hearted 'No' to pre-emptive action. Committees had a mixed membership, about half of them represented various radio and television departments. Most problems were brought up for discussion from inside the Corporation, but there were cases when committees felt it would be better to raise broader issues. Even before the brief had been widened to principles in usage, grammar and style in 1983, one finds a few general issues such as the pronunciation of names and some general words in foreign languages; the pronunciation of words to do with international sports events; lexical fields such as for cars: vintage, veteran, classic, historic, etc. (minutes of 122th meeting, 9 June 1978)

272

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

The widening of SCOSE's briefs and the concept of diversity in style now made it possible to exert pressure on the ABC, often from lobby groups inside the Corporation, and to argue that "the ABC as the national broadcaster has an opportunity, indeed a responsibility, to exert that authority." That occurred in the context of the calls for neutrality of language use regarding gender, race and disabilities (see below). The ABC was also approached with a request to participate in a project on place names, the Toponomy Project. It declined that approach, but the biased language issue was an area that it could not. Yet, the more action was suggested, the less likely it was for the Corporation to agree to participation - there was and is an inherent conservativeness. In 1994, for instance, the Terms of Reference re-confirmed the rejection of pro-active decisions: The Committee recognises that the ABC employs a range of styles and that these are in part imposed by the particular medium, in part a reflection of the broadcaster's perception of the target audience, and in part a matter of individual choice. Again, the Committee gives advice when this is sought or in response to an expression of audience opinion. (Archives of the ABC, SCOSE 1994, ρ 6) That position contributed to the resignation of linguist-members in 1996, who felt successful action required forward planning and a systematic, not a piecemeal, approach to potential problems. Closely related to their resignation is the second problem, i.e. the dissemination and implementation of decisions on codification. Though the practice of having language committees was to insist on, and improve, language standards, implementation had been a persistent problem and had never been solved adequately. Implementation was a cause of frequent structural changes and changes in the membership. Up to the early 1970s committees were a platform for language issues to be raised, when they were brought up for discussion from within the ABC. That procedure was to avoid the impression committees would tell broadcasters what to do. Decisions were published in the ABC Weekly and circulated to departments concerned. On the 94th meeting (12 October 1973), SCOSE discussed a letter of the chairman to the General Manager about "the unsatisfactory standard of pronunciation". He replied that decisions did apparently not reach the right people and added that "[a]n obstacle to general acceptance of SCOSE rulings is a failure to understand the true role of the Committee, i.e. that it is a properly-constituted ABC body, NOT composed of people outside the organisation seeking to impose their views on ABC staff." Its status was not fully recognized and diffusion continued to be difficult. Due

3.5 Standard mAusE and Australia 's national language

273

to re-organizations and the abolishment of the Presentation Department in the 1980s, responsibilities now fell to heads of program departments, such as News, Current Affairs and Sports, etc. They often did not attend SCOSE meetings, though non-attendance did not necessarily imply lack of interest, as my interviews with the Head of News, Current Affairs and Sports and other broadcasters revealed in 1995: "Oh I think it's our bible. It's uh it's very good, because it tells you how to pronounce words in an acceptable Australian English language." A sports commentator was more outspoken when he told me that their work had very little to do with SCOSE and that SCOSE did not suggest anything of relevance. The number of queries brought up for debate diminished, which made implementation even more difficult. Electronic diffusion did not help much and, by the mid-1990s, SCOSE still had not found an effective way of diffusing recommendations. It was then disbanded, with one staff remaining to deal with pronunciation. The ABC had ceased to function as a codifier, the essential work had been done - the acceptance of solely mAusE norms - and further issues could well be dealt with on the basis of high-level norms to communication. The ABC had returned to an internal way of ensuring adequate language use. Program and editorial policies spell out the goals of the Corporation and express general principles on issues such as defamation, privilege, advertising and objectivity in election broadcasting. They address general norms of language to be observed in program content and presentation, while they leave scope for professional judgement. Special in-house style guides, e.g. for News, Current Affairs (ABC 1995c), Sport (ABC 1996), etc., give more specific recommendations, but again go beyond the narrow concept of language that SCOSE dealt with. Policies permit debate about language in an abstract but coherent high-level manner; guides deal with medium-level norms, style, groups of related words or, on occasion, single expressions. There is, of course, an in-built tension between the policies and the style guides. Low-level norms are far less binding, especially when they do not affect content to a noticeable degree and so cannot be conceived of as direct translations of policies. The latter, however, do permit inferences on the favoured approach to communication and raise topics of language under such headings as program standards. Thus, the Program Policies and Practices (ABC 1981) define their task as 'guidelines' and, when proscriptions are made, appeal to professional judgement, good sense and ethical behaviour. On language they says this: The ABC is looked to for guidance on the use of the English language. Audiences expect ABC staff to express themselves clearly and without

274

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

hesitation, and to pronounce accurately and confidently. Staff should be careful in the choice of words, and should marshal their thoughts into orderly phrases and sentences so that argument and discussion can proceed in a logical manner ... In programs heard or viewed by young people, or by those whose mother tongue is not English, it is particularly important that ABC staff use correct forms of spoken English. Such audiences will be influenced by the distinctions broadcasters make between formal English usage, and idiomatic and colloquial expression. Learning the correct use of idiom and colloquialisms is essential to fluent speech, and ABC staff should set a good example in this matter.... for the ABC is a considerable educational force in the community. The pronunciation of words, place names and people's names and titles is important. The ABC's Standing Committee on Spoken English meets regularly to determine the correct pronunciation and use of words and phrases.... (1981:9)

Different styles are to be used to match the objectives of program formats with audience segments. The potential conflict between the provision of guidance and not sounding too educational had to be resolved. The choice of words, pronunciations of proper names and general words, the use of grammar, etc., was to sound natural. The 1981 document does not reflect the shift to mAusE standards - that was made by SCOSE in 1983. The policies of 1993 (ABC 1993) do reflect it implicitly, when they state that " [variations of language favoured by different groups of Australians - young and old, well educated or less educated, migrants, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and others - are equally valid...." (1993: 30). Other changes worth mentioning are the cultural dimension in international broadcasting (1993; section 8.2.), nondiscriminatory language use (ABC 1989) and the demotion of good usage in favour of the theme of the ideological impact of language. In other words, the ABC underwent not only a shift from 'good English' to 'acceptable styles of presentation' and a widening to include ideological issues, but also a change that re-placed debates inside the Corporation. I can now turn to the third theme, i.e. the illustration of the codification of linguistic expressions. Having alluded to dangers and advantages of the tension between high-level and low-level norms, I need not pursue a strictly historical approach and can start with a list of issues that were discussed: (a) Pronunciation of place names, especially Australian ones; English and foreign place and personal names

3.5 Standard mA usE and A ustralia 's national language

275

(b) Pronunciation of common words, classes of words (c) General use of words and grammatical structures (d) Style (e) Foreign words used in mAusE, pronunciation of foreign language words in general, foreign language titles (f) Bias through language of all sorts (g) Purity of the language, especially the resistance to AmE Issues overlapped at times as the focus shifted some item from one category to another. The word aboriginal, for instance, was discussed under the label of good usage - capitalisation, adjectival or nominal status - till the late 1970s. It was then seen to carry 'ideological load1, especially after Koorie and other names were preferred by indigenous Australians (cf. section 3.3.1). Australian place names have been a major source of problems. In 1953, for instance, the ABC Queensland submitted 1,000 Queensland place names (17th meeting, 24 November 1953). Similar lists came from other states. Work eventually culminated in A Guide to the Pronunciation of Australian Place Names (ABC 1957). To give some examples, the town of Tomago, New South Wales, was to be pronounced as [tomma-go] (95th meeting, 10 December 1973), Casuarina as 'kaz-yoo-ree-na (101st meeting, 6 December 1974), Nullagine, Western Australia, as [nAbgain] (1983). As for Wagga Wagga, New South Wales, its popular form Wagga was rejected (69th meeting, 17 December 1968). It is not entirely clear on what principles such lists were set up, but efforts were made to collect names for future occasion. It was felt that more should be done and, in the 1980s, David Blair, the then chairman, encouraged the Corporation to participate in the Toponomy Project mentioned above, which was supported by the National Geographic Society, Macquarie Library, and other national bodies (217th meeting, 13 December 1990). Though the terms of reference of 1994 gave the ABC a national authority, lack of interest in and funding of an outside project accounted for the negative stance taken. English personal names were raised during the early period, when the intended norm was still BrE. A typical example is a BBC list of names and words that was distributed to program departments for comment on the occasion of the coronation of Queen Elizabeth II in 1952. Proper names for music, which were likely to come up in music programs, were raised on the 105th meeting (11 August 1975). Closely related was the use of the definite

276

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

article with names of institutions, such as 'The University of Sydney', 'The Flinders University of South Australia' (special pamphlet, 1969). Phrases like 'Sydney University' were acceptable, but not 'the Sydney University'. Foreign names came up throughout the existence of committees. A principled distinction between them and general words was hard to apply in practice, and logically committees issued pronunciation guides for foreign languages (see below). Names did raise some crucial issues, and a proposal by Bernard into degrees of anglicization was accepted as policy. That policy could not remain undisputed when Australia saw itself as multicultural and when, as a result, the need was felt for more "genuine" pronunciations. The 1994 terms still opted for the older position that, in case of choice, the ABC should use an anglicized pronunciation. "In rare cases," the terms argued, "there may be an Australian usage different from both, and that will be recommended." Where there was no established anglicized form, a pronunciation close to "the sounds of Australian English" had to be taken. Generally speaking, policies were similar to those of the BBC. Thus, German names like Lufthansa 'looft-hun-za' (101, 6 December 1974), Die Welt as 'dee velt' (101 st meeting, 6 December 1974), or French names (117th meeting, 5 August 1977) were pronounced as in BrE. Indigenous languages might have been expected to come up, but they rarely did.45 There are surprisingly few indigenous words in my large collection of the minutes. Stress placement in Pitjantjatjara was discussed at the 125th meeting, 15 December 1978, when it was ruled that stress was on the first syllable. The name of the town Boroloola, Northern Territory, was stressed on the third syllable, i.e. Boro'loola (undated meeting, presumably in 1991). Koala was discussed on the basis of a usage note on its etymology and meaning by Ramson at the 194th meeting (20 October 1988). While indigenous names do not seem to have been much of a topic, names like Aborigine, Aboriginal or, later, Koorie were (see below). The end of the White Australia policy saw some pro-active action, as unpredictable events might trigger a sudden need for advice. The 61 st meeting (28 September 1966) discussed where the ABC should move forward. The focus was, amongst others, on the languages of Asia and the Pacific. The minutes say that Arthur Delbridge [1] submitted a preliminary list of languages .... This was based on the languages covered in the Introductions to the American publications World

45

I have checked the minutes from the 82nd meeting on.

3.5 Standard mAusE and Australia 's national language

Til

Words and CBS News Pronunciation Guide, but a number of languages, chiefly from the South-East Asian and Pacific areas, had been added to it; [2] recommended that the original idea of merely modifying and augmenting the existing American pronunciation guides should be discarded, and that an entirely new set of rules, adapted to local requirements, should be compiled instead... ... the Committee recommended that... using the BBC pronunciation system as a basis, it should formulate an equivalent set of rules... and ... determine the order in which languages should be dealt with, giving priority to Asian and Pacific languages. (61st meeting, 28 September 1966) This language hierarchy reflected Australia's geo-political realities earlier than governments did. Though the statement expressed favourable attitudes towards American reference sources and AmE, it showed a continued preference for the BBC and BrE. Where possible, there should be local Australian rulings. Soon after, this resolution was adopted: The ABC Standing Committee on Spoken English proposed to undertake the progressive production of a series of general guides to the pronunciation of various languages.... That priority should be given to languages of SouthEast Asia and the Pacific, which were of particular concern to ABC announcers, and about which very little authoritative guidance was at present available, (minutes of a meeting in 1966 or 1967) There is some evidence in the archives that similar views had been expressed earlier. At the 29 th meeting (6 May 1955), the problem of "important place and personal names in the Pacific" was raised, but not acted upon. The topic of mining led to a discussion of Malay names at the 36th meeting (25 July 1956). To clarify points of detail, it was suggested to refer to experts of mining and to write to Radio Singapore. At the height of the Vietnam War Vietnamese words were debated. And at the 56th meeting one finds this statement: Vietnamese names. Mr Scott undertook to seek advice about the pronunciation of Vietnamese names whose representation in English orthography suggested a pronunciation differing markedly from that actually recommended by speakers of Vietnamese. It seemed desirable to adapt these pronunciations so that listeners would readily identify the sound of the name with the written form. (22 September 1964) A guide of European, Middle East and Asian languages was presented at the 78 th meeting (4 December 1980). Asian languages like Bahasa

278

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

Indonesia and Malay received further attention (Director of Presentation, September 1973), Chinese (pronunciation guide in Pinyin spelling, 4 th meeting, 1983), Asian names and titles (News Division attached to minutes of 100th meeting. I quote from that document: 46 Regulations on titles, such as Mr., Mrs., the name to call a person by, honorific, etc., in Burma, Cambodia, Sri Lanka, China, India, Japan, Korea, Lao, Malaysia, Pakistan and Bangla Desh, Thailand, Vietnam, Indonesia, and Latin America. (4 October 1974)

To return to English, listeners brought problems with common words to the committee's attention: There are a few letters ... between 1948 and 1950 complaining about the mispronunciation of Australian and foreign names, Australian vulgarisms, such as yairs for 'years', weil for 'wheel', bars for 'baths', bin for 'been', and about notorious British issues such as the 'intrusive r' and the endangered /w/-/wh/ distinction in words like wail and whale, (fr. Leitner 1984: 68)

One cannot fail to see the mixture between Broad and non-standard mAusE on the one hand and the General and the good usage tradition on the other. The pronunciations given were common in Broad and General. Bin was not even uncommon in the Cultivated. Conservative sections of the public remained unhappy with Australian solutions unless they had currency and saw the purity of mAusE at stake when some expression could be seen as an unwelcome intrusion from the outside. Yet, most examples discussed were isolated cases about correctness or similar concepts. A few cases forced the committees to look at small classes of words. Thus, the [a] sound in unstressed syllables in words like recuperate (section 3.2.2) was accepted early. The Pronunciation Committee discussed dirigible and re_naissance at its 22nd meeting (2 July 1954) and accepted hi as the regular form. In 1965 defect was ruled to have /a/. In other cases, Australian pronunciations were accepted as a matter of course, prior to debates about mAusE norms. More recent meetings confirmed rulings, e.g. racist, aged (123 rd meeting, 11 August 1978), divisive (222 nd meeting, 20 June 1991). What may yet be surprising is that such rulings were felt to be necessary at all in the 1990s. The tense /i:/, in place of /i/, in words like indisputably was accepted at the 37th meeting (4 October 1956). The /w/ for /hw/ in where or when was 46

The attachment carries Ramsons's signature and the date 6 December 1974.

3.5 Standard mAusE and Australia's national language

279

condoned at the 95th meeting (10 December 1973). After an extensive discussion at the 125th meeting (15 December 1978) the ruling was reaffirmed, classifying other practices as characteristic of "a certain educational tradition" inside Australia but outside Cultivated mAusE. The use of /a:/ or /ae/ in words like demand came up sporadically. At the 42nd meeting (30 August 1957) circumstance was ruled to be pronounced with /ae/. With regard to balm and band it was said that "each announcer should pronounce the -a .... according to his normal usage" (probably 61st meeting, 28 September 1966). At the 76th meeting (7 September 1970) it was maintained that there was no choice in "both educated English and Australian speech" in words like transport, transact and /ae/ should be used. But circumstance permitted choice of a different sort, viz• liti or hi. There still was some reluctance to speak of educated (or standard) mAusE, and the quotation contrasts 'educated English' with 'Australian speech'. Bias through language was raised in the 1970s and was related to several of the topics above, such as the use of titles and names for people, which was seen in the context of decorum and respect, until then. The first sign of a shift occurred in discussions of the noun homosexual and of designations for indigenous Australians. The word homosexual raised a pronunciation problem. The first vowel could be realized as either [au] or [D] and the choice of one over the other caused a lengthy debate. As the word was of Greek origin and meant 'same', not 'man', the vowel 'should' be [D], not [au]. SCOSE expressed the view that an etymologically correct usage was a way to avoid bias (121st meeting, 7 April 1978). The parts of speech and spelling of Aborigine and Aboriginal were a frequent topic. On the first occasion on 23 October 1959 it was ruled that Aborigine{s) was a noun, Aboriginal an adjective; but usage remained divided. The ruling was confirmed December 10, 1973, but ran counter to the Australian Government Style Manual's (1966) position, according to which Aboriginal was a noun and adjective. Blackfellow, too, came up at that meeting, but the point was to reject Baker's (1945) treatment of it as a standard Australianism. At the next meeting it was acknowledged that blackfellow and white-fellow were used, but only by tribal Aboriginals, and it was suggested that the words Aborigine and Aboriginal be discussed "from time to time". One wanted to stay in tune in this controversial area. The 118th meeting (7 October 1977) started a shift in the context in which these word were discussed. The minutes refer to the practice of the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel in legislative drafting, which used Aboriginal as noun and adjective. In contrast, the Minister of Immigration, Al Grassby, favoured the old ruling. In light of such contradictory but eminent sources,

280

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

no recommendation was made47. Two years later (124th meeting, 29 September 1979) the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs argued that the old ruling should be incorprated into the Australian Government Style Manual, "[f]or only in this way can the Aborigines of Australia truly feel unique, as we are." Good usage debates ceded to concerns with Aboriginal identity. That twist of the argument was acceptable even to the first Aboriginal Senator, Senator Bonner, who attended the meeting as a guest.48 The theme of language and its ideological load could no longer be dodged. SCOSE was aware of the potentially discriminatory implications of Aborigine, and on its 215th meeting (18 October 1990) it held that a phrase Aboriginal People (with capital letters) would be more appropriate and in harmony with multiculturalism. As indigenous names had now become common (section 3.3.1.2), a new theme of usage surfaced viz. their appropriate use in relation to region. SCOSE cautioned that "[t]he use of Aboriginal names ... must be approached with care as they vary from state to state." The second edition of Watch Your Language (ABC 1992) clarifies the position: [t]he user of these terms should be alert to the feeling among a growing number of Aboriginal people that Aborigine is a term that applies to indigenous people of any country and to use it as the only word for Australian indigenous people is to belittle them and their cultureAboriginal names should be used in some contexts. (1992: 2)

Decisions about indigenous names were, once again, framed within the 'good usage' tradition. Watch Your Language (ABC 1982; 1992) reflects the widening of the briefs to grammar and style. It contains decisions that have been arrived at over many years and projects an image of timelessness on the kinds of issues raised and the decisions taken. But there are significant changes between the two editions. The first one is close to the minutes of SCOSE, the second one adopts the structure and presentation of usage guides. Many examples that had been raised again and again during several decades proved that codification in grammar did not emphasize a distinct Australian identity in dialect. The plurals of Greek words ending in -ae, -i and -es are a case in point and were raised at the 103rd meeting (2 May 1975). While 47

48

The 120th meeting (24 February 1978) ruled that the word Aborigines, which was only to be used as a plural noun, should also have a singular. On the 125th meeting, 15 December 1978, a three-page summary of the evidence returned to the original 1959-recommendation. It was re-affirmed on the 152nd meeting (presumably in 1984). Old practices die hard!

3.5 Standard mAusE and Australia 's national language

281

etymological plurals were maintained in many cases as in antennae, larvae, vertebrae, a number of words were accepted with regular English plurals likt formulas. In a few cases SCOSE felt it had to set a standard. In 1973 it discussed the plural of platypus. Platipi was considered correct, but too academic for colloquial usage; "platypuses" fairly common but not euphonious. "Platypus" itself, used as a noun of quantity (cf. "deer" and "sheep") was considered, with a view to creating a standard, but no decision was made. (93rd meeting, 31 August 1973) Style had come up for discussion frequently and long before the committees' briefs allowed it to be done. Downer, for instance, wrote an essay on sentence stress in 1973, which was prompted by errors made by announcers in stressing function words, such as prepositions. His essay echoed what was done by the BBC and shows a persistent dependency on the BBC (Leitner 1984). Here is one of Downer's examples that contrast erroneous with correct stress assignment: (197)

(a) size of his feet, the man from the gas company, the penalty for this depravity (b) he said he was for the motion, not against it

Though one might have seen (197) as conveying the wrong information, Downer argued that "the result is usually felt to be aesthetically displeasing". His argument is set in the good usage tradition. At the 121st meeting (7 April 1978) a note on colloquial style by Bernard was discussed (cf. ABC 1982; 1992). Interesting is the inconclusive end: Colloquial English, slang and cant and the like have their place. And this is the point. The standard language and the modified standard, the colloquial and slang, can be defined and determined with some precision. The question as to when and how each might be fitly used still stands. (ABC 1992: 26) Summing up, the ABC's committees' work was crucial to the creation of a standard of mAusE. Its rulings probably affected more the work of other codifiers than actual program practices. When the ABC returned to implicit, high-level regulations in program policy statements, etc., it ceased to act as a codifier. By virtue of the pluralism that it permitted in spoken style, it contributed to usage in grammar and lexis and was aware of ideological issues such as unbiased language use (section 3.5.8), though it really was unable to respond adequately.

282

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

3.5.2

The Macquarie dictionary project

The ABC was the first institution to address issues of standardization and, though it widened its scope, its focal area remained pronunciation or spoken style. The Macquarie project, which Görlach (1997) described as the most innovative dictionary for its clear Australian policies, was the second major codifier. Görlach remarked that [t]his development [towards a broader, more self-assured view, GL] can be highlighted by a few dates: In 1945, Baker's The Australian language, ..., made an exaggerated claim for the independence of AusE. Although this was not acceptable even to his compatriots, his claim being based on the broad, discredited varieties, was a landmark on the way to new attitudes.... Proper codification started with the Macquarie dictionary, first published in 1981,... (1997: 28)

The editors were by no means sure if the public was willing to accept a mAusE dictionary and were surprised when it was so soon taken as the standard reference source by the ABC, schools, media and other institutions (Clyne 1989). I will re-iterate the steps leading up to the 1st edition in 1981 and then come to the codifiers that followed the path of the Macquarie. There is no space for a comprehensive survey of earlier dictionaries and glossaries (Leitner, Taylor, and Fritz forthc.), but table 3-12 has an overview over such reference works before 1981. They formed part of the knowledge base for that dictionary: Table 3-12. Analysis of the scope of lexicographic publications Period 1788-1899 1900-1949 1950-1981

Tot. 9 15 67

Lingo 6-7 11 12

Gen'al 2-3 3+1 21

Register

Usage

Etymo/hist

Other

13-15

10

4-7

6

The first 110 years had not, naturally, produced many glossaries, let alone dictionaries or usage guides, though there was some interest in the slang of thieves and similar strata of the population. Vaux (1819) is a collection of the flash language and Hotton (1859) a dictionary of "modern slang", which appeared in a second edition in 1860. Crowe (1895) was not a genuine representation of Australia' slang. Another tradition is connected to the late-19th century interest in mapping the words of the dialects of English in Austral-Asia. Lentzner's (1891) Colonial English: A Glossary of

3.5 Standard mAusE and Australia's national language

283

Australian, Anglo-Indian, Pidgin English, West Indian, and South African words and his Dictionary of the Slang-English of Australia and of Some Mixed Languages (1892) are prime examples of collections of slang and contact languages, while Morris's Austral English (1898) applied the OED's historical principles to the lexis of Australasian varieties. Lake's (1898) Dictionary of Australasian Words was already mentioned in section 3.1.3 as a source of words for Webster's International Dictionary (1900; 1908). The years to the mid-20 th century saw a growing interest in slang and informal words, but none in the mapping of English in the whole AustralAsian region. Baker's (1941) A Popular Dictionary of Australian Slang caught the immediate interest of the public and had run into three editions by 1943. Baker (1944) contains a glossary of words from Aboriginal languages. The boom period for Australian lexicography began in the 1950s and accelerated and diversified during the 1970s. Schonell and Middleton's (1956) dictionaries studied the English of the working class, the nonstandard mAusE, with a view to developing teaching materials for migrants. A concern with the history of words is visible in Ramson (1966), with good usage in Turner (1972). The registers of gold-mining, Australian football, and the idiom of the convicts were studied by Eagleson (1964; 1965b), Gunn (1965; 1966), Eagleson and McKie (1968a/b; 1969) and Langker (1981). Such studies prepared the ground for a novel approach to Australia's lexis, and the Macquarie (1981) was able to shift away from exo-normative BrE or AmE reference sources. It could treat mAusE as selfcontained. When the plan for it was aired in the 1960s, the idea of a comprehensive Australian dictionary was shared widely. Proposals had been made before by Bernard (1963), Eagleson (1967) and others who had worked at the Australian Language Research Centre (ALRC) at Sydney University. Delbridge, too, who became the Macquarie's chief editor, was familiar with lexicography and had written about it in Delbridge (1973). It is instructive to quote fro his history of the dictionary and the earliest phase of the work: It began in late 1969 when after sending out some scouts to view the terrain, Brian Clouston, whose staff at the Jacaranda Press wore at parties party Tshirts proclaiming Clousto maximus est [Clousto was the head of Jacaranda, GL] proposed the preparation and publication of what he called an "aggressively Australian" dictionary. He invited me to be the editor, and to gather together a team of university colleagues who work with a research staff provided by Jacaranda Press in Jacaranda Press offices, close to

284

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

Macquarie University. He offered the Encyclopedic World Dictionary as a base dictionary, so that work would not start tabula rasa. (1985a: 274f)

Jacaranda wanted an aggressively Australian dictionary which should contain Australianisms from all walks of life, from slang and swearing. It should be a full Australian dictionary, not an appendix to a British or American one. The Macquarie did not become aggressively Australian, though it did contain a fair portion of the slang and obscene language. Selection principles struck a compromise between the lexis of the lingo and educated usage. This brief list of examples shows the low end from several letters of the alphabet: (198)

(a) arse, arse about face, up Cook's arse, arse bandit, arsehole (b) bullshit, bullsh, bulsh (c) fuck, the fuck, fuckable, fuckwit (d) shit, have the shits, up shit creek, to shitcan, shithouse, shit stirer

The dictionary would, according to Delbridge (1998: 51), "give something like equal coverage to the whole range of registers found in community life - formal, informal, colloquial, slang, standard, nonstandard, even crass and vulgar - at least so far as in a general dictionary you were wanting to meet the interests of that part of society that actually buys dictionaries." As a consequence of that decision, Delbridge departed from older dictionaries and left unmarked Australian words, while words that were, or could be, used but were really typical of BrE or AmE were marked. Delbridge explains this policy in the introduction: It [the Macquarie Dictionary, GL] is the first general reference dictionary to present a set of entries for a comprehensive word list in which all the pronunciations, all the spellings, and all the definitions of meaning are taken from the use of English in Australia, and in which Australian English becomes the basis of comparison with other national varieties of English. By Australian English we mean that form of English that originated early in the nineteenth century among the children of British settlers who were born and raised in the new colony. (1981: 12)

Though unacknowledged, the policy fulfilled Baker's plea for an internal measure of mAusE. The first edition was not based on a systematically collected corpus - which is the case of the third edition (1997). Yet, it could be taken as representative of more than the public domain and to fulfil all criteria of a national dictionary, Delbridge maintained:

3.5 Standard mAusE and Australia's national language

285

The editors have presented information about the way English is used here in Australia, in the newspapers, in literature, in education, in government and public life, and in conversation however formal or informal. This book is not a dictionary of Strine; not a dictionary to show either how inventive, or even how uncaring Australians might be in matters of language. Its objective is to give the Australian community carefully assembled information about its own use of English. (1981: 12) Clyne (1989: 36) referred to it as "an outstanding piece of language planning of a national variety of a pericentric language." As the first full, desk-size dictionary of mAusE, it seems to have fulfilled more than modest expectations. Within three months the first edition of some 50,000 copies was sold out. SCOSE adopted it as a standard in pronunciation in 1983 (section 3.5.1). The Australian Education Commission adopted it as a spelling guide for schools. It became the standard reference book for the Hansard reporters of the Commonwealth Government, in law courts, numerous companies, organizations and other institutions. The Australian Government Style Manual referred to it from 1988 as the standard for spelling and dropped the word lists it had contained till then. The first edition was based on the Encyclopedic World Dictionary (1971), which was an encyclopedic dictionary and was itself based on the American College Dictionary (1969). But the work involved more than the mere Australianization of that dictionary. The first step was to eliminate words and senses that were too British, too American, typical of other varieties of English, encyclopedic or just ghost-words that had been carried over from one edition to the next. The second process was the insertion of relevant Australian words and/or senses. These tasks were performed on the basis of extensive reading programs and good judgement, says Delbridge: Words have been included on the evidence of their being current, or of having been current in Australia at any time. We have not been influenced by necessarily doubtful estimations of the probable life-span of some of these words.... If we could be persuaded of a genuine currency, then the words went in.... [several paragraphs later, GL] The only regional information in this dictionary is what is included about the English used in New Zealand. (1981: 14f) The first edition was uneven in what it considered current and representative. 'Comprehensiveness' meant a mixture of what was said to be, or have been, current. The dictionary was harshly criticized (Urdang 1984; Burchfield 1982). Burchfield claimed that 93 per cent of the words

286

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

had remained the same as in the Encyclopedic Delbridge rejected this allegation:

World Dictionary (EWD).

But the extent to which we made a new book out of the base is certainly relevant even if not easily expressed. Dr Burchfield mentions a similarity of 93% between ACD [Australian Concise Dictionary, GL], EWD, and the Macquarie, estimated apparently by headwords common to all three. Perhaps American, British, and Australian are superficially alike to that extent - we do all speak the same language after all.... Dr Burchfield (...) acknowledged that in the settling of Australia the emigrants 'forged new varieties of speech and writing that are superficially very similar to those of the land they left but underneath teaming with differences.' Our Macquarie editors tried to do justice to what was underneath, and Dr Burchfield has completely underestimated the extent of this task. (1985a: 77)

Burchfield had deplored that the pronunciations did not also refer to the pronunciations of British migrants: "The pronunciations given are those of 'native-born Australians', a concept he [Bernard, GL] may find increasingly difficult to defend as the population continues to diversify" (1982: 11). Delbridge replied that dictionaries were codifiers and that it was pertinent to omit BrE pronunciations and others as ephemeral to the community unless they were seen as regular features of groups or sub-groups. One might add that Burchfield was quiet wrong to imply that mAusE would return to pronunciations that were identical with, or close to, BrE or that it should support an exo-normative view of the language. The third criticism was that "[t]he rules for the inclusion of Australian expressions are also strikingly less stringent than for words from the common core of the language" (1982: 11). He mentioned words that he thought were no longer current but were included, while others were current but left out. That point seems to have been granted and later editions have shifted to a corpus basis as technology made it easier to do that. Today the Macquarie Library has a vast Australian data base and its third edition is unrelated to the Encyclopaedic World Dictionary. The Macquarie has also closed the gap to the Oxford tradition by increasing the stock of words taken from literary sources so as to "assist readers of earlier Australian literature" (1997: xi). On its policy of inclusion and exclusion it says this: So it [the dictionary; GL] records, for Australian English, both its stability and the facts of change.... it takes its descriptions of the form and meaning of words and phrases from the uses of English in Australia, whether it be active, productive use, as in speaking or writing, or passive use, as in reading and listening.

3.5 Standard mAusE and Australia's national language

287

What The Macquarie Dictionary offers is a descriptive account of the use of English in Australia; it holds up the mirror to the national society of speakers and writers, not just at the present time, but with a historical perspective. (1997: xi) The Macquarie also covers AborE words (not AborE pronunciations), regionalisms, Asian words and reflects the broad socio-political context of the country whose citizens have come from many backgrounds and may encounter South-East Asian English newspapers. The inclusion of AborE words reflects the shift from a narrow to a broad concept of mAusE (see section 4.4.4). Here are some examples: ashes, grow up in the ashes 'to be brought up in a traditional Aboriginal community, seen as gathered around the camp of fire', ashes bread 'damper cooked in the embers of a camp fire', brudda 'brother', business 'the rituals of Aboriginal tradition', do business 'to perform Aboriginal rituals', camp 'an Aboriginal domain centred around a dwelling place which can be temporary, as an overnight shelter, or permanent, as a group of houses', cheeky '(of people and animals) unpredictable and dangerous', learn 'to teach', jumbuck 'a sheep [orig. Australian pidgin corruption of jump up]', to be caught up in yarns 'distracted by gossip'. 49 A few words, widely considered as AborE, are unmarked, which suggests that they have become a part of mAusE, e.g. deadly 'colloquial wonderful'. Internationally, the Macquarie met with little interest outside specialist circles. It is unlikely that it will replace Anglo-American dictionaries in the foreseeable future. While recognized as a national variety of English, mAusE still does not have the international prestige, not even in its own region. But there are attempts to turn the Macquarie Library into an interregional company that is relevant to the Asian-Pacific region. The third edition, for instance, includes South-East Asian English words which Australian business people or tourists are likely to see or hear used. Instead of seeing that policy as a weakness, one should recognize that the publisher aims to turn it into a regional dictionary - similar to, say, Oxford or Webster's dictionaries. At a Macquarie-sponsored conference in Manila in 1996, Susan Butler, the chief editor, expressed the view that Macquarie Library could assist in the production of a regional South-East AsianPacific dictionary that would serve the needs of native and second language speakers. It would mirror the English of the region, says Butler: 50 49

50

See http://www.ecu.edu.au/ses/research/CALLR/AENG/entrv.htm (22 January 2003) and the Macquarie (1998). Cf. Said, Siew, and Keat (1997), Bautista (1997), Newbrook (1999) for the work invested by the Macquarie Library in the South-East Asian region.

288

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

The aim of the conference is to build up a description of the state of English in Southeast Asia, to encourage research in this field, to establish links with the Macquarie regional dictionary. This could be done by making contributions to the local consultant, or directly to Macquarie. ... we hope to be launching an Internet Site on MacquarieNet... (1997: 120) Because the dictionary is establishing itself in a market which has such a broad range of dictionary users - from native speakers to those who are using English constantly but as a second language, to those who are dipping a toe into English as a foreign language - it needs to include some ESL features. For example, it needs lots of illustrative sentences... And it needs to provide collocations - those words which happen to go together in English. (1997: 123) Australia could well play a part in such a project, not as another outside authority on English, but as a friend with some expertise. (1997: 124) The first edition, thus, initiated a radical revision of the way Australia's lexis, pronunciation, lexico-grammar, spelling and usage were seen. The English in Australia was the yardstick, not the marked case. The third edition is a full-scale Australian product, based on a multi-million corpus of how English is used in Australia, and stretching out into the linguistic experiences Australian users may make in the Asian-Pacific geo-political region as tourists, business people and the like. Scores of dictionaries have followed Macquarie's lines, with little modification. The most relevant next step in relation to codification was The Australian National Dictionary (1988). But from users' perspectives, desk-sized dictionaries may be more relevant. Oxford University Press published the Australian Pocket Oxford Dictionary (1984) and others in collaboration with the Australian National University. OUP did not quite follow Macquarie's practice at first. The unmarking of mAusE terms had to wait till the Concise Australian Oxford Dictionary (1992). Other dictionaries had adopted that praxis earlier. Collins, for instance, had already published its Collins Australian Pocket Dictionary of the English Language and Gem Australian English Dictionary (both 1981). The Australian edition of its Concise English Dictionary followed in 1982. The pace of lexicographic work accelerated and over 150 dictionaries have been published since the Macquarie (Leitner, Taylor, and Fritz forthc.). The most important innovations since the Macquarie are the AND (1988) and the etymological glossary by Dixon, Ramson, and Mandy (1990), both of which adapt the Oxford tradition to Australian vocabulary and highlight the historicity of mAusE and raise, by implication, its status.

3.5 Standard mAusE and Australia's national language

289

Starting with small-scale, specialized collections of words in the 19th century, mAusE now has a full set of lexicographic reference works that meets diverse needs (section 3.5.7). Currency, etymology, meaning, spelling, pronunciation, etc., have been mapped. Lexicographers continue to monitor on-going change and develop more refined reference materials. The grammar of mAusE has attracted attention (Burridge and Mulder 1998; Jones 1999; 2001). Though much research is still academic (section 3.2.3.2 and 3.4.2), there is a body of knowledge for language teaching and teaching materials to be discussed on the basis of the national variety of the country.

3.5.3

Government and other codifiers

Government has a significant role with regard to language in education and the needs of migrants. Yet, the Australian government did not involve itself in this area up to the education acts of the 1870s and 1880s. And for as long as migration was largely from Great Britain there was little need to do so. Involvement became a necessity after World War II (cf. Leitner 2004b). But there was a precedent that may have foreshadowed a willingness to act, when listeners complained about the quality of English on radio (cf section 3.5.1). The Postmaster General then acted in a way that was not likely to have happened in Britain. Australian government action in the language domain has been more intensive and pervasive than in other Anglophone nations, at least since World War II. So it is not surprising that Delbridge approached government when the Macquarie project was running into difficulties: "An appeal to government was an obvious possibility", he said and continued that "a country growing in its sense of independent and international stature had its own variety of English, yet after at least 150 years of its being identifiable in use as the national language, there was no lexicographic record of it" (1985b: 284). The project deserved government support, he thought. The request was put to the Commonwealth Literature Board, which agreed. A consequential area where government intensified its involvement was norms for written communication. Australia had inherited a British practice of having a government style manual, which, in Britain, was published by Her Majesty's Stationary Office (HMSO). But official writing must have been so poor that a joint parliamentary committee noted in 1964 "the poor and variable typography and design of government publications and lack of uniform standards for style and presentation. 'It hoped that some of these variations might be overcome by the formulation and general acceptance of

290

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

a Commonwealth style"' (Delbridge 1990: 119). The result was the first edition of a Style Manual, whose recommendations were based on Fowler and similar British publications. That edition was intended, Mackerras, the editor of the 5 th edition, explains, as a pure house-style manual, but it "was quickly embraced by commercial and private publishers, business and education" (2000: 1). He adds that "[t]he second and third editions of the Style Manual were essentially consolidations of the first edition." Delbridge and Peters (1989) comment on the third edition: Through its successive editions (1966, 1972, 1978) it [the manual, GL] has prescribed the correct spellings, capitalisation, and punctuation, as well as some details of morphology, such as foreign versus anglicised plurals, as they are to be used in government documents. It offers a list of about 1,100 words deemed to have "difficult spellings", and in it, arbitrates on many of the currently variable points of English spelling, generally adhering to what is often thought of as British rather than American practice (...). On some points, however, it takes its own stand apart from both, for examples in preferring to use -ise and -isation (rather than -ize and -ization, or a mixture of both forms). (1989: 129)

In other cases it is "erratic", as when it recommends blameable instead of blamable. If that was a sign of independence, it was not independence thought through, nor defined in mAusE terms. Once the Macquarie had set a new trend, more decisive steps towards the Australianization of norms for public, governmental writing could be envisaged. Especially the fourth edition in 1988 had adopted a distinctive Australian style and based most of its decisions in this regard on the Style Council of 1986 (section 3.5.3; Peters 1987). Since Delbridge and Eagleson were appointed to act on the advisory board, it was possible to consider seriously the notion of Australian style. Anne Summers, who was First Assistant Secretary at the Office of the Status of Women in the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, was a member who favoured change especially with regard to discriminatory language. But the Department of the Army and the Attorney General's Department pointed out that there were bound to be "usages peculiar to the professions represented in their departments, possibly with an international style authority to regulate their usage". A switch to Australian norms was not possible without considering such constraints. Delbridge responded by saying that this situation raised the whole question of the status of the Style Manual recommendations not only in relation to public servants, but to the wider

3.5 Standard mAusE and Australia's national language

291

readership of the book. It directed the Committee's attention to a related question: whether this manual for government publications, which are typically informative or regulatory documents of a fairly formal sort, could really be broad enough in scope to cover other types o publication and other sorts of writing: newspapers, for example, novels, periodicals (from the Women's Weekly to Quadrant). (1990: 122Í) A solution was found when norms for written communications no longer implied a uniform style for all writing. The manual would accept spelling variants, etc., and would "place a higher value on consistency within a publication than on absolute conformity with specific and possibly arbitrary rules" (Delbridge 1990: 124). Editor Grayston added that, "[n]o publication, whatever its nature, should be expected to follow slavishly any set of rules - by whomsoever prescribed - if to do so would have an adverse effect on the text as a whole" (1990: 127). Variation in writing was a policy that resembled that of SCOSE in the area of speech and enabled the manual to have a wider reach than anticipated. As to Australian norms, let me mention that non-sexist language took up a total of 17 pages. Regarding norms for writing, any reference to BrE usage books (e.g. Gowers 1973) was deleted. But the AGSM still referred to OUP practice and to the American Times Atlas for geographic names (1978: 13). The fourth edition of the AGSM (1988) added a list of Australian place names but deleted the chapter on syntax and replaced the list of difficult words by a reference to the Macquarie. The fifth edition basically continue the fourth. The sixth edition (2002) has made further progress in the direction of a purely Australian perspective (Mackerras 2000). It is, in other words, the fourth edition that is important for standardization and codification. It is now published by Auslnfo, which also edits Stylewise (1994-), a bi-annual pamphlet, which is sub-titled "Communicating Commonwealth Style and Best Practice". That pamphlet picks up general themes, such as explaining the meaning, history, and uses of grids in geography, malapropisms, editing details etc., and provides practical help and background. Auslnfo also published Purchase's (1998) The Little Book of Style. Further steps have been taken in what is called acquisition planning (cf. Leitner 2004b). Walsh, for instance, was asked to produce a training booklet for writing by Walsh (1989) entitled Communicating in writing. Walsh targeted the public service, hoping to give practical help for writers to "overcome the most common causes of breakdown in written communication" (1989: v). Loosely following the structure and content of AGSM, it contains a list of difficult words, explains the difference between advance and advancement, Aborigine/Aboriginal, and the like. Pauwels's

292

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

(1991) systematic and didactic Non-Discriminatory Language addresses the problem of re-writing or even re-thinking entire messages to avoid bias. Purchase's (1998) Little Book of Style is an attempt to popularize the manual's content and to present "the essentials of Commonwealth style in the accessible form of an alphabetically arranged list" (Purchase 1998: ix). It gives one an answer to each problem and refers to the larger work where there is choice, yet insists on consistency as the major norm and wants to be a bridge to the as yet unpublished sixth edition. This guide has been designed officially for Commonwealth writing only, not even for states and territories. Yet, the preface, too, stresses, "[t]he success it met with in government and the private-sector publishing industry soon gave it far greater relevance and applicability than originally foreseen. Indeed, it has long been regarded as the standard work of reference for all authors, editors and printers in Australia" (1988: v). It does not quite succeed in providing a national forum for its complexity, but it is a yardstick for public writing and printing and a resource for smaller and more specialized guides, such as those for newspapers. One should add that its impact and that of spin-offs did not have much effect on, say, Women's Weekly and other down-market magazines, which take little note of it and are much more Australian in their idiom. 3.5.4

Usage guides, especially newspaper guides

The preceding section has already touched upon the concern with 'good usage1 in public speech and writing and the need for usage guides. The AGSM had set the tone, as it gradually shifted away from BrE norms and took an independent - and later an Australian - stance. The publication of Australian usage guides is thus be related to the general climate of opinion and the research climate that gradually favoured projects with an Australian angle. Such an angle had to rely on a large body of empirical research. And that kind of research had indeed been carried out since the 1960s, some of which had been mentioned in section 3.3.2.2. A precursor in the description of an educated variety of Australian English grammar was Eagleson (e.g. 1972a/b; 1976), whose work was set in the British tradition of 'divided usage' (e.g. Quirk et al. 1985). His lead was taken up by Collins (e.g. 1978; 1979; 1998) and others. If one adds to this the episodic points discussed in SCOSE, there had emerged a sound basis for usage guides and I will turn to two different, if related, types: general guides for an educated but nondescript public and guides for broadcast and print media.

3.5 Standard mA usE and A ustralia 's national language

293

Usage guides symbolize a concern with appropriacy in language, codification and standardization. And they have had a long history in the Anglophone world. The first two books that could properly be called guide were Alford's (1864) The Queen's English and White's (1871) Words and Their Uses, Past and Present. The first one was British, the second American. These works established a model for the most prominent usage guide authors, viz. the Fowler brothers. While they wrote King's English (1906) together, Henry Fowler is the sole author of Modern English Usage (1926). "The four books", says Burchfield, former editor of the OED Supplements, "differ considerably in length and presentation but the bond that joins them is that each of the authors was attempting to seek out solecisms" (1982: 94). He might have added that all four are based on the public language as reflected in the press and in writers in the national speech community. He might have added also that they are unrepresentative empirically. They do not seek to explore current usage and are prescriptive. They cover anything that their authors wish to say on pronunciation, writing, print conventions, lexis, phraseology, morphology, syntax, titles, proper names, style, and pragmatic devices - keeping an eye on intended readerships. Fowler's Modern English Usage, for instance, dealt with public usage and included conventions in social life. Good usage had also been a theme in the ABC's committees early on, readers will recall, and became more so when the committees' briefs shifted towards diversity in spoken styles. The public interest in usage was, in other words, institutionalized early in the ABC, whose SCOSE committee eventually published a small guide itself (ABC 1982; 1992). But there were bound to be follow-ups. Murray-Smith (1987), Hudson (1993) and Stern, Bolitho, and Lutton (1993) primarily targeted writers and included sections on real-estate terms, book design, etc. Hudson added letter writing conventions, keyboarding terms for self-editing and many other themes. Though in alphabetical order, the intent of an entry is often hard to identify without a good knowledge of the tradition. The entry on Aboriginal words in Hudson (1993) deals with meaning and spelling, the one in MurraySmith (1987) with pronunciation. A prominent feature of all guides is their essayistic style, which combines a good understanding of the language, its history and social conventions with wit and humour. That style is noticeable in the longer essays of SCOSE (ABC 1982; 1992). Such conventions had been imported from Britain and have been adapted to Australian content. Guides are cautious not to depart too much from international usage in the direction of local mAusE. Murray-Smith (19892), for instance, is ambiguous in what he thinks of Australianization. The first

294

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

quotation argues strongly for the need of an Australian guide, the second one downplays its significance: Right words has a number of aims.... Above all we wish, where appropriate and possible, to apply an Australian understanding to words. For we believe it is time for a specifically Australian guide to the use of our language. Studies in the Australian language and in Australian literature are reaching some sophistication. There is a greater awareness than there ever has been of our own contribution to the English language. (1989: x) It [Right Words, GL] seeks merely to contribute to discussion of the way we use English in Australia. For the most part, of course, we use English in Australia very much as English is used elsewhere. Where there are important differences, these will be the concern of the folklorist, the collector of colloquialisms, the specialist dictionary-maker and the phonetician. (1988: xi)

Hudson (1993) wants his guide to be "about Australian English" (1993: v), which he defines as "the language Australians talk and write". But, he says, it "consists of a great many shared elements [with other forms of English, GL] plus those usages which are peculiar to Australia" (1993: v). The following quotation is worth adding: However, the book lays special emphasis on the issues which are peculiar to Australian English, not so much because Australians need to be taught their own language, but because we need to be aware of the differences when speaking or writing for overseas consumption. (1993: v)

A systematic search for specific features has not been done, but mere browsing shows there is not much that is distinctly Australian. A brief look at Hudson (H, 1993) and Murray-Smith (M, 1989) may be enough to make that point. There are obvious cases like Aborigine(s), Aboriginals); the meaning and spelling of Aboriginal proper names (H) or their pronunciation (M). There are less expected entries, such as a lengthy one on attitudes to accents (H), on the lexis of Advance Australia Fair (M), on the words Australia and Australiana (M) or on ocker (H). Countless entries deal with mAusE and AmE - such as the use of the digraphs -ae- >e and oe- > -e in mediaeval and foetus (M; H); the derivation of transitive verbs from prepositional ones, as 'agree {to something)'; or 'agree something' (H). Regarding words from AmE, Hudson asks whether they could or should be avoided and answers that they should be, "just as Britishisms are to be avoided: clarity and courtesy demand that we speak our own language,

3.5 Standard mAusE and Australia's national language

295

whether this happens to coincide with British usage, with American or with neither" (1993: 25). That brings out a point not made explicitly above, viz. usage guides aim to increase the "purity" of the language by rejecting foreignisms on the one hand but acknowledging similarity and overlap on the other. Especially grammatical and lexico-grammatical entries do not contain much that is specific to (standard) mAusE. There are a few instances, such as as well as, as if/though, as from, as to (H, M), participles (H), an entry on pronunciation that touches upon the pronunciation of known and similar words in mAusE (section 3.4.1); and an entry on non-standard grammar that deals with begunned, which is said to be used by children. Here are a few examples that are dealt with from the perspective of mAusE usage in these guides: abyss (spelling), Anglicism, -ise (meaning), apartment, condominium, flat (uses), to barrack (BrE, mAusE usage). That does not identify a large area of Australian content if Australian means that the use or meaning of some expression must be confined to mAusE and must differ from BrE or AmE. But if it is taken in the sense of the Macquarie (H), then the guides do deal with what is common in Australia. It may be good at this point to mention Peters and Delbridge's (1997) investigation of Fowler's Modern English Usage (1965; edited by Gowers) and the question if and to what extent it has influenced Australian guides. Pointing out that Fowler had shaped BrE guides (1997: 305), a comparison is made of a few items in BrE and mAusE actual usage. On the basis of evidence in large corpora of the 1960s, Peters and Delbridge conclude, for instance, that "fused participle" constructions and the genitive variant, as in (199a), are more common in BrE, while in mAusE a version like (199b) would be more common: (199)

(a) My singing operatic arias annoyed my neighbour's dog

(b) The neighbour's dog hated me singing operatic arias (fr. Peters and Delbridge 1997: 309) On the basis of such evidence Peters and Delbridge concluded that what is consistent in the two sets of data is the tendency of British writers to work to certain restrictive usage principles, and that of the Australians to range more freely. What we seem to have is more like coincidence with Fowler's positions than consistent evidence of his influence. Taken on their own, the data suggest regional differences in usage. (1997: 310) They added that "Australian usage writers are as a group less committed to the canon of Fowlerian items.... Among those which they do treat, they

296

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

accept rather more than their British counterparts and contemporaries" (1997: 31 Of). mAusE, it seems, has been moving towards norms of its own in the dialect, and the notion of Australian style is a reality today, not an oxymoron. Turning to media guides, newspaper publishers had not remained inactive after the publication of the Macquarie and the AGSM, and no major publisher today lacks a style guide. A look at two of them may be instructive. The Age's Style Book (19952; 19871) and the Herald Tribune Weekly's (HWT) one (ar. 1995) outline general norms of writing and of communication and also contain specific entries. The Age's guide (1995) maintains that its principles of 1985 have remained valid but that low-level changes can be observed which are intended to "help reporters and subeditors produce clean copy; accurate, literate, clear and concise, and in style" (emphas. sic; 1995 Introduction). It admits that there is diversity of style for different papers of the Fairfax company: Because of the differing needs and special requirements, the sports and business departments and The Sunday Age sometimes adopt a style different to that of the Age [j/c!] generally, (n.p.) The HWT's guide begins with high-level norms such as 'be right1, 'be quick1 and 'be brief which translate into specific norms on, for instance, sentence structure, length, etc. Like The Age it prefers diversity of style, as its author Lockwood says: "This book does not seek to impose conformity or discourage individuality. It tries to establish uniformity... Flexibility does exist." But he adds that, as "papers with wide variations in style from day to day or page to page look undisciplined or confiised, so break the rules sparingly" (n.y.: 6). There follows a list of broad themes, such as capitalization, metrics, tautologies, titles, and an alphabetical list of special entries. At the 2002 Style Council (section 3.5.5) Lockwood read a paper entitled "Newspaper style: from local to national", which signalled a radical move of News Corporation's Australian papers towards a national style. Until then, News Corporation's papers had pursued different policies for as long as there was consistency in each paper. The common noun labour, but not the name Labor Party, was, for instance, spelt with -our in Sydney, while it was with -or in Melbourne. But, Lockwood said, "commercial demands and technological advances have now made it impossible for editors to be idiosyncratic" (2002, ms). Staff cuts mean that staff employed by one paper may produce articles for a range of the 100 News Corporation's papers; internet sites cross-refer to each other. Diversity is out of

3.5 Standard mAusE and Australia's national language

297

the question in a situation where articles transcend individual papers. There has to be a national style. Yet, Lockwood says, "all the changes, all the compromises, perhaps with the exception of the significant spelling changes, were cosmetic". Regionalisms are translated when an article appears in another paper. Americanisms, too, are replaced. News Limited's (2003) style guide now prefaces the quotation in this way: This book aims to do two things. First, it is intended to help achieve consistency. It shows how our newspapers spell and use certain words, how to punctuate... We can argue endlessly ... but finally the newspaper has to choose... Second, it aims to be a reference work. It contains the spelling of difficult words, advice on grammar, punctuation and when to use capitals... If you cannot find a spelling in this book, our standard reference is the Macquarie Dictionary. We do not always accept Macquarie's spelling, but where we differ the spelling is in this book.

Though this guide is as prescriptive as the others and expects journalists and editors to adhere to the principles, they are free to depart in details. The corporation's flagship and only national paper The Australian, which was an exception before, now has to adhere to the national style. The reference to the Macquarie, too, confirms the rise of an independent, Australian norm, even if solutions in particular cases are similar to those of, or the same as in, other varieties. But one should recall that the aim of consistency was not to promote a national Australian linguistic identity or its international acceptance but that it was a result of commercial decisions.

3.5.5

The Style Council

The codifiers that emerged after the ABC and the Macquarie, i.e. writers of general usage guides, those who wrote guides for newspapers, etc., would not have had much impact outside the domain on their own. Their impact has much to do with the Style Council, which was one of the most prominent outcomes of Australia's Language and Literacy Policy (Lo Bianco 1987). The Style Council was not, strictly speaking, a codifier or an institution with any power to prescribe. It is a platform or forum for informed debate amongst language and communication specialists. It takes up language issues that come up in the public domain and promotes a highlevel, consistent approach, that is informed of differences between different media and their needs of communication. At annual conferences it has

298

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

discussed such themes as spelling, the possibility of a broadly uniform standard for style, the language of education, law, or parameters that determine the choice of styles and stylistic change (cf. Peters (ed.) 1987; 1990; 1992; 1993; 1994; ar. 1996; and ar. 1999 in References). While the themes are not inherently Australian, there is an emphasis on distinct mAusE aspects. By bringing together Australia's expertise in the media, publishing, government, business and the professions, the Style Council diffuses highlevel information and acts as a co-orchestrator. It edits Australian Style, a bi-annual magazine on general themes of usage, explores the awareness of the public of Australian words, attitudes and other matters and has entered into a partnership with Auslnfo to promote the view that there is a need for a coherent approach in the public domain.

3.5.6

Non-discriminatory language and plain English

The long-term involvement of powerful agencies with codification and standardization has been diminishing and, having reached a consensus on the existence of a standard mAusE, the ground has been shifting from local Australian issues to those necessitated by global needs. They now exercise pressure on mAusE to open up to the global world of communication. I will turn to linguistic bias towards gender, race and disabilities which had not gone unnoticed in the good usage tradition, as the remarks on the discussion of homosexual and Aborigine!Aboriginal had shown in section 3.5.2. But 'good usage' solutions turned out not to be the best conceptual framework for issues to do with the representation of people, and more was required than a change of pronunciation or the replacement of a word by another. A mechanical approach was more of an obstacle than a solution; one really had to 're-think' the norms of writing and speaking before solutions would flow naturally. In my study of the role of AmE in the ABC's broadcast language (1984), I expressed this in these words: The rejection, or reluctant acceptance, of AmE usages performs several distinct functions. For one, it reconfirms the linguistic options that have been taken. It also strengthens the linguistic and cultural ties with BrE and Great Britain generally. But, thirdly, it runs the risk of creating a conflict with professional practices and audience expectations. In this respect the A B C must not allow itself to be seen as too conservative in comparison with its commercial rivals and a more liberal attitude is required. It is the task of the Standing Committee to find an acceptable compromise that

3.5 Standard mAusE and Australia 's national language

299

satisfies most expectations of the ABC's audiences in most cases and can be seen as an Australian policy. (1984: 78)

The re-casting of Australia's stylistic norms revealed that discrimination had a common linguistic core, e.g. gender bias in all forms of public speech. 51 When norms were re-thought, issues could be re-cast in neutral terms as well as in terms of Australia's multiculturalism, Pauwels wrote: Australia is a country that has been populated mainly through immigration. Various waves of migration have brought people from all parts of the world to Australia. As a result, Australia's population is very diverse: it contains different racial and ethnic groups, many languages are used, and various cultures and religions are represented. In such a diverse society it is important that the language used to describe its members is fair and is seen to treat everyone with similar respect (...). (1991: 10)

However, while multiculturalism was a prominent socio-political framework for language issues, it was not the only one. The discriminatory effect of legalese in legally binding documents led to the Plain English movement and was, for instance, supported by arguments about economic rationalism rather than by multicultural concepts like equity of access. Economic rationalism was, as is well-known, a powerful idea that was strongest under the presidency of Ronald Reagan in the USA and Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher in Great Britain. In Australia it was promoted by Labor governments. Such global shifts in policy worked against local mAusE solutions and created a conflict between the standard and the ocker - its social opposite. Gender discrimination, undoubtedly the most prominent concern, was combated in the intellectual and socio-political climate of the 1960s. Of all forms of discrimination, gender was the first and most pervasive dimension to reach the public eye. Its international, global edge even, was noticed early by researchers like Pauwels (cf. 1984; 1989), Eisikovits (1989) and others. Issues of bias against the working class, ethnic communities, etc., came up somewhat later in the routine, day-to-day coverage of the media (cf. Leitner 1997). And whether or not language was the cause or consequence of discrimination, it created a common framework for discussions of all forms of discrimination. Seeing a common core in all forms of discrimination in the 'US and THEM' division, Pauwels argued that it is a threat to society's cohesion: 51

Another example is the word negro (SCOSE, 93rd meeting, 31 August 1973).

300

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language ... language is an instrument of action. We can do things with words, we can perform actions simply through the use of language.... Language is also a major vehicle for the expression of prejudice or discrimination. Discrimination is defined here as the unequal treatment of people which has negative effects on, or leads to disadvantage in, the person or the group of people considered being inferior in some way.... Language and language use can cause discrimination, exacerbate discrimination or reflect other kinds of discrimination. This is due to the intricate links between language, society and culture. Language not only reflects the society or culture to which it is linked, it also shapes that society or culture. (1991: 3)

Gender was addressed by the Curriculum Development Centre in 1976 and the Australian Journalists' Association in 1977. The SCOSE committee turned to it in 1979 when the -ess suffix, as in poetess, actress, etc., and man in chairman,

spokesman,

or newsman

were discussed at the 131 st

meeting. The strongly negative connotations of -ess words and the sexism in the use of compounds with -man were recognized, though the minutes state that "[o]f course, 'spokesman' and 'chairman' are still acceptable, but they are under threat, together with 'manmade' and 'mankind', and their future is by no means assured." That foreshadowed the shift from usagebased decisions to ones that took note of the potential ideological content. Gender came up again at the 143rd meeting (11 February 1982) when the committee recommended a paper by the Women Media Workers (n.d.).52 The minutes ended commonsensically with the slogan that "non-sexist language is common sense".53 An essay by Jilea Carney from the ABC on male-dominated language and a similar one on female-dominated language were attached to the minutes of the next meeting. At its 153rd meeting in 1983 SCOSE set up a working group and a document was attached to the minutes that called for an ABC directive on non-sexist language. The emphasis had definitely shifted from a policy to reflect good usage to one where the ABC could "be seen as a pacesetter amongst the electronic media" on the grounds that its brief stipulated that the ABC was to "provide innovative broadcasting and TV Services" (underlining sic!). In April 1984 an attachment contained principles and recommendations on ways to avoid sexist language use. That document is, in all likelihood, the immediate precursor of a 1984 document entitled "Non-sexist language guidelines". The ABC became one of the major co-orchestrators of anti-bias regulations 52 53

An "Equal Opportunity Forum" in 1980 might have triggered that paper. There was also a brief discussion at the 142nd meeting (17 December 1981).

3.5

Standard mAusE and Australia 's national language

301

and, what is more, did not confine itself to internal staff regulations, but extended regulations to programming (e.g ABC 1995b). Such a pro-active policy could not remain unchallenged, as I said earlier in this section. An obvious criticism was that the anti-sexist language movement was not socially consensual for the nation. A former Managing Director, Professor Leonie Kramer, described the regulations as "silly" (The Age, 10 May 1984). The ABC could be seen as departing from its policy of following trends and not initiating them. The impetus behind the gender issue was strong enough to make other codifiers act during the 1980s. Parliament, for instance, endorsed the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women in 1983 (cf. AGSM 1988: 111) and passed the Sex Discrimination Act (1984) and the Act's Interpretation Amendment Act (1984). In 1983 gender regulations were published by the Australia Council, the Federation of Australian University Staff Associations and the Office of the Status of Women, which all rejected gender bias. The Human Rights Commission followed in 1984, the National Labor Consultative Council in 1985 and the Australian Council of Trade Unions in 1986. The Department of Administrative Services and the Department of Community Services and Health followed in 1988. Pauwels' (1991) broad survey in public organisations examined the awareness of and responses to bias. It took the debates forward and led to a consensus that the ABC did not have when it had first dealt with gender in 1979: The discriminatory terms discussed in this book are mainly those about which the many groups consulted showed concern. One hundred and fifty organisations were sent a short questionnaire requesting them to list the following information: type of organisation (representing an ethnic group or religion, for example); the existence of language guidelines in the organisation, its concern about discriminatory language and terms, and its suggested non-discriminatory alternatives. Ninety-five organisations returned their completed questionnaires in time for them to be taken into account. (1991: ix)

Endorsing a view that sees in the structure of language - recall the wide notion in Chapter One - a possible cause of discrimination, Pauwels argued that "women feel increasingly alienated from language and language use", adding that "[w]omen see themselves described and defined by words and expressions which are not their own. They experience themselves in language through the language of others" (1991: 80b). Linguistic discrimination could be expressed in the following ways:

302

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

(1) By omitting individuals or groups, making them 'invisible' altogether or by subsuming them under a common label, such as the use of a single gender to do service for both or avoiding diversity and focussing on the mainstream society (2) By giving individuals or groups extra visibility or emphasizing the difference, such as ethnicity when that is not called for (3) By stereotyping individuals or groups with the use of derogatory and imposed labels, such as retarded, foreigners, etc. To avoid discriminatory representations of events or people, she suggests, writers should ask three questions. Firstly, does the context warrant the depiction of persons and groups in the first place? Secondly, is it necessary to depict (groups of) people in ways that are restricted to that group? And, thirdly, in the event that a depiction may be controversial, would it be better to explain the need for a depiction? Pauwels says that potentially discriminatory language should be avoided "where its use may offend or hurt others. The use of discriminatory language is especially offensive in formal contexts and speech: for example, legislation, contracts and other legal documents, job advertisements, educational texts, news reports, official guidelines, regulations" (1991: 9). Such contexts call for the standard, and the recommendations not only codify standard mAusE but extend its uses into less formal and non-public contexts through a process of diffusion. The recommendations on gender neutrality show no specific mAusE features and only need brief illustrations. Pronouns may lead to problems examples like these: (200)

The average employee works form nine to five. He works in an urban environment

Pauwels suggested several solutions. Thus, he could be replaced by the coordination "he or she", the non-sexist employee could be repeated, the plural they be used and, finally, the text could be rephrased in the plural, as in "average employees". Problems can be resolved, she maintains, in ways that are sensitive to particular contexts. For mankind, for instance, there is a range of solutions like humans, human race, human beings, humanity, women and men, individuals, etc. For compounds like sportsmanlike there are alternatives like fair, the idioms to man the desk can be replaced by to staff the desk. And the proverbial man-in-the-street can be upgraded to citizen or downgraded to the ordinary person. Occupational titles like camera girl, maid, matron can be replaced by camera operator, hotelworker, household help ", director of nursing, etc.

3.5 Standard mAusE and Australia 's national language

303

As here, there is no single, mechanical substitute in racist language. The problems associated with Aborigine and Aboriginal will be remembered. Pauwels dwells on derogatory terms for migrant Australians like ethnics, wogs, dagos, slopes (1991: 30). The word Arab can be discriminating today, as this example shows that was a reaction to perceived usage after the 11th September 2001 terrorist attack in New York: (201)

Calling someone an 'Arab' has taken negative and racist connotations and was being used to marginalise ethnic communities, the Australian Arab Council (AC) said today. The council said the term "wog" - once used as a term of scorn towards migrants - had been replace by the ethnic-specific insult, 'Arab'. (AAP, Wed. 28 November 2001) Pauwels believes the term Australian should do service to all citizens, not just the mainstream. The norm of fair representation may require recasting a text to find the right expression for indigenous people, ways of life, languages, cultures and religion to avoid stereotyping, invisibility or extra-visibility. Pauwels (1991: 26) mentions, e.g., Anangu 'people in Central Australia', Koorie 'people in Southern Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria and Tasmania', which jars with actual usage. She qualifies the use of terms like Australian natives, blacks, Black Australians, racial designations such as full-blood Aborigines, half-caste, etc., and names relating to cultural standards like primitive, nomads, tribes. If communities have to be singled out, qualifiers like Anglo-Australians, Italo-Australians, indigenous Australians, Australians of Italian descent should be used. I will pass over stereotyping, over- and under-visibility, since most of what is relevant was said in section 3.3.1, and turn to the depiction of migrant Australians shortly after World War II when linguistic racism was pervasive at first. It is surprising how little of it was discussed in the ABC. The phrase new Australians came up in the ABC's Advisory Committee, when the efficiency of English language teaching programs was raised (20 May 1955). Some criticized ABC programs for their patronising approach to the needs of migrants. These excepts from that source are worth quoting: The patronising manner in which the sessions are presented arouses resentment among our new citizens. ... sessions were patronising and pedantic in approach.... the sessions could be given in a rather more natural style....

A more authentic approach to the language that migrants might need to learn was desirable but that was difficult to do for two reasons. For one,

304

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

there was little information on the language of the people they were most likely to meet first, i.e. the Australia's working classes. Secondly, the school tradition emphasized the standard and educated language rather than the language of lower social strata (Leitner 1989). So there was a nearly insoluble conflict. Schonell's project into the language of the Australian working class referred to earlier would have been helpful but did not, apparently, yield much fruit. There is little evidence that the issue was debated further inside the ABC. The ground could only shift decades later when migration was seen in the context of diversity and multiculturalism. Johns, ABC chairman, argued that "the ABC was too Anglocentric" (quoted from a brochure of the Bureau of Immigration and Multicultural Research, n.d.). The report said: 'You know yourself, you look around', you look at the faces in the street, you look at the changes. You look at your lifestyle. Now do you really think that an Anglocentric [response] ... is an adequate response, an adequate view of Australia.' The ABC needs to become 'open and to capitalise on the multicultural energies and talents that exist in the community .... it was important that the ABC not have an outdated accent because 'an outdated accent... means an outdated mind and that's the real problem, (n.d.)

Though the ABC's style was to respond to the diversity of its audiences, that did not imply the need to use ethnic accents. It was sufficient if staff was seen to come from diverse ethnic backgrounds and that a more colloquial style was used. Style, of course, is a theme that - in the Australian context - raises the issue of the relationship of the standard with the ocker. Particular characteristics of mAusE - in contrast to general English - became a bone of contention when colloquial styles or slang figured in the debate. The recommendations suggested really revised the social, stylistic texture and the ideological basis of mAusE. And Seal discusses that their likely impact on the lingo: The Lingo has little to worry about from outside linguistic influences, then. But what about the forces within? Many people worry that the WOWSERS of old have been reinvigorated and transformed into crusading moralists of language under the rubric of political correctness. Will political correctness dampen the characteristic excesses and vulgarity of Australian? Not only is the grammatically incorrect in vocabulary and usage, it is by its very casual, unofficial nature politically incorrect. As this book amply demonstrates, it is also the vehicle for much that is reprehensible in our society, especially in

3.5

Standard mAusE and Australia 's national language

305

matters of race, ethnicity, gender, and other perceived differences. Yet, the Lingo carries a powerful emotional charge of national identity, of belonging and shared meanings. These generally more positive aspects of the vernacular conflict directly with the tenets of political correctness increasingly enshrined in legislation, especially that relating to sexual harassment, equal opportunity and racial hatred. (1999: 203)

That redefines the stylistic spectrum. While the formal could easily overlap with the informal in the same speech situation in the past, a clearer division was now felt necessary. Concerns from without Australia thus fed into the Australian debates and opened the path for a redefinition of the style pattern. AmE norms had become a yardstick for public communication and have re-embedded mAusE in the international context. The conflict between norms referred to in section 3.4.2 shows that the codfication of standard mAusE now required non-local, non-Australian solutions. And this was true also in the domain of law, interethnic communication in the courtroom, language services, and Plain English. Australia followed the lead of other Anglophone countries. There is some uncertainty as to whether plain English refers to the language in the public domain, or, more narrowly, to that of legislation. Kelly argues it is "the most important type of public language, because it actually constitutes rights and duties; it doesn't merely describe them" (1988: 22f). That may be true, but legislation is the least public language in terms of access and experience and too restricted in terms of text types. Such a limitation is unwarranted as plain English has to do with the language of all legally binding documents and especially those that take the form of pamphlets, forms, standard and business letters, job ads, applications, instructions, Acts of Parliament, leases, tenders, submissions, questionnaires, manuals, memos, minutes of meetings, staff circulars, regulations, contracts, wills, and ministerial correspondence. Such texts can be informational, regulatory, descriptive, narrative and employ different registers. They are public and often printed. The history of plain English has not got enough attention. McArthur (1991) believes that it had to do with the three styles that were distinguished in the Renaissance. The so-called middle style was suited to education and instruction but came under pressure as the grand or high style and the plain or low style polarized. As the middle style shifted upwards, there were periodic calls for a plain style or, one might think, a plainer style, in Anglophone countries. However, the debates about plain English movement today originated not in that domain, nor in that of

306

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

legislation or education, but in the (American) consumer rights movement, Eagleson writes: The current drive for Plain English, however, dates from the 1970s and has its mainspring in the consumer movement. The recognition that consumers had rights and were not just a source of income for manufacturers and sellers not only led to better products but also eventually spread to aspects of language used in the documents which described products and services. (1991: 362).

The first companies to trial a plain English approach were a car insurer and Citibank in the USA, who, following market surveys, responded to the call for comprehensible contracts in 1975. The American National Council of Teachers of English followed with its annual award for efficient writing in plain English (1974) and President Carter signed an Executive Order (23 March 1978) that obliged government regulations to be written in plain English. Australia did not lag far behind. The National Royal Motor Association used plain English from 1976 and the Real Estate Institute in Victoria from 1977. The federal government declared a plain English policy in 1984. Eagelson notes the Victorian Law Reform Commission which the first step from imitation to initiative, when it was given a wider brief than any of the initiatives in Britain or the USA. It was required to inquire into and review current techniques, principles and practices of drafting legislation, legal agreements and those Government forms which affect the legal rights and obligations, in order to recommend what steps should be taken to adopt a plain English drafting style. (1991: 363)

In Australia plain English was almost promoted single-handedly by Eagleson in the 1980s. A breakthrough came when a plain English revision of the Coroners Act in 1985 showed an increase in comprehendability and the fact that plain English was working in that domain. A plan was now made "to have the 50 most important Victorian Acts rewritten in plain English over a period of five years" (1991: 363f). That step would have had the added value of providing training material for future legislative drafting. The Law Reform Commission's (1986) discussion paper's call for a practical orientation eventually became an important element of the language and literacy policy (Lo Bianco 1987). Paul Keating, the then Prime Minister, formulated a strategy for improving the social justice system: The Government is committed to greater use of plain English in legislation. Laws that are simpler to understand and administer will reduce unnecessary

3.5 Standard mAusE and Australia's national language

307

conflict and expensive legislation. The Government will act to improve access to, and the quality of Commonwealth legislation, (fr. Duckworth 1993: 3) Soon after, the House of Representatives issued a report on drafting in Commonwealth legislation. A Simplification Task Force published a Plan of Action (1993) and issued a series of discussion papers between 1994 and 1995 on economic issues, as well as, interestingly, a paper on singular they to avoid gender bias. Plain English has been successfully applied in business, administration and government. And that was reason enough for linguists and law departments to turn it into an applied academic subject. The University of Sydney, for instance, created a Legal Writing Institute. As semi-professional magazines, the Style Council and others debated it, it became a significant, specialized area of public interest. I can be brief about its impact and begin with a definition by Eagleson: Plain English is a foil version of the language, using the patterns of normal, adult English. It is not a type of basic English, or baby-talk. While documents that are converted to plain English may be described as simplified, they are simplified in the sense of being rid of entangled, convoluted language - language that is difficult to analyse and understand, language that submerges, confuses and conceals its message. They are simplified in this sense, not in the sense that the language has been severely condensed or amputated and that the message truncated. Plain English is language that is not artificially complicated, but is clear and effective for its intended audience. (1986: 3) Plain English "is concerned with matters of sentence and paragraph structure, with organisation and design, where so many of the hindrances to clear expression originate", says Eagleson (1986: 3). Just like non-biased language, it is, says Lang, "much more than a choice of words. Its fundamental aim is effective communication" (1995: 4). What is it then that plain English has contributed to the codification of mAusE? There are few specific Australian words apart from those that have legal force. Plain English really re-affirms the norms of international English and re-embeds mAusE into the wider Anglophone context. To illustrate that, I will use an example from the Warrant of Commitment (the numbering is mine) on the next page. Eagleson argues that "[t]he real import of (20.1) [i.e. the original version, GL] cannot be said to be any different from that of (20.2) [i.e. the plain English version, GL], It is simply that the writer of (20.1) has chosen

308

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

to express the message in superfluous words and a longwinded sentence structure and, as a result, to burden readers unnecessarily.... the writer effectively dissipates the energies of readers... The object of (20.2) has been to strip away the dross and concentrate on the message" (1986: 8). The plain English text is, obviously, much shorter. The first sentence in the original version had 33 words, the plain English one 15, the second has 70 as against 35, etc. A study of sentence length in selected Australian statutes between 1936 and the 1990s found that the Incomes Tax Assessment Act of 1936 had an average of 97.15 words-per-sentence, the Credit Act of Victoria (1984) - written before the plain English policy was adopted 80.45 words-per-sentence, and the Freedom of Information Act of Victoria (1982) 61.92. Obviously, there has been progress between 1936 and the 1990s, but the contrast is more telling with plain English texts. The Draft Credit Bill of Victoria (1989) has a mere 29.44 words-per-sentence. Original version [1] To all members of the Police Force of the State of Victoria and the Officer in Charge of the prison at Pentridge or any other prison more accessible or convenient [2] The defendant for the above offence having been ordered to pay the amount(s) set out above and having been sent the notice required by section 89G ... and being in default therein in respect of the amount due. [3] You the said Member of the Police Force are commanded to make demand upon the defendant for payment of the amount due and unless payment of the amount is made to you within 7 days after the demand is made, that then you do take the defendant unless the amount due is paid to you and safely convey him or her to the abovementioned prison ... together with this precept.

Plain English version To all members of the Police Force:

The defendant is in default of the amount due, details of which are given below.

You are ordered to demand payment of the amount from the defendant. Unless the defendant pays you within 7 days, you are to take him or her to Pentridge prison ... together with this warrant.

The lack of typical mAusE features is not really surprising. The old legal style heritage was a property of the entire Anglophone world, Mellinkoff (1963) had shown. The context in which it was used, i.e. in parliamentary legislation, courts of law, public administration and business practices, shared that legal background, the Common Law, wich ensured

3.5 Standard mAusE and Australia 's national language

309

that there was enough pressure for texts to remain internationally comprehensible. The legal domain and legally binding texts remained embedded in a context that reinforced the unity of English and Eagleson's achievement was that mAusE was not discarded from progress made elsewhere and that it had an edge over other countries, which would be seen as Australian.

3.5.7

The English language industry

There is no area that has benefited more from the concurrence of the developments described above than the English language industry. While a more detailled account will be given from a language policy and languagein-education angle in Leitner (2004b), I must mention here their output, i.e. the volume and diversity of descriptions and reference books that can be, and are, used in educaiton. That will lead to the question to what extent and from when they have reflected the realities of mAusE and of the other varieties of English in Australia. T w o very different purposes for which English was taught in post-War Australia helped that industry to emerge. The one was English as a Native Language(ENL), the other was English as Foreign or Second Lnguage (ES/FL). The latter was intrinsically connected with immigration and more interested in teaching English - rather than mAusE (Martin 2002). The former was open to an Australian angle in principle but it took a long time to liberate itself from the intellectual and conceptual framework of a British-based education system. And both had created a demand for a full range of Australian-based reference works and for even bilingual dictionaries. The typology below shows that the vloume and diversity of such reference works (cf. Leitner, Taylor, and Fritz forthc.): (1)

Dictionaries (a) general dictionaries, from desk-top size to very small ones and for all kinds of users at all levels (b) specialized dictionaries on the entire spectrum, i.e. from the colloquial to slang dimension, specific registers, regional variation, the time spectrum, cultural or encyclopedic information

(2)

Usage guides (a) for the general language (b) for specific areas such as non-discriminatory language for the media, the Commonwealth, etc. (c) for all media types and also for certain program areas such as news, current affairs and sports

310

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

(d) plain English in legislation and contract regulations (3) Grammars (still underdeveloped with little specific on mAusE) (a) one desk-sized grammar for schools and undergraduate courses (b) one small-sized illustrative grammar for the student market (4) Teaching materials (a) for all primary and secondary levels (b) for native speakers; adults; especially for migrant education (c) for the international market (d) for the professions and in-house training: e.g. health industry; e) legislative writing; insurance industry (plain English) As to teaching materials, a range of publishers are in the ENL and ES/FL market. To name the Curriculum Development Centre (Melbourne), the National Centre of English Language Teaching and Research (NCELTR) and AMES (which caters for the migrant market). They all produce Australian-oriented materials, which ensure that scenes in which language learning is practised, vocabulary, grammar and pronunciation reflect local content and formal or colloquial mAusE. Mulder, Burridge, and Thomas (2001), Mulder et al. (2002) and Mawer and Field (1995) provide curriculum statements and syllabus materials that spell out what is meant by the teaching- of English as a native language in Australia. It amounts to the teaching of (or, at least, familiarizing with) the range of range of social, ethnic, regional and use-oriented varieties of mAusE. The materials that have been written for the Victorian Certificate of Education (VCE) contain four units with a definite bias for mAusE. And the ACT Department of Education and Training (2001) spells out the approach to English in a culturally inclusive curriculum: 1.

This policy reflects national and local policies to English a second language (ESL) education.

3.1 Culturally inclusive curriculum - a curriculum which values and includes the backgrounds of the learners. 3.2 English - here used as Australian Standard English 3.3 ESL learner - a person learning English in Australia whose first language is not English 4.1 English is the language of power and access in Australia. 4.2 All Australians should have the opportunity to acquire and develop proficiency in English

3.6 A social and linguistic history of mAusE

311

Teaching, then, has broken with the tradition of teaching a neutral, let alone a BrE, variety of English. And mAusE forms the undisputed target at university level - courses on phonetics and phonology, linguistics or semantics take as their starting point the English of Australia (Mannell and Cox 2000-2001). Though ESL material still reflects such neutralized varieties of English, one can expect them to shift to the position just described. The political power and educational dominance of standard mAusE could not be made clearer and I will come back to that point in subsequent chapters. What will continue to reflect international norms are areas like plain English, but that is due to the shared Common Law system.

3.6

A social and linguistic history of mAusE

"The typical mainstream Australian", Jupp said (1988: 62), "is still thought of as a speaker ... whose ancestors came from Britain and Ireland...." and spoke BrE. That has not been true for a long time but when the final step towards an Australian linguistic identity was marked when the status of mAusE was raised to that of the national language of Australia that it was to be accessible to all Australians (Dawkins 1991). An account of the history of that development must begin with the situation at the end of the 18th century in Britain and the early colonial period and will need to merge three developments. Firstly, the socio-historical, economic and educational changes; secondly, the attitudes to what was perceived as linguistic development; finally, the development of the language after transplantation. The history of attitudes to English was dealt with in section 3.1 and needs no elaboration. As to the linguistic history of English in Australia, I said that it drew on the shared Anglo-American heritage (section 3.3.3) and developed that further and independently: What looks American, need not be American; AusE has always pursued a "third path" in some areas. A few words on the problems that arise in an account of the history of mAusE. The lack of direct evidence has been cited often. Mitchell and Delbridge noted the lack of primary evidence and found that even secondary evidence was deficient: "Evidence which would enable us to follow the development of Australian speech practically does not exist" (1965b: 24).54 But the 54

The situation is different for factual written English. There is a large amount of data in state libraries, in the Historical Records of Australia, in state records, the Commonwealth and State Hansards, regional newspapers from the mid-19th century. The missions archives in Britain, Germany, Spain and Italy and those of school inspectors and Aboriginal Protectors should contain information.

312

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

problem with evidence was aggravated by the paucity of evidence on the English of the 19th century as such. Görlach, for instance, remarked that "historical linguists depend entirely on descriptions and transcriptions by phoneticians, and various comments (often negative), on other people's speech habits" (1999: 53). Given that the EngE spectrum is poorly described and that there was no secure, educated accent in England at the end of the 18th century, there is a substantial hurdle for diachronic linguists (Milroy 2001). Kytö, Rudanko, and Smitterberg added that there is no large computerized corpus of 19th century English: "The 19th century was an age of exploration and new discoveries; yet the English language in that period remains largely unexplored territory.... we still need access to corpora covering the 19th century..." (2000: 85). These difficulties notwithstanding, several hypotheses have been put forward to explain the way the English settled and stratified in Australia to lead to the results described in preceding sections. It is best to start with questions like these: (1) What were the main steps in the social history of Australia and did they correlate with or give rise to, different accents and dialects? (2) What were the formative inputs into AusE? (3) What were the developments that marked AusE as linguistically different from EngE and other British dialects? (4) Did the accent and dialect develop at about the same time in the ways described in section 3.2? Or did they develop independently of each other and at different periods of time? Questions (1) and (2) look at the social history and the sources of linguistic expressions. Question (3) turns to the problem of dating periods of change. Question (4) addresses the issue of whether the development of the accent and dialect correlate in some way. Some of the issues in this section will be taken up again in Chapter Four. The particular linguistic processes of variety formation or, in other words, the way various inputs have amalgamated into a novel, Australian form will not be dealt with for lack of adequate literature (cf. Trudgill 1986; Siegel 2000a). The review of social history and of likely inputs will establish a basis for the identification of periods of change and of what these processes involved.

3.6.1

The formation of the accents

English accents during the late 18th and 19th centuries have been described in detail by MacMahon (1998), Ihalainen (1988) and Bailey (1996) and

3.6 A social and linguistic history ofmAusE

313

Görlach, who throws additional light on the time leading up to the early 20th century when he argues that the predominance of London was undoubted. However Walker (1791) had pointed to the improprieties of London speech and Smart (1812) made relevant remarks on class-related varieties of pronunciation current in the metropolis: 'Imitation of a Londoner, or of a person who pronounces like one, is the only method by which a just utterance can be acquired.... But while it is necessary that there should be a standard pronunciation, and while the courtly and well-bred conform to it, that of the inhabitants of the metropolis will always claim the preference, and every deviation wiil be looked upon, if not as illiterate, at least as uncouth and inelegant. But there are two pronunciations even in London, that of the well-bred, and that of the vulgar. The well-bred speaker employs a definite number of sounds, which he utters with precision, distinctness, and in their proper places; the vulgar speaker misapplies the sounds, mars, or alters them.... But while the vulgar commit errors through inattention, it not infrequently happens, that the well-bred are guilty of faults through the affectation of correctness.... (1999: 54f)

MacMahon (1998) argues that correctness in pronunciation was not an issue before the mid-18 th century in England. A clear cleavage between the up-and-coming middle classes and the traditional upper class emerged at the end of that century and was accentuating throughout the 19th century. It was, as I said in Chapter Two, related with demographic change in Britain, social stratification, the Industrial Revolution and the demand for literate labour. That demand was rising enormoulsy as the expansion of the Empire was reaching its peak at the end of the 19th century (Brutt-Griffler 2002). Experts at the end of the 18th century had already believed that, if there was to be a standard language, it would be based on the speech of people "of elegance and taste of the English nation, and especially of London" (Johnston 1764; fr. MacMahon 1997: 386). That type of speech was renamed Received or Standard Pronunciation by Ellis in 1869 (MacMahon 1998). But Ellis said in 1791 that the speech patterns of the "best educated people in the provinces, if constantly resident there, are sure to be strongly tinctured with the dialect of the county in which they live" (fr. MacMahon 1997: 388). Their regional patterns were widely acceptable and acted as a cause for the disdain expressed against popular London English. Regional accents were only rejected at the end of the 19th century, says Watts (2002).

314

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

And even then, Ihalainen adds, rural dialects were seen as having "a certain justification in that they were in many ways 'purer', of greater ancestry and better pedigree than was standard English" (1994: 206). That research suggests that there were two accepted London sociolects at the formative period of AusE. The prestigeous one was the speech of the educated and cultural elite, i.e. not that of the Court. Its counterparts were popular London and Cockney. But a sharp boundary between the former and other 'educated' but regional varieties did not emerge till the late 19th century. What existed at the time was a cline from 'well-bred speech' to those other educated accents that were distinct from both RP and popular London. That description is plausible if one follows Schwarz who said that "[B]y the end of the eighteenth century there was, therefore, a considerable degree of social segregation in London. The more 'comfortable' middle classes were situated in the western and central parts of the metropolis, while maintaining a relatively low profile in the east and the south" (1990: 328f). But, he adds, the "picture of developing residential segregation requires two major qualifications". One is that "the absence of a Central Business District led to wide spread of purchasing power and of shopkeepers across London", the other that the wealthy nowhere formed more than fifty per cent of residents and "generated their own poor hinterlands" (1990: 329). There must have been a fair amount of interaction between the affluent and the poor; both must have been familiar with each other's idiom. Accent polarization seems to have been a matter of the last quarter of the 19th century only and the social status of RP, as we know it, developed only at the end of the century. It gained overt prestige, the others, especially in the south-east of England, were reduced to covert prestige. How different the accents were in terms of linguistic details is not well understood but there must have been boundary markers, if one follows Milroy's study: Although its ancestry may be more ancient, the status of RP as a special regionless accent dates back, according to most authorities, only to the later nineteenth century, and its recognized status was no so much associated with any general process of standardization and focussing throughout the community as with the effects of a high status politically powerful- in-group (or set of interlocking social networks and coalitions) based on the public schools (...), where in the later nineteenth century it became a generally used accent. Around 1900 it seems that speakers of RP were almost always likely to have been educated at a public school.... Whatever its origins may have been, RP had become a network accent and a badge of identity that showed membership of a fairly clearly defined social stratum spanning the

3.6 A social and linguistic history of mAusE

315

higher professional and business classes. What seems to me to be most important about these general social affairs, however, is the fact that the possession of RP was also at that time a guarantee that the speaker could be regarded as educated. (2001: 20)

There are several inferences one can make about the linguistic situation in Britain and the input into the English in Australia. The first is that London and, somewhat less, the whole of the South-East of England exerted a formative influence on all varieties of English in England (and beyond), even if regional accents had resisted, to some extent, to accommodate to London patterns. The second point is that the accents transplanted embraced the full London spectrum but included accents in the middle range of the social spectrum as well as regional dialects from around Britain. Third, even if London modes of English may have been prominent during the convict period, the whole accent spectrum continued to be transplanted and mirrored the increasing sociolinguistic stratification in London and elsewhere. While settlement was no mirror image of that in Britain, Australia had speakers from the full range of accents and may well have had a sharper accent differentiation during convictism than England. Subsequent changes in the composition of population, social stratification, economic progress, and, above all, education recast the population into a new mix. Mitchell (2001) has argued that five historical periods are relevant to the history of English: (a) The Cumberland Plain (1788-early 1820s) (b) Pastoral expansion (1820s-1850) (c) Assisted free migration (overlapping with (b)) (1830-1850) (d) The gold decade and its aftermath (1850-1870) (e) The recasting of the demographic growth from immigration to natural increase and the beginning of urbanization (1870-1900) The numerical strength of what could be called a middle class, i.e. administrators and officers, was negligible during the first phase. But as officers were paid by Treasury, he says, they were able to trade with ships that operated in the whole network of the Pacific and in the seaways to India. As these officers were joined by immigrants of wealth who received large land grants through their trading activities, Sydney soon became a thriving port and commercial centre. (2001: 2)

By implication, Sydney attracted large numbers of an emerging middle class. Mitchell adds that the number of ships that called at Sydney rose

316

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

from 85 in 1825 to 709 in 1850, that there were regular lines to Hong Kong, India and Singapore, and that there was a service that connected the West and East of Australia. If limited and slow, there was access to information on what went on outside the colony, the Asian colonies of Britain, and across the Pacific. There were signs of internal social stratification, which was the result of the changing social status of convicts, who were given land, tools, seeds, and often a servant when they had served their term. Gradually, they became members of an influential middle class and were better off than free immigrants during their early years (2001: 3). Many convicts were literate, had manual skills or were tradespeople and were keen to form a stable family life (2001: 13). By the 1820s a first layer of social stratification had surfaced and distinguished freed or pardoned convicts, born-free citizens and free settlers. These strata had stabilized by the 1840s (2001: 14) and created a shift in the way Australians wanted to see their status in the colony: ... at the abolition of transportation New South Wales was a mostly free society. The 1841 census used a very significant phrase to replace 'exconvicts', namely 'free citizens who had arrived in the colony as convicts.' (2001: 15)

Such a society facilitated upward mobility. While convicts and exconvicts accounted for as many as a quarter of the population in most districts in the 1820s, they did no longer after 1841. In older areas and Port Phillip, for instance, they were a minority. Social status and habitation shaped the emerging communication networks. Other changes followed: 1840, therefore, is a very significant year in Australian economic, social political and demographic history. In that year transportation to NSW ended, hegemony passed from landed wealth in the country to mercantile wealth in the towns, a platform had been established for vigorous population growth by natural increase, the rural, religious and hierarchical ordering of society was changing to one more liberal, secular and democratic. The dissident religious (?) [question mark by C. Yallop; GL], growing in strength, emphasised individual freedom and responsibility. A vigorous and critical press replaced the monopolistic Government Gazette. Agitation, for self-government grew and by the mid century all colonies except Western Australia had attained it. A middle class was growing stronger in the cities and towns. (2001: 71)

A massive change indeed! It was, however, slow if contrasted with the changes that were caused by the Gold Rushes in the early 1850s! Apart

3.6 A social and linguistic history ofmAusE

317

from the mobility they generated, cities and older locations suffered massive losses of their population, whole the gold fields and adjacent areas were overpopulated. And all that was accompanied by a dramatic rise of often uncontrolled immigration. To quote Mitchell: "The impact of the gold discoveries in 1850 was dramatic and swift-moving, boisterous and disruptive" (2001: 22) and "[T]he main features of population movement in Victoria 1851-60, which affected neighbouring colonies, were mobility, instability and transience" (2001: 23). At the end of the gold rushes diggers returned to the cities and upset their demographic composition once again. In passing, one might add that gold rushes in the West, for instance, in the Kagoorlie-Boulder region, only began around 1898 and did not generate the same level of excitement. There were other factors that produced long-term change. To name the river traffic, camel transport, coach routes - recall Cobb's company - and the inland expansion and into the far north. Queensland, for instance, was the fastest growing colony after 1860. Population growth had irreversibly shifted from immigration to natural growth by the 1880s and subsequent immigration was small now by proportion (section 2.2). That demographic transition, Mitchell notes, shifted the mean age upwards and strengthened the role of the middle-aged, more conservative people. A particularly stimulating part in Mitchell's draft is his discussion of educational history (2001: 64-70; passim). As in Britain and elsewhere in the Empire, the Australian education system began on a denominational basis (Anglican, Catholic or other denominations) in the 1820s. Schools for the better off were modelled on English Public Schools and were supported financially by Government (2001: 66). Schools were to impart the same values in the same manner as 'at home' and were, Mitchell says, "supported by those of 'established rural background and new urban wealth' and the idea was that sons of these two classes might mingle together (...). Most of the headmasters of these schools were from England" (2001: 64). But the years from 1820 to 1880 there were debates about questions like these: Should education continue to be denominational? Should there be both a state and denominational system? Should there be a single board of education (control) or, alternatively, different boards in the hands of the providers, etc.? The Irish national school system had been seen as a possibility by Bourke in 1833 but dismissed in light of fierce opposition. The Scottish educational philosopher Rev. Dunmore Lang was opposed to the domination of the Anglican Church and favoured the Scottish system, founded parish schools, the Australian College, etc. He and his associate Carmichael stood for "a number of elements of the Scottish tradition

318

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

relevant to Australian conditions: a broad (even utilitarian) curriculum, universal schooling, openness to Continental and American ideas, and the importance of grammar and philosophy" (fr. Jupp 1988: 777). Indeed, even prior to the education laws the provision of education expanded. To quote from a report of 1851, which is obviously governmental: The schools have increased in the ten years [from 1841 to 1851, GL] from 167 with 9,040 scholars to 558 with 25,682 scholars. Of these 558 schools 222 are supported in whole or in part by grants from the colonial treasury, amounting to £ 16,796 per annum, the number of pupils being 15,426, of whom 6,553 are church of England, 2,313 Presbyterian, 1,678 Wesleyan, 219 independent, and 3,313 Roman catholic, (www.uk.olivesoftware. com/archive/ ..., 14 January 2002)

The fact that the wealthy rural and urban sections of society shared such values and goals is an interesting facet of that period. At the same time a number of clubs were established that catered for the expanding middle class. The Melbourne Club, for instance, was founded in 1830, the Australian Club in Sydney in 1838, the Union Club in Hobart at around the same time, and The University of Sydney in 1850. The Sydney Morning Herald newspaper was published from the 1850s. Early stratification, then, created a social class structure, backed by a strong educational component, yet, continued a division between rural and urban factions. Other changes promoted the rise of an organized working class. Though worker rights had been granted in 1828 (2001: 71), that meant little when landowners were magistrates. Workers had to form associations of their own and they became ever stronger after the 1840s, when the foundation of trade unions increased the working class influence and, with that, that of the Irish. As workers organized, so did employers. The result was an urban-based infrastructure that centred around the economy. Its influence fanned out into the country. On that basis Mitchell argued that Broad Australian had emerged in 1828, that is after forty years, and that General Australian emerged about the 1870s or 1880s, that is after another forty or fifty years. General Australian was a consequence of a coincident surge of the two forces that have produced the Australian population immigration and natural increase. (2001: 62)

Broad and General had "coexisted in the 1850s (possibly earlier) and continued to coexist", he had said somewhat earlier (2001: 58). Regarding Victoria, he suggested that

3.6 A social and linguistic history of mAusE

319

the emergence [of an Australian speech] was not sudden but very gradual, in an unbroken continuity going back to the First Fleet, given a powerful impetus in the 1840s with the first achievement of a solid platform for national increase of population (2001: 37). Though the General grew out of the Broad, the two differed in their demographic base: Broad Australian developed as a mostly rural and male speech; and General Australian developed as mostly an urban speech in a demographic pattern of a good balance of the sexes and rising rate of natural increase. (2001: 72) If one adds that new immigrants first and increasingly settled in the cities, one might infer that the General was a product of reciprocal adoption of the newcomers to the patterns of the old population and of those to the more prestigious EngE accents, respectively. Part of what was said about today's social (section 3.4.1) and regional stratification (section 3.4.3) would find an easy explanation. But the origin of Cultivated has always been a problem. In contrast to Mitchell and Delbridge (1965b), he now believes that General Australian and Broad Australian grew out of mass migrations, population movements and demographic influences. Cultivated Australian, as Delbridge saw it, developed out of individual or group choices. (2001: 63) What would these "individual or group choices" have been based on, if not on models imported from England during the final decades of the 19th century? The Cultivated must have developed under the influence of education, the club structure and the cities that offered more educational facilities. Sydney, for instance, was soon a major provider of schools. An educated accent of AusE could have emerged and become associated with an urban, public school type of speaker base. It would have centred around State capitals in the south-east, most of all in Sydney and Melbourne, their universities, clubs, and similar institutions. If that was the area of use of the Cultivated, readers should recall its distribution today, the south-north divide, the role of type of education, etc. Such an account finds support in Milroy (2001), who argued that RP only acquired the prestige that is attributed to it during the latter decades of the 19th century. Being a speaker of RP was a guarantee of a good education and qualified for well-paid positions at a time of high demand throughout the growing Empire, in

320

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

industry, the church, and the expanding education system. The acceptance of RP was a world-wide phenomenon (Brutt-Griffler 2002). And without such an accent in Britain, there could hardly have been a similar one in Australia. The teacher shortage that Mitchell (2001: 58) mentioned for the 1820s and 1830s was no longer a problem in the 1870s when Public School type of education system was strengthened. The final matter to be addressed concerns the national homogeneity of Australia's accents (cf. section 3.4). Part of it can be accounted for by the high mobility generated by the Gold Rushes, etc., so that Mitchell rejects Bernard's (1981) idea of similar inputs in various port towns around the continent and of processes of levelling, etc., producing much the same result. Yet, in the absence of a Cultivated accent at that time, the idea of linguistic diffusion from the ports of entry cannot hold for the Cultivated. It must have spread with the expansion of education and the growth of the cultural elite and must, as a result, have been distributed quite unevenly. Having outlined the broad picture, I should add two points. The first is that Mitchell's outline of social history becomes somewhat problematic in light of MacMahon's (1998) criticism of research: The data considered in this chapter [19th century phonology, GL] has, in the main, dealt with 'educated' speech... To what extent has 'educated London' speech differed from RP? Certainly, the narrowing of focus by British twentieth-century phoneticians onto RP, to the relative exclusion of the other 'educated', but non-RP, accents compares unfavourably with the position taken by nineteenth-century phoneticians such as Ellis and Sweet, and by twentieth-century phoneticians in the USA. The British publicschool system and its association with RP has indirectly contributed to a lessening of professional interest, until relatively recently, in the nondialectal speech of the majority of the inhabitants of the British Isles. (1998: 521)

Mitchell's account relies too much on that narrow perception of EngE accents and of London. For instance, when he argued that General grew out of Broad, yet had a different demographic base, the question is if its speakers acquired a different social status or whether it is possible that migrants from the London region had imported a more educated form of London English around the middle of the 19th century that could have formed the basis of a 'compromise'. To answer such questions one would have to correlate the social and educational background of migrants at the time with the nature and social distribution of London's accents. The second point contrasts with the presuppositions of the first one. The history

3.6 A social and linguistic history of mA usE

321

of attitudes has shown that at the end of the 19th centuiy there emerged less unfavourable attitudes to Australia's Broad idiom and one suspects that this will have included pronunciation. What impact did General speakers then have on the perception of Australia's English? Regarding the sources of the accent, i.e. question (2), I have made frequent references to the likely origins of a number of features and argued that it is beyond doubt that the input came from a wider array of accents than Hammarström (1980) would have it. mAusE was not a Cockney transplanted. Of course, the fact that the Cockney transported was not the same as that spoken later in the century is undisputed but it may be good to mention some of the changes that have occurred after transplantation. One feature is the glottal re-enforcement of stops that is characteristic of Cockney, popular London and recent RP. AusE does not seem to have it and the question when it was introduced into English accents is unsettled. Collins and Mees (1996) suggest that it was first observed in ScotE around 1860, then in New York in 1896, in northern English in 1908, and Cockney as late as 1909 (1996: 177f). Ihalainen (1994: 206) dates it at the end of the 19th century, though Collins and Mees (1996) mention inferential evidence from 17th century Cockney. Andrésen (1968) believed the glottal stop in Cockney to be "the result of the influence of Scottish accents, such as Glasgow, where the glottal stop was already established" (fr. Collins and Mees 1996: 178). Southern IrE, in contrast, never had a glottal stop. It would not be unreasonable, then, to assume that Scottish, northern Irish and northern English migrants had transported it after the mid-19 th century since it is there that it originated. There is no evidence to support that idea inference and it seems easier to argue that the glottal stop was introduced when demographic growth had shifted. Another feature is the fronting of /Θ, 0/ to [f, v], which Ihalainen (1994: 206) dates at the end of the 19th century, though Taylor's (2003) data have Cockney samples around the middle of the century. He also has examples of the suffix [en] for -ing and the realization of /λ/ as / i / in discovered, which were incorporated into non-standard mAusE:55 (202) ... she heard Miss Fitzgerald screemen [italics in original, GL] and rushing out, she diskivered Miss Fitz a sprawling on the ground, and the old vidder a tearing the little scrap of hair out of her head. (Taylor 2003: 14)

55

In (203) and (206) the speakers use the Aboriginal loan waddy "heavy wooden war club'; his speech is more genuinely AusE.

322

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

(203)

Ryan: — Did not you almost crack my shins with your waddy? Β: I only gave you a blow or two in self-defence. R: Did not a gentlemen complain, and cry out 'shame upon you!' for hitting me on the shins? B: How can I tell he was a gentleman? R: Vy you must know he was a gentleman; cos vy! he vore a vite at! (Taylor 2003: 14) Turning to other accents as potential sources, Trudgill (1986: 142) noted that mAusE has a slightly retroflexed [r] variant of Irl which is similar to IrE and AmE and would imply a potential influence from IrE. The nonrhoticity of mAusE shows that western, south-western EngE, IrE and ScotE accents cannot have had a formative influence in this respect. And the variation between /a/ and /ae/ (sections 3.2.1 and 3.4.1) highlights the potential role of southern and Midland accents. Regarding the deletion and hypercorrect insertion of /h/, readers should recall (section 3.4.1) that the loss of /h/ is one of the persistent complaints to the media and education, //-lessness is certainly frequent in the Broad accent and non-standard dialect and the examples above, and in section 3.6.2, from mid-19111 century English in Australia clearly show that it was pervasive. Where then does that variable pattern come from? Trudgill believes the Australian pattern cannot be due to the South-East of England: Australian English differs dramatically from most varieties of English English in its treatment of /h/. The whole of south-eastern England has been Λ-less for a long time, and pronunciations such as [ae?] hat are entirely usual in London and elsewhere. Australian English, on the other hand, is basically /i-pronouncing: hat is [het]. (1986: 138) Trudgill's (1990: 28) map 6 shows that the traditional London area was Α-less, like the rest of England was. The only area that had a prevocalic /hi was the far northeast, Essex and East Anglia. If Ihl was used in mAusE, its use must be due to Essex and East Anglia: [t]he origins of Australian English lay in the type of English spoken in the nineteenth-century counties of Norfolk, Suffolk, Essex, Middlesex, eastern Hertfordshire, Cambridgeshire, eastern Northamptonshire, and eastern Bedfordshire, centring, of course, on London. (1986: 130) But it might also have been introduced, or supported, by migrants from Ireland, Scotland and speakers from the northeast of England, whose accents had been Λ-full:

3.6 A social and linguistic history ofmAusE

323

What we cannot ignore is that there was one big difference between nineteenth-century Australia and London, namely that present in Australia during that time were not only (variably) ft-less Londoners and southeasterners, but also entirely /i-full Irish and Scottish speakers of English (as well as East Anglians, RP speakers, and speakers from a few other A-full areas of England. (1986: 139)

Another likely factor is that teachers may have insisted on the use of /h/ in classroom teaching and thus have supported it indirectly. It is worth recalling that Catholic school teachers tended to be Irish and Scottish and there were Scottish Presbyterians in Protestant schools. As far as writing is concerned, the norm was definitely Α-fullness, as the reports by Arthur Phillip and others in the HRA show. Yet, there are a few occurrences of hlessness that suggest that even these speakers may have been Α-less at times or pronounced certain word without an ih/:56 (204)

(205)

A barrack is likewise finished ar Rose Hill for aη hundred men... (letter by Arthur Phillip to Grenville, HRA, vol. I, 1788-1796, ρ 247) One acre and aη Aalf of ground (letter by Arthur Phillip to Grenville, HRA, vol. I, 1788-1796, ρ 277)

I would therefore argue that mAusE was neither entirely Λ-full nor hless, though the dropping of /h/ could only survive in, as said above, the non-standard. To replace Hammarström's simplistic hypothesis, Cochrane (1989) and others relied on a broader picture. Gunn (1992), for instance, argued that [h]e [Matthews 1938, GL] described an eighteenth century London pronunciation whose features are almost identical with those put forward earlier in this section as distinctive markers of the Australian accent and substandard speech. As far as one can determine, these forms have changed little since early colonial days, and are usually accepted as having emerged from an amalgamation of English dialects after the convict transports began arriving. One might also consider that the greatest users were not a widely mixed group of people thrown together for the first time in Australia. They were of a distinctive, low class, a very large number of whom had been living together in their part of London for a long time. (1992: 216)

A small set of features, viz. the articulation of /i:/ and /u:/ (see section 3.4.1) was taken to reflect a vowel shift, (cf. Mitchell and Delbridge 1965b: 37).

56

Gordon (1998: 70ff) reports on Λ-dropping in NZE.

324

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

That idea of a shift was pursued by Turner (1960), Bernard (1970), Gunn (1975), and Bauer (1979), who referred to it as a 'Second Great Vowel Shift'. Short monophthongs, he maintained, interacted with long and rising diphthongs.57 Bauer (1979) argued that the shift began with /λ/, which had a mid-back quality up to the late 19th century and then moved forward. Jones (1909: 43) described it as "half-open back unrounded", MacMahon (2001: 113) refers to that quality as 'refined R P and adds that some accents like Cockney have a low front vowel instead. If Cockney is at an advanced stage of EngE, as is often assumed, mAusE would have been innovative, too. In his early version Bauer (1979: 59) thought that the fronting of ltd narrowed the phonetic space of /ae/ and caused /ae/ to move upwards, instead of conflating with /λ/. It became tense and could diphthongize to [ea] - a well-known variant in AmE. As the push chain reached /i/, there could have arisen a pair of long and short vowels with the same vowel quality, but that did not happen either. What happened was that /i:/ diphthongized and left the monophthong system altogether, while /i/ did neither tense nor become long. It left a space that could be filled by monophthongal realizations of the vowel in here. The situation with back vowels was somewhat different, because /u:/ acquired 'a central quality. Following criticism by Matthews (1981), Wells (1982), and Trudgill (1986). Bauer retreated and now suggests that one might think of "three independent vowel shifts, one for Australia, one for New Zealand and one for South Africa" (1992: 263), a weak claim in light of the fact that southern hemisphere accents are so close. It does not make much sense to argue that the hypothesis of raising was still the best option: "[t]he stronger evidence is in favour of the short front vowel shift being a raising" (1992: 260). But it makes sense to accept his point that social 'pressure from above' against the raising of /ae/ in RP has nothing to do with the possibility of a shift in Australia. If such a shift is plausible, the problem with Trudgill's (1986) account disappears. His view would require RP to have raised /ae/ - it had been low in Middle English - and then to lower it again - an extremely unlikely account, but similar arguments were put forward by Wells (1982) and more detail was provided by Trudgill (1986) (see Leitner 2003b). There are further problems in light of the recent studies of 19th century English discussed above. MacMahon's (1998: 448ff) survey shows that the 57

If a shift occurred in the making of mAusE, one would expect it to have occurred also in NZE or SthAfE.

3.6 A social and linguistic history of mAusE

325

quality of short vowels was described in terms that suggest a fair amount of variability at identical periods of time. His sources are not unanimous but often suggest opener variants in, for instance, genteel London and regional accents. There is little agreement on how close /i:/ and III were, but /i/ was said to be somewhat opener than /i:/ by most observers. MacMahon maintains that the crucial IAI was quite back at the beginning of the 19th century and moved forward gradually to a position close to mid, reaching [a] in the 20th century. Diphthongal realizations of li:l as [ii] were mentioned by Batchelor in 1809, but MacMahon (1998: 448) suspects that this might reflect only his accent from Bedfordshire, which is some 100 km north-west of London. Lowerings in the direction of schwa were only mentioned at the end of the 19th century. Ihalainen's (1994) study of EngE regional accents, for instance, has no evidence of the diphthongization of/i:/ at the beginning of the 19th century and does not refer to Batchelor. It says that it was "first attested in the late nineteenth century, about the same time the interchange of ν and w disappeared from descriptions of Cockney" (1994: 206). While Jones (1909: 34) refers to a diphthongal quality of/i:/, he implies that it must have been a recent phenomenon, i.e. late 19th century, and occurred predominantly in word-final position. He believes that li:l is regularly diphthongized in London English; it may begin with hi or with what he describes as 'ei', i.e. a low /i/.58 Diphthongization and the lowering of the onset was not observed by McBurney in his 1887 description of mAusE (Mitchell, and Delbridge 1965a: 26). Taylor's (2004) data of the mid-19th century have no examples of diphthongization. There is also uncertainty about short lei. Some experts say it was a midhigh vowel like very close or Cardinal lei, others that it was open and close to Cardinal lei. MacMahon (1998: 453) suggests that there was a wider array of variation in EngE by the middle of the 19th century than in AmE and that EngE and, above all, RP had a somewhat closer vowel quality. It follows that /as/ was quite variable up to the 1830s and that thereafter there was some lowering in EngE accents; but its lowering to an [a] quality in RP is quite recent. The diphthong /ei/, which derived from /e:/, was said to be frequent after 1800 in BrE and AmE, but apparently not the only option and not with a decidedly low onset. Ellis, who observed that vowel very closely in London, found both monophthongal and diphthongal realizations in 58

Jones (1907: 42) mentions a slight diphthongization of /u:/ as late as at the turn to the 20th century. Gunn's (1975; 1992) evidence does not seem to be very strong and Well's is purely conjectural.

326

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

regular use in London at around the late 1860s and the early 1870s (1874: 1109; fr. MacMahon 1998: 451). Writing at about the same time, Sweet (1877) drew attention to the lowering of the starting point Ί find that boys under twelve speak a different language from mine: they broaden the vowels, making take almost into tike, no almost into now, see almost into say' (letter by Sweet to Sayce, April 3, 1880). (fr. MacMahon 1998: 451)

According to MacMahon, Sweet considered the 'broadening' of /ei/ and /ou/ a feature of educated speech and thought the change to have not been older than about thirty years. Jones noted the low onset in London, which may be realized as "LET, HAT, a, or even HALF" (1909: 35f). These observations imply that the lowering of the onset in /ου/, which had been observed by McBurney in 1877 (cf. Mitchell, and Delbridge 1965a: 26), was either older than Sweet assumed, a feature transported, or reflected a teleological trend in English, which is the most unlikely assumption. These observations suggest that the extent of onset lowering and retraction in London English was as much apparent as it was in Broad AusE; there was no significant difference with this feature between London and Australian speech at the end of the 19th century but that similarity could not have been transported with the first formative input at the beginning of the 19th century. A useful inference on the "broadening1 of /ei/ may be drawn from what MacMahon says about /o:/. The first explicit reference to a diphthongal quality is in the work of William Smith in 1795: 'The English long o has in it a shade towards the oo, or 6th sound [i.e. the vowel of WOO, FOOD, etc.] (1998: 459)

A diphthong was becoming the norm, but the lowering and fronting of the onset was first observed by Sweet in 1890. If one assumes a symmetry of evolution, it would seem that the diphthongization of /e:/ might have become common by the middle, but not at the beginning, of the 19th century. There are other observations on / ei/, /oi/, etc. that I cannot look at here in detail. MacMahon (1998: 420ff) shows that vowel reduction gradually embraced all unstressed vowels during the 19th century and led to the use of /a/ and - sometimes in free variation - of hl in RP. mAusE prefers /a/ and, like NZE, is said to have a bias for full-vowel articulations and a different, syllable-timed rhythm. Regarding question (3), there are, thus, considerable problems with the evidence available. Past studies, including Mitchell (1995), argue that the

3.6 A social and linguistic history of mAusE

327

main features that account for social stratification had been present in Australia at the formative period. There was one single process of the formation and development of AusE. The details of this process have been described as 'levelling', 'generalization' and 'resturcturing' by Trudgill (1986); Siegel (2000a) believes it was the same as in koiné formation. But there is not enough detail to develop either hypothesis in detail. However, the development of mAusE thereafter is best understood as a process of creating distance and of the integration of (former) non-English speakers. Via a linguistic and demographic process one could go the path towards identity formation. As to the linguistic side, the outline based on MacMahon (1998) and others has shown that some crucial features and especially diphthongal realizations of /i:/ and /u:/ and the lowering of the onset in /ei/ were late 19th century changes in popular London English and could not have been present at the formative period.59 If that is so, the consensus on mAusE cannot be maintained. Even Mitchell (1995) is vaguely aware of this, when he speaks of a compromise that new immigrants and the local population formed in the creation of the General. What would the compromise have been between? If central features of the accent cannot have been present, how did they get there, since they are undoubtedly a part of 20th century mAusE? In principle, one could argue that they developed as a result of the inherent dynamics of English. But in view of large-scale migration, 'drift' is unlikely, at least, as a sole explanation. A better solution is to assume a second formative period. To know the demographic details of this second period, one would have to investigate the social, professional and educational backgrounds of migrants after the 1870s. Jupp (1988), for instance, speaks of skilled workers, trade union-sponsored emigration schemes, a focus on rural labour, etc. These were all working class. Jupp mentions 'voluntary', unassisted migrants who came to Victoria and who had a higher educational level. They formed a class of educated migrants. Some of them like Rev. Dunmore Lang came as members of the elite and strengthened the local elite. Some of the educated migrants, Jupp says, continued to dominate in the almanacs and volumes of 'Notable Australian' that constituted the Australian Who's Who. One analysis of the birthplaces of 2135 leading Victorians as the end of the nineteenth century shows that 27 per cent of commercial men, 26 per cent of professionals and civil servants, and 14 per cent of land holders had been born in England - high 59

Jones (1907: 42) says that /u:/ acquired a low onset at the turn to the 20th century. Gunn (1975; 1992) and Wells (1982) are unconvincing.

328

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

representations since less that 10 per cent of the colony's population was English-born. Indeed, the gold-rush generation of English migrants dominated Victorian public life for decades. Nine of the 11 Victorian premiers between 1870 and 1893 were English migrants who had arrived in the 1850s. Between 1851 and 1901 the number of English-born members of parliament was overtaken by those born in Australia. Even so, 16.5 per cent of New South Wales' parliamentarians and 20.6 per cent of Queensland's had been born in England. (1988: 387)

The English-born and Scottish-born of the second half of the 19th century accounted for a large proportion of the professional, intellectual and political elite. So the last decades of the 19th century brought to Australia members of all social classes, who, on the evidence discussed, spoke the full range of London English accents of their time. And as some educated speakers were fully aware of class differentiation at home, they may well have supported the conservative element around RP and the rise of the Cultivated as an accent close enough to RP. Despite inconsistencies in Mitchell (2001), his idea that General emerged in the 1870s and 1880s as "a consequence of a coincident surge of the two forces that have produced the Australian population immigration and natural increase" (2001: 62) is still attractive and consonant with this description. What he ignores, of course, is the true impact of that second cycle of the transportation on the features introduced and of the persistently exo-normative attitude in Australia that made it easy for these new features to be accepted and to spread. I would suggest, then, that the General arose as a result of a new wave of immigration that reflected the social classes, educational aspirations and linguistic distinctions in accent and dialect of EngE. The compromise that Mitchell rightly speaks of is the selective acceptance of such features as the lowering onset of diphthongs, the diphthongization of long high vowels and the increasing rejection of hdeletion. In contrast, the use of the glottal stop and the vocalization of l\l were not accepted. If what I said is plausible, the alleged uniformity of the mAusE accent must be re-addressed. The demography of the colonies differed somewhat, as I have shown in Chapter 2 . Note that, for instance, Queensland had been very attractive to British working class migrants, Victoria and Adelaide had a wider social mix. On the assumption that the features discussed earlier started out in working class London and were more extreme there than in middle class speech, one would expect different outcomes in the consensual accent that Mitchell had noted. It would seem that the division between the north and the south of Australia and that between large cities and rural

3.6 A social and linguistic history ofmAusE

329

regions may have developed or, at least, been reinforced. The south and the cities had less extreme realizations - e.g. higher onsets - than the north. And these patterns were, I would argue, not distributed as homogeneously regionally as has been maintained in the past. Moreover, the discussion of regional dialect features (section 3.4.4) has already pointed to some régionalisme that emerged at the end of the 19th century. As to Cultivated, it would have modelled on England's RP in its telling absence of the features just mentioned. Exo-normativism, not endo-normativism, was the guiding principle in the social stratification of the accent at the turn to the 20th century. The accents were both a replication of the English model and a sign of the Australianization of English. In remodelling the English pattern, the phonology of mAusE stayed well in tune with the phonological umbrella of EngE. It also stayed in tune with the prevailing normative attitudes about class stratification and the role of good speech. That should not surprise us when we recall that the codification of the Cultivated and its rise to an explicit norm thanks to ABC's language policies (section 3.5.1) began with a similar process of copying. But independence was ultimately reached when Australian norms replaced English ones. 3.6.2

The origin of stratification of the dialect

As there is less research about the social causes or correlates of change in the grammar of English during the formative period, though there is on the vocabulary, it is not possible to tell a story like Mitchell's (1995; 2001). Question (4) in section 3.6 is as a result more central than question (3). Denison believed that English had "already undergone most of the syntactic changes which differentiate Present-Day English (...) from Old English" (1998: 92) and added that the English of 1776 was linguistically by no means the same as that of the present day.... The earlier we look, the more obvious it becomes that English syntax differs from that of our own day, even though few post-1776 usages will cause us much difficulty. Since relatively few categorical losses or innovations have occurred in the last two centuries, syntactic change has more often been statistical in nature, with a given construction occurring throughout the period and either becoming more or less common generally or in particular registers. The overall, rather elusive effect can seem more a matter of stylistic than of syntactic change, so it is useful to be able to track frequencies of occurrence from eModE through to the present day. Of

330

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

course there have been substantive changes too, particularly in the verb.... (1998: 93) There were some changes in the verbal group related to the auxiliaries be and have, which had been markers of transitive and intransitive verbs and became markers of the perfect and passive, respectively. There is the expansion of the present perfect, a clearer contrast between the perfect and simple past, the expansion of the progressive through the entire verbal paradigm, some changes in the use of modal verbs like in shall/will, may/might, etc. In the course of the 19th century the verbal group acquired its current structure. There were some changes in the noun phrase, in word order, etc. There were shifts in frequency and style, as Denison had said, which cannot be traced without extensive corpus linguistic studies. But overall there was more continuity than change. As these changes affected both BrE and AmE, Algeo (1988) concluded that there was not a single major system that would separate the grammar of AmE from BrE even after 200 years. A number of low-level lexicogrammatical distinctions have become highly symbolic of the two varieties and were so strong that linguistic choices in emerging varieties of English, such as mAusE, were often perceived as siding with one or the other of the two varieties. In light of these observations, what is it that one could expect to find on the dialect of mAusE? Clearly, the English in Australia was affected by the same changes as BrE and AmE, in principle. But the realities of the continent, its inhabitants, social conventions, living patterns or values necessitated other changes - changes in the inherited vocabulary - as Australia was not like Britain and perhaps a bit like America. Furthermore, as English in Australia inherited the features of the shared Anglo-American heritage that had existed prior to the separation of the grammar of BrE and AmE, it could pursue a third path, a path that was neither British nor American. That path is often referred to as 'colonial lag', but that concept misses the point that mAusE owes a part of its texture to Anglo-American English, rather than merely to BrE. Have these features, then, produced patterns that show up today as remnants of that past? Let me turn to some of the trends mentioned earlier. There are some features that all varieties seem to have shared at the end of the 18th century (Denison 1998). They are listed in table 3-13 on the following page. They can be found in Australia at the beginning of the colony and many of them are still used. Example (206), for instance, shows the non-attraction of not to the auxiliary, (207) has the fe-perfect, the old gerund formed with a-,

3.6 A social and linguistic history of mAusE

331

which readers will know from "Waltzing Matilda" is in (208) and (209) has the place adverbial before the subject complement: (206) Did not you almost crack my shins with your waddyl (Taylor 2003; "Police protection") (207) ... they were now become exceedingly fond of bread (letter of John Hunter; fr. Troy, ρ 11) (208) I am α-coming (Taylor 2000; "A knotty affair") (209) the other was found at some distance dead (Phillip to Sydney, 15 May 1788, HRA, vol. 1, 48) These common features confirm the high level of continuity during the 19th century and the possibility of an independent path of the English in Australia on its way to a standard variety. While many of these features were non-specific and occurred in most varieties of English at the time, some were specific and typical of the southern or, alternatively, to the northern type of English, i.e. northern EngE, IrE and ScotE and AmE (Leitner 1992). Their uses were illustrated in section 3.2.2.2 and elsewhere. Table 3-13. Examples of the shared Anglo-American heritage Area Noun Phrase Verb Phrase

Sentence structure Orthography

Examples def. art. in 'go to the hospital'; pronouns: (i) pi. yus (also for 2nd p.); (ii) she instead of 'it' tense: simple past in 'did he come yet'; present perfect with def. past time adv. like 'last week' modals: non-use of must as deontic; rareness of shall for Is' p. sg. multiple negation adverbial clauses: final but, gerund marking with a- as in 'a-going' general variants such as -or/-our, lexical variants such as judg(e)ment, gaol/jail

Origin Northern type Northern type

Northern type General English

Some features were specific to Cockney and popular London. Taylor (2003), for instance, has examples that show their lexis and grammar used in Australia during the middle of the 19th century: (210)

Miss Elvira: — No my lord. I wishes as how I was. (Here she burst into tears and sobbed convulsively.) If as how I had an 'usband it isn't likely I'd be in this here fix, no more I wouldn't. but I've gotten nobody to take care on me but my own blessed self, and Missis Jones insulted me, and I give it her back again. (Taylor 2003: 16)

332

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

Note the 3rd p. sg. -s in Ί wishes', as as a conjunct, double negation, gotten for 'got', give for 'gave'. There were other inherited features that were discarded later, such as the use of be for 'have' to express the perfect in (207), the quasi-gerund in (208), and never as a marker of the past time: (211)

Veil he never! Did you hever? (Taylor 2003; "A knotty affair")

Non-standard strong verb forms such as commed 'came', knowed 'knew' (Taylor 2003; "A penny lawsuit"), or as for 'who' in (212) are owed to Cockney, amongst other dialects: (212) I've Mr. Nickells as isn't here (sic! Taylor 2003; "Assault") These features were then and are now part of the non-standard or slang. Regarding lexis, Ramson (1966), Turner (1966; 1997) and others have suggested periods of growth and change, such as 'the early years', 'convicts' or the 'pastoral expansion', which are related to periods of the expansion of the colonies. I will merely add a few examples to what was said in section 3.2.4, such as the word woods for later 'bush', air used as a count noun: (213) (214)

... and I believe their numbers in the woods must be very small (report by Phillip to Lord Sydney, 15 May 1788, H RA, vol. 1, ρ 31) ... and a very good situation for buildings, streets will be laid out in such a manner as to afford a free air (report by Phillip to Lord Sydney, 15 May 1788, ΗRA, vol. 1, ρ 48)

Apart from those periods, one should recall the evidence on periods of loaning from Aboriginal languages and contact with other varieties of English (after the formative period) and other languages (section 3.3). What is missing yet is a clearer, integrative picture of the social history of the stratification of the lexicon. As late as 1945 Baker could speak of mAusE as being merely slang. Foster and Mühlhäusler (1996) pointed to a shift in literary norms at the end of the 19th century when the literary representation of the bush required Aboriginal loans, while that of the town called for the non-standard and, possibly, Cockney elements (cf. section 3.1.3). That was, one might say, a dialect shift, while a shift in the perception of the vocabulary along a standard/non-standard dimension or along registers was not noticeable until Maley (1972). To close with discourse and style, rhyming slang (section 3.2.2.1) was first observed in mAusE by Ducange Anglicus, according to Görlach: Rather, the type burst into existence, as slang did, at the same time and in the same lower-class (and often criminal) circles of London, where both types [rhyming and general slang, GL] served the obvious function of a secret language. Therefore, the sixty RS [rhyming slang, GL] items listed in

3.6 A social and linguistic history ofmAusE

333

The vulgar tongue by a writer with the penname Ducange Anglicus (1857; 1859) are the first concentrated evidence.... many of these expressions survived... This stability is an important fact since it implies that the surviving items must have lost their secretive function - otherwise they would have been given up as useless - and that a spread to other speech communities could therefore have happened at any time until the first attestation in, say, AusE provides a terminus ad quem.... although detailed evidence for most items is lacking, ... contemporary observers agree on the fact that RS started becoming popular in Australia as late as the 1890s... (2000: 11)

Görlach believes rhyming slang was imported by the last waves of convicts and free settlers before 1867, but lay dormant until the end of the century. He quotes Crowe's comments at the end of the 19th century: The Cockney RS is popular in Australia and the lion comiques, and lydies of the variety stage are helping to make the holder stronger (fr. Baker 1970: 308). (2000: 15) Many items listed were common English, but about half of them, e.g. arty rolla 'a collar', must have been Australian formations. The items in the AND are all attested for the first time just before the turn to the 20th century, which is in line with the flowering of rhyming slang between 1895 and 1915. Görlach adds that the sociolinguistics of both the BrE source and the AusE recipient were quite different from those of 1850. Australians were not willing to imitate phonological innovations of Cockney, but RS obviously had a different appeal. The Australians' Cockney origins may have produced the right kind of atmosphere to supplement their highly expressive language with another juicy facet. (2000: 16) Though all of that may be highly speculative, as Görlach admits, it is interesting in light of what was said above in connection with glottaling, lvocalization and /x-dropping. These features were all found in London late in the 19th and early 20th century and were rejected in mAusE - rhyming slang was not. What could have been the reason for that split in the willingness to borrow? There is thus a good deal of evidence that points to the integration, levelling and functional or stylistic restructuring of the various inputs. There is evidence of an independent path. But there remain pressing and unanswered questions. The first is that Denison (1998) does show that the

334

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

19th century was a period of stability and change, but he is quite unspecific about dates. He does, however, imply hints about the dating of some features such as definite and indefinite past time adverbiale and the present perfect and simple past in BrE, compared with AmE. Is then the greater ease of combining the perfect with definite past time adverbials in mAusE a remnant of an earlier period when the current BrE and AmE distinction was not yet settled or is it a return to an earlier pattern that now counts as AmE? One would tend to think the first alternative would be the correct one. The second issue is that Denison (1998) has nothing to say about whether such a change was promoted more by some social strata than by others. Turning to social stratification in AusE, what was the impact of education, of the persistent exo-normative attitude to the 1960s, of the staffing practices at schools, the media - all of which emphasized BrE norms (section 3.5)? The social history of the dialect and of grammar especially have not been investigated enough and one would hope Fritz (in progress) will provide some answers. It is difficult therefore to date that slow movement that created a base in the dialect that would be codified further. There is no doubt that there were sub-conscious patterns, given the diversity in public and private writing and the split between urban and rural literary representations of the Australian idiom. Maley (1972), for instance, could unashamedly refer to standard Australian grammar in the early 1970s without causing any uproar - yet without any practical consequences. The ABC's SCOSE, too, had for some time been pre-occupied with usage and Australian perspectives. If these are signs of an emerging consciousness of a standard dimension in mAusE, one would assume that explicit views would have started to be heard at the end of the 19th century, possibly at about the same time as the rise of the Cultivated accent. While we cannot but be tentative regarding question (4), then, on parallels in the development of the accent and the dialect, we have some evidence that they did not develop in isolation from one another.

3.6.3

Recent change

I will close section 3.6 with a few remarks on recent, 20th century changes, which are often ignored in discussions of mAusE. To recall some features that have been mentioned in section 3.4.3: (i)

The on-going stratification of the accents and creation of ethnic varieties

(ii) The High Rising Tone (section 3.2.1)

3.6 A social and linguistic history of mAusE

335

(iii) On-going language and dialect contact, especially with AmE (section 3.3.3.1) (iv) The emergence of regional dialects and accents (section 3.4.3) (v) The shift from Cultivated to General, along with the emphasis of more informal styles as a public norm (section 3.5) (vi) The clash between the lingo and the standard in relation to such demands as non-discriminatory language (section 3.5) (vii) The replacement of established BrE norms in legally relevant types of texts by the much more international plain English (section 3.5) These features mark internally motivated change and show how dynamic, self-controlled mAusE had become. Taylor (2000) discusses an important aspect of the pronoun system, viz. the 2nd person plural youse and other changes regarding plural pronouns. He argues that there seems to develop a plural use of youse, which may occur in BrE also. He also adds that this is spreading as a solidarity form among non-working class adolescents: \y]ous is spreading in Australian English as an in-group solidarity form. That is to say, non-working class younger people, whose parents would stigmatise youse, employ it within their own group as a solidarity marker, though they would not use it to their elders or otherwise outside their group. ... we have perhaps the unique situation that in colloquial Australian English it is only the plural of the second person pronoun that is the so-called familiar or solidarity form - there is in Australian English no equivalent singular solidarity form, in contrast to other languages such as German and French with their ... solidarity forms. (2000: 13f)

Taylor argued that they is developing beyond being just a generic singular pronoun that covers male/female possibilities and that it is developing into a pronoun referring to indefinite referents in general, that is, it is developing a new grammatical function rather than just continuing or extending its older non-standard pragmatic function. (2000: 18)

He even believes that, once they has developed a general singular or plural generic use, the reflexive themself might arise, which is indeed the case as the following examples show (Taylor 2000: 18): (215) (216)

They also have controls on the movie that they can change themself, er er themselves (in a very low voice as an after-thought) We like to give people a tool in their hand to help themself.

336

Chapter 3 Australian English: The national language

(217)

The reviewer takes care to identify themself at every possible point (email by Clyne, 2003) As this form is used later by an Aboriginal speaker, it is clear that this is a shared development and cuts across the varieties of AusE altogether. It proves the Australianness of AusE. mAusE is not only an epi-centre of English. There is emerging a common Australian base over above internal diversity that will be discussed as one of the crucial signs of the creation of a new habitat in Chapter Four and in detail in Leitner (2004b). And yet it is important at this point to re-affirm that mAusE is not too different from BrE and world varieties of English elsewhere, as Gillam (1982) has argued: In contrast to the upsurge of confidence and individualism in the last century, linguistic impetus this century has been towards World English and twentieth century Australian English is less divergent than it was in the nineteenth century. (1982: 157)

3.7

The language repertoire of the speech community of mAusE

Before I come to the final chapter of this study of mAusE, its role as an epicentre, its pluricentricity and political role, which will be developed further in Leitner (2004b), I must come back to one of the underlying themes of this study. I have repeatedly emphasized the fact that mAusE has been absorbing millions of non-English-speaking Australians or, in other words, of people who have had non-Anglophone backgrounds and who have made English in its Australian variety their own and only or additional language. The demographic base of mAusE has thus been widening throughout the history of colonial and independent Australia. At the same time mAusE has never been a inescapable straitjacket: Those that have made mAusE their own need not have given up their other languages or varieties of English and those others, who have had an Anglophone and Australian background may have acquired other languages and other forms of AusE. I recall well the daughter of one colleague in Perth who speaks AborE fluently because the mother works in the Aboriginal section of the Education Department. Both also speak German due to the descent of the mother. Aboriginal Australians who work in government departments, in national or international companies or who have set up advisory businesses, etc., are typically familiar with (standard or near-standard) mAusE and use AborE for local matters. The same is true of non-English-speaking migrants who have lived in Australia for a considerable period of time and have the

3.7 The language repertoire of the speech community of mAusE

337

motivation or feel the need to be fully proficient - in addition to their native language(s). The mainstreaming of LOTEs, which has been a successful political move since the 1980s, has led to large numbers of students and adults to acquire languages for enrichment reasons, because of their careers or of their personal circumstances as they married into a family of non-Englishspeaking indigenous or migrant Australians. There are countless Aboriginal Australians who also speak German, Somali or other languages. mAusE may be the primary or a secondary language or a variety of English in the language repertoires of Australians - by no means is it a limitation. There are two particular and heavily mixed communities that need to be mentioned in passing, i.e. those that speak Norfolk or Cape Barren English as their only or additional language. Norfolk is spoken on Norfolk Island, which is some 2,000 kilometers east of Queensland. Cape Barren English is used on Cape Barren, a small island northeast of Tasmania. These two varieties are the result of contact that native English speakers had had with other languages in Tahiti and Pitcairm and in Tasmania, respectively. They are part of separate traditions of transplanted English and are unrelated to the development of mAusE. That independent part of their history was mapped out in diagram 1-2 where they were seen as migrant varieties of English in Norfolk on the one hand and of Aboriginal English on Cape Barren Island on the other. Early Norfolk speakers were native English speakers, who came from Pitcairn where they and their ancestors had interacted and mixed with Tahitians and other South Pacific islanders. Those of Cape Barren English were native English speakers who mixed with local and mainland Aborigines. It is for that reason that the two varieties of English will be dealt with in more detail in Leitner (2004b). It will be shown there that both contain features of 18th and early 19th century BrE dialects. However, the pervasive contact with Australia and, as a result, with (m)AusE began when Britain took control of these islands, which has drawn them into the sphere of mAusE and made them seem a relic of a distant past. Their language ended up as a sort of regional dialect of today's AusE. Varieties or languages that are used by a heavily mixed population that hardly has any members of unmixed descent throw up theoretical problems of classification and my solution to include them in a section on the diverse speech community of mAusE is really no more than to say that they are a part of contemporary AusE and of (earlier) ethnic varieties of English.

Chapter 4 An epi-centre in the Asia-Pacific region I come to the close of my study of English in Australia. I have reiterated the path of a set of transplanted dialects of English to a recognizably different, independent variety that has become the national language of Australia, is an epi-centre of English internationally and increasingly recognized from outside. I discussed its texture, functions and standardization inside the relevant socio-historical context. Throughout I emphasized the outcomes of contact with indigenous and migrant languages in Australia and have given attention to the on-going contact with AmE and other varieties of English. What was surprising in this account was the persistence of, what I have called, a 'split' perception of mAusE - as an informal, even slang, variety on the one hand and a fully stratified variety, with a standard at the top, on the other. In England and the USA, varieties at the lower end of the social spectrum may have covert prestige, while the standard, educated forms have overt prestige. In Australia the non-standard varieties seem to enjoy a much higher public visibility and recognition than their analogues in the USA and Britain. The core of mAusE, which was dealt with in section 3.2, was approached from an Anglo-Celtic angle and I showed that what is essentially Australian in mAusE is often less found in concrete expressions than in underlying patterns or the norms of communication. Patterns typical of different styles, registers or social varieties are also less neatly divided than in BrE, it seems, and there is a great deal of transition, which creates a sense of liveliness, a dynamism that can be used to mix expressions of opposing norms in a single text or discourse. The texture of mAusE outside the core was dealt with in section 3.3 where I turned to the impact of indigenous languages, whether traditional or modern, and to the pervasive role of AmE. AmE, I argued there, acts both on its own and as a carrier of other language input. The internal stratification of accents, dialects and styles of mAusE in section 3.4 showed that regional variation is a minor factor. Stratification is accounted for mainly by gender and education. Ethnicity plays a minor role, with Italians and Greeks having formed an accent that borders on the mainstream. As I just said a prominent feature of mAusE is the possibility of shifting between varieties and styles in creative writing. Delbridge, for instance, has said that

Chapter 4 An epi-centre in the Asia-Pacific region

339

poets and dramatists, especially, like to plummet down out of a stretch of high style, down into a highly colloquial phrase, even a single word, even a vulgar word, but certainly a slang idiom... Both styles [here], the patrician prose and the slang, are written tongue in cheek, as if to say, look I can master them both. But ultimately this is a feature of Australianness. (1998: 56) The Australianness of Australian English is not merely a matter of vocabulary. There's a nice essay by Chris Wallace-Crabbe in a volume of his papers called Falling into Language. He mentions a poem by Bruce Da we, called "Drifters", in which there are hardly any regional words. Its Australianness "is at heart a matter of phrasing, of the way his voice takes on the guise of suburban speech-rhythms, the pacing, the Lego grammar, the innocent anaphora, the rambling flattened stress patters no more than lightly stitched together by recurrent internal rhymes. To the native ear this poem sounds as Australian as a jar of Vegemite.1 (1998: 57) mAusE is thus more than a set of expressions or an impoverished social code: It is a reflection of the cultural background of Australia's society. All its sub-varieties - from the standard to the non-standard, all styles - have national significance. The Macquarie's subtitle 'The national dictionary' has made that point very convincingly since its first edition in 1981. When work on it was begun in 1970, Delbridge explained, "there was a crying need for a dictionary that would serve Australians, as some of these foreign dictionaries [he refers to the Concise Oxford, Webster's and Random House dictionaries, GL] had so imperfectly done as first-port-of-call reference books, for any and all the words that Australian users might want to look up..." (1998: 50). Australia's words may have been more prominent than the sounds, then, but it is the language as such that stands for the nation, integrates and symbolizes its sections, Malouf says: Insofar as we are a people here, and inasmuch as we have a culture, it is absolutely rooted in that language [Australian English, GL]. The language is what holds us together. You know when people are always looking round for what defines our Australian identity, or defines us as a community ... it seems to me to reside ... in the fact that we share that language with one another and have changed that language to fit us, but fit us socially rather than fit the land. That seems to me to make the way language exists here something both more precious, because it is the source of our cohesion as a people, but also something that we are self-conscious about in a way that a speaker of the language in England may not have to be. (Malouf; fir. Delbridge 1998: 56)

340

Chapter 4 An epi-centre in the Asia-Pacific region

The flow of expressions between varieties that has been mentioned repeatedly shows another facet, i.e. its flexibility and adaptability to changing purposes and its power to cast changing angles on to diverse purposes of speaking. Delbridge highlights that in these words: Nevertheless slang, the colloquial element, is perhaps the dominant, certainly the most notorious element in the Australianness of Australian English. In what Patrick White called the novels of social realism, written in the earlier parts of this century, the attempt to capture the Australian voice relied mostly on the colloquial, especially in fictional dialogue. Indeed it was often overdone so that what was intended to be the colorful background to character and action became the foreground, with the paint laid out too thick. (1998: 57)

The language and literacy policy since the late 1980s (Lo Bianco 1987; 2001; Dawkins 1991) meant precisely that, when it referred to English without even using the term mAusE. "More recently", says Delbridge, "there has been a strengthened strategy to promote literacy and language learning under the Australian Literacy and Language Policy. Here the word 'literacy' means literacy in English, and English specifically means "the form of English generally used in Australia, Standard Australian English" (1998: 55). And yet, while the whole range of mAusE reveals something of the nation and its culture, it is surprising that it took to the late 20th century for it to define the essence of the so-called literacy in English and to become the sole target of education from pre-school to tertiary level. It is worth making two points that are rarely made explicitly. The first has a domestic Australian angle and maintains that this English has been assimilative throughout Australia's history. mAusE has continually widened its demographic, social and functional base. I referred to markers that are indicative of ethnic background or to clusters of education, ethnicity, religion or habitation. Could one argue that this kind of stratification is related to a confluence of quite diverse developments from the late 1950s? The first large wave of non-English-speaking European migrants had settled by that time and was seen in need of longterm language teaching needs (cf. Ozolins 1993; Leitner 2004b). Indigenous Australians had gained citizenship and formed larger concentrations in the cities. Their educational and language needs have been a persistent theme. At the same time and almost unrelated to this Mitchell and Delbridge carried out their researches into the stratification of the Australian accent (see Mitchell and Delbridge 1965a), which did not identify any features worth noting from non-Englishspeaking migrants. Their work and the developments described in section

Chapter 4 An epi-centre in the Asia-Pacific region

341

3.5 contributed to the emergence of a fully stratified mAusE with a standard variety in both accent and grammar and social variants beneath it. When the need arose to formulate a coherent language policy that would include all languages, the developments regarding migrants' language needs, that of indigenous Australians and developments noticed in mAusE could be integrated to a position that defined (the standard of) mAusE as the nationally integrative language that all citizens should have access too. It defined the other languages as complementary assets in what was seen a multicultural nation. The other aspect is that mAusE is aiming to gain status outside Australia. Status as a target variety in Europe is clearly out of the question. An Asia-Pacific focus is more realistic. The Macquarie dictionary is trying to incorporate the lexis of Australia's Asian-Pacific neighbourhood and to cover 'Asian words' that the average Australian businessman, tourist or educated layman is likely encounter - without returning to a conception of English that was used in the 19th century when one spoke of Austral English (e.g. Morris 1898). To quote from Butler: My ambition was to research the Englishes of Southeast Asia with a view to including items from these Englishes in the Macquarie Dictionary. I wanted to expand our current list of items ... to include those items of high frequency which the average Australian might be expected to encounter, increasingly so given the fresh commitment to regional affairs and trade made in particular by former Prime Minister Paul Keating. (1997: 276)

That new turn is, of course, not just a reflection of commercial aspirations; it embeds mAusE into its socio-political context and reflects the kind of interactions taking place. 'National identity' in mAusE is being extended to the passive or semi-active knowledge of the varieties of English of the wider region. And in doing that, there is a suspicion that it aims to become a player in the region as a point of linguistic attraction and of an international standing. An important question in this context relates to the reciprocity of such moves. How well is mAusE perceived outside Australia? In section 3.1.2 I noted the quite positive views in the USA at the turn to the 20th century. Yet, the standard of mAusE has remained a local standard, a norm for Australia, not one for the wider world or the Asia-Pacific.60 Macquarie's Grolier International 40

Dictionary

(2000), a dictionary of English for the

See Görlach (1990) and Leitner (1992) on the rise of standard mAusE in the wider context of English worldwide.

342

Chapter 4 An epi-centre in the Asia-Pacific region

Asian market, does not contain Australia's lexis and pronunciations. Its editor, Sue Butler, told me that mAusE would not be acceptable and that the publisher had to confine themselves to BrE and AmE conventions. Yet, mAusE is making inroads into Asia and international markets in practical ways. Tens of thousands of students study 'down-under', business companies set up headquarters or do business from there; international bodies, the military, the ABC, or the Supreme Court, which functions for several Pacific nations, all act as co-orchestrators of mAusE. While that is increasingly being recognized, it is puzzling that Australia continues to emphasize the other side of the coin, so to speak, the ocker, the lingo as its main selling asset. The Berlin Tagesspiegel, for instance, carried this view of mAusE (3 August 2000; my translation): Many things are different downunder. And so is the language. Australians have a love of abbreviations and imaginative idioms, which a tourist may find hard to understand. Some words are derived from the vocabulary of Aborigines. The slanguage reflects the typical character of Australians: rough but warm. Here is a small list of the most frequent expressions: Aussie = Einheimischer Brekky = Frühstück Up the creek = in Schwierigkeiten Salty = Salzwasserkrokodil

Barby = Barbecue Drongo = Nichtsnutz Stubby = kleine Bierflasche Back of Bourke = tiefste Provinz

But there are signs of a positive evaluation outside its own region. Itamo Oizki, a Japanese linguist, for instance, believes that internationally, Australian English is increasing its importance as a common language in the Asia-Pacific region. Firstly, it has been winning a 'language war' going on in the competitive zone of Southwest Asia. For example, the Australian English program was overwhelmingly more popular in Cambodia than the French counterpart... Australian organisers are convinced that English is the language Cambodians want to learn. A similar demand is also observed in Vietnam. Secondly, the ABC has a potential audience of 600 million around the Asia-Pacific region, indicating that about one-tenth of the world population will listen to it. Thirdly, more and more overseas (mostly Asian) students are studying at Australian universities.... The number .... jumped from just over 18,000 in 1988 to more than 54,000 in 1993. (1998: 3) As I said above, goods and services industries, information technology and tertiary education help mAusE to spread. Spread may be speeding up

Chapter 4 An epi-centre in the Asia-Pacific region

343

if, what Clyne thinks, turns out to be true, viz. that mAusE may be seen as free of imperialist connotations that are associated with BrE and AmE: The parallel [between East and West Germany, GL] suggests that Australian English may well be seen in South-East Asia as free of imperialist connotations of both British and American English. (Style Council 92, Australian Style. A National Bulletin, April 1993, p. 4) Essentially, English can no longer be seen as a unified language in terms of international perceptions. And social connotations linked with English worldwide may apply to some of its national varieties or epi-centres more than to others. Those varieties that do not suffer, or do not suffer strongly, from negative connotations may benefit from an increased acceptability in the long run. The connotations of pluricentric English will thus have to be re-thought and, if there is evidence that political or other connotations are associated with them, re-defmed. I will close with a note on the effect that English has had on all the other languages on the continent - whether migrant or indigenous.61 Mühlhäusler (1996b: 11) has put this well when he maintained that all languages have had to position themselves vis-à-vis English. Anglicization and Australianization have been the central trends and Aborigines have had to find a linguistic place 'in their own land', defined as it was by the mainstream of Australia. We have seen words like riba and dagger being used in Kriol. The one goes back to the English dialects at the beginning of the colony and illustrates Anglicization, the other comes from AusE and shows Australianization. These two trends have, of course, succeeded each other, certainly with a long period of overlap. The extent of and the periods of Anglicization are shown in diagram 4-1 below. That diagram reflects the effect that English has had on other languages as it displaced them or restricted the scope of their use as soon as English intruded upon the Aboriginal habitat - which happened, readers will recall from Chapter Two, at different periods of time in different parts of the continent. Over time the effect of English or, put more precisely, BrE was weakening and was being superseded by the influence of AusE, then by mAusE. The replacement of the influence of BrE by that of AusE was, of course, not a sudden, instantaneous change and there was a lengthy period of overlap - again, in relation to different parts of the continent and the two cycles of formative input mentioned in

61

The following passage draws on Leitner (2004a).

344

Chapter 4 An epi-centre in the Asia-Pacific region

section 3.6. But the Australianization of English did eventually win out and its increasing linguistic effect of all other languages is shown in diagram 4-2 below. The local varieties now acted like a shadow that recast the texture of all other languages - indigenous, migrant and contact. One should recall at this point, for instance, the spread of Australian words like bush, that of indigenous words like jumbuck that had become loans in AusE to other indigenous languages. One might add the spread of the High Rising Tone with its pragmatic implications or of language norms against racial, gender or other bias into indigenous, migrant and contact languages (section 3.6). Apart from mapping the impact of Australianization in general, diagram 4-2 identifies periods of change in the transformation of the Australian language habitats. Is it possible, then, one may ask, to conceive of Australia as a new, restructured, but stable or stabilizing habitat, a habitat in a new equilibrium, to borrow a term from Dixon (1997)? If this were the case or if that would be a likely future state, it would be hierarchically structured equilibrium, with mAusE at the top and with none of the other languages able to exert any linguistic power outside Australia's borders. While they are exposed to contact with mAusE and increasingly Australianize, their teaching in Australia will essentially be based on exo-normative principles. German would be taught on the basis of Hochdeutsch, Mandarin as the standard language in China, etc. The teaching of non-English languages would be unlikely to shift to local Australian norms. And, given that the new habitat would have a hierarchical structure, there will be continuous pressure to 'move up' linguistically and shift to mAusE. Plurilingual policies that aim to create a space for other languages will be, and are, difficult to implement. A final note, as the consecutive processes of Anglicization and Australianization are being emphasized, one should not forget the persistent pull towards the unity of English world-wide. It was shown to exist in a range of areas and domains such as the language of law and legally binding documents in earlier sections. Science, technology, entertainment, etc., could be added and, though the history of science and technology in Australia has not been looked at from a linguistic angle, the study by the Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering (1988) is an example that opens up perspectives that oppose a too localistic view of the transformation of Australia's language habitats and the development of mAusE. Local and global pressures have both been at work constantly and shaped an epi-centre of English with 'uneven edges'.

345

Chapter 4 An epi-centre in the Asia-Pacific region

Ι

INDIGENOUS HABITAT AT MOMENTOF INVASION

2

[NON-TRANSPLANTED LANGUAGE] OUTSIDE INFLUENCES

3 CONTACT/INTERACTION between LANGUAGE?' and VARIETIES O F L A H ® U A G E S

4

^TRADITIONAL 'S LANGUAGES

5

6

MULTILINGUÀLISM

MODIFICATION

OUTSIDE U M

IS

-INCREASE OF L C E S

G

REDUCTION (LOSS&SHIFT)

PIDGIN

RECAST OF T E X T !

REVERSAL DOMINANT LG-BASED

ÉD / LANQUAGP

10

DOCUMENT- ICOMPLEMÈNTARY ΑΠΟΝ / ROLE/DOMAIN (RE-) ASSIGNMENT

NEW HABITAT

I FORMATION

11

» S E L F - C O N T R O L L E D DEVE

12

13 indigenous lang.s i contact lang.s

migrant contact lang.s

migrant" FLUENCES ROM/TO OL'TSIDE

Diagram 4-1. Broad stages of language development inside the habitat

346

Chapter 4 Art epi-centre in the Asia-Pacific region

Indigenous habitat

English h a b i t a t TRANSFER,

Indigenous Ig,

Migrant habitat users

• invading set of dialects

common

1790

tahjj^e

1850

increased loss, shift

pidgin

early \borE

1900

increased LOTEs loss, shift

creolization

stabilized

Norfolk

»'«ve

few LOTEs

early pressure

Kriol, I S AboifÍ; creole, stable pidgins

f r o m mAusE decline 3 accents urban/bush Singo early dialect words earlv codification

1950 continued loss, shift

further expansion

uirther expansion

towards full stratification

2000 attempts to

recognition part-codific

recognition full codification part-codific. national

halt shift

Australia's Indigenous heritage

ethnolects of AusE

increased f r o m jiiAusi

reduction nf status

mAusE-att ethnolects epicentre, of English of AusE

Diagram 4-2. Shared periods of the transformation of the habitat

LOTEs

References 200 Jahre Geschichte der deutsprachigen Gemeinschaft in Australien ar. 1989 Edited by Die Woche, Bankstown, NSW. [published around 1988] Age, The 1995 Style Book. Melbourne: The Age. Ager, Dennis 2001 Motivation in Language Planning and Language Policy. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Alford, Henry 1864 The Queen's English: Stray Notes on Speaking and Spelling. London: Strahan & Co. Algeo, John 1988 British and American grammatical differences. International Journal of Lexicology 1: 1-31. Allan, Keith 1984 The Component Functions of the High Rise Terminal Contour in Australian Declarative Sentences. Australian Journal of Linguistics 4(1): 19-32. American College Dictionary 1969 Oxford: Putnam and Sons. Anon. ar. 1880

Anon. 1972

The Detective's Handbook. Slang Phrases Comprising the Quaint Slang Words and Flash Dialogues in Use in Australian Ahadows of Life... New Edition - Several Thousand New Words Added. Sydney. Spelling List of Difficult Words. In Good Australian English and Good New Zealand English, George Turner (ed.), 223-238. Sydney: Reed Education.

Arthur, Jay M. 1996 Aboriginal English. A Cultural Study. Melbourne: Oxford University Press. Attorney General, Simplification Task Force 1993 Plan of Action. Commonwealth of Australia, Attorney General. 1995

Drafting Issues. A Singular Use of they. Simplification Task Force.

348

References

Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering 1988 Technology in Australia 1788-1988. A Condensed History of Australian Technological Innovation and Adaptation During the First Two Hundred Years. Compiled by Fellows of the Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering. Melbourne. [http://www.austehc.unimelb.edu.au/tia/titlepape.html. 15 May 2004] Australia Council 1983 Guidelines on the Use of Non-Sexist Language in Australia Council Publications, Reports, Papers, Documents and Correspondence. Canberra: Australia Council. [ABC] Australian Broadcasting Corporation 1944 The Voice of the A.B.C. Announcers' Handbook. Sydney: Australian Broadcasting Corporation. 1957 A Guide to the Pronunciation of Australian Place Names. Sydney: Australian Broadcasting Commission. 1981 1989 1992

Program Policies and Practices. Sydney: Australian Broadcasting Corporation. ABC Editorial and Program Practices in Radio and Television. Sydney: Australian Broadcasting Corporation. Watch Your Language. Sydney: Australian Broadcasting Corporation. [2nd ed.; I s ' ed. 1982]

1993

ABC Editorial Policies. Sydney: Australian Broadcasting Corporation. 1995a Journalism Style Guide [for ABC radio. News, Sports & Current Affairs]. Sydney: Australian Broadcasting Commission. ar. 1995b Sexism - Guidelines for Non-Sexist Journalism. Compiled by Women Media Workers. Sydney: Australian Broadcasting Corporation. ar. 1995c Style Guide for News and Current Affairs. Sydney: Australian Broadcasting Corporation. 1996 Sports Style Guide. Sydney: Australian Broadcasting Corporation, [draft] 2001

2003

Aboriginal Language Resurrected in South Australia, 7.30 Report, ABC Radio National, 28 February 2001. [http://www.abc.net.au/ 7.30/s252923.htm. 31 March 20031 Australian Word Map. [http://www.abc.net.au/wordmap/. 14 October 2003]

References

349

[ABS] Australian Bureau of Statistics 1995 Australia Now - A Statistical Profile. Culture and Recreation. Special Article - Ethnic and Cultural Diversity in Australia (= Year Book Australia 1995). [Written by J. Jupp]. [http://www.abs.gov.au/ Ausstats/[email protected]/Lookup/49F609C83CF34D69CA2569DE0025Cl 82, 2 February 2004] [ABS] Australian Bureau of Statistics 1999a Australia Now - Population Distribution, [http://www.ausstats.abs. gov.au/catalog.nsf/domainquery7openform] 1999b Special Article - Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians: A Statistical Profile from the 1996 Census, [via http://www.ausstats. abs.gov.au/catalog.nsf/domainquerv?openform] 2002 Australian Historical Population Statistics. Sydney: Commonwealth of Australia. [Cat. No. 3105. 0.65.001] 2003

2001 Census Ancestry - First and Second Generation Australians. Written by Chris Kunz. Commonwealth of Australia. [= Census Paper Nr. 03/01a]

Australian Concise Oxford Dictionary 1997 Edited by Bruce Moore. Melbourne: Oxford University Press, Australia. Australian Council of Trade Unions 1986 Non-Sexist Language Guidelines for Unions. Melbourne: Australian Council of Trade Unions. Australian English Association, pub. irreg. Leaflets, Sydney. [AGSM] Australian Government Style Manual 1994 Revised edition by G. Grayston et al. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service, [the exact title is Style manual for authors, editors and printers of Australian government publications·, I s ' ed. 1966; 2nd ed. 1972; 3rd ed. 1978 by J. Pitson; 4th ed. 1988; 5th ed. used here] Australian National Dictionary, The 1988 Edited by William S. Ramson. Melbourne: Oxford University Press. Australian Oxford Dictionary, The 1999 Edited by Bruce Moore. Melbourne: Oxford University Press. Australian Pocket Oxford Dictionary, The 1996 Edited by Bruce Moore. Melbourne: Oxford University Press. [1st ed. 1984]

350

References

Bader, Rudolf (ed.) 2002 Australien. Eine interdisziplinäre Einföhrung. Trier: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag Trier [1st edition 1996] Bailey, Richard W. 1996 Nineteenth Century English. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Baker, Sidney 1941 A Popular Dictionary of Australian Slang. Melbourne: Robertson & Mullens. [2nd edition, no date; 3rd enlarged ed. 1943] 1943 1945 1947 1953

The Influence of American Slang on Australia. American Speech 18(4): 252-256. The Australian Language. Sydney: Angus and Robertson. [19662] Australian Pronunciation. Sydney: Angus and Robertson. Australia Speaks. A Supplement to "The Australian Language". Sydney: Shakespeare Head Press.

1959 The Drum: Australian Character and Slang. Sydney: Currawong. 1982 A Dictionary of Australian Slang. South Yarra, Vic.: Lloyd O'Neill. Baldwin, J.P. 1989 Aspects of Intelligibility and the Interlanguage Phonology of Japanese English. Macquarie University. Working Papers of the Speech, Hearing and Language Research Centre, 33-69. Ball, P., C. Gallois, and V. Callan 1989 Language Attitudes: A Perspective from Social Psychology. In Australian English. The Language of a New Society, Peter Collins and David Blair (eds), 89-102. St. Lucia, Qld: The University of Queensland Press. Bauer, Laurie 1979 1982 1992

The Second Great Vowel Shift? Journal of the International Phonetic Association 9(2): 57-66. That Vowel Shift Again. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 12(1): 48-49. The Great Vowel Shift Revisited. English World-Wide 13(2): 253268.

1994

English in New Zealand. In The Cambridge History of the English Language, Vol V, English in Britain and Overseas. Origins and Development, Robert Burchfield (ed.), 382-429. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

References

351

Bauer, Laurie 2000

The Dialectal Origins of New Zealand English. In New Zealand English, Allan Bell and Koenraad Kuiper (eds), 40-52. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Bautista, Maria Lourdes S. (ed.) 1997

English Is an Asian Language. The Philippine Context. Proceedings of the Conference Held in Manila on August 2-3, 1996. Sydney: Macquarie Library Pty. Béai, Christine 1992 Did You Have a Good Weekend? Or Why There Is No Such Thing as a Simple Question in Cross-Cultural Encounters. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics 15(1): 23-52. Bell, Allan 1985

One Rule of News English: Geographical, Social, and Historical Spread. Te Reo 28: 95-117. Bell, Allan, and Koenraad Kuiper (eds) 2000

New Zealand English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Bernard, John 1962 The Need for a Dictionary of Australian English. Southerly 22: 92100.

1963 1967 1969 1970

1981

An Extra Phoneme of Australian English. A UMLA 20: 346-352. Length and the Identification of Australian English Vowels. A UMLA 27: 37-58. On the Uniformity of Spoken Australian English. Orbis 18: 62-73. Towards the Acoustic Specification of Australian English. Zeitschrift fur Phonetik, Sprachwissenschaft und Kommunikationsforschung 23: 113-128.

Australian Pronunciation. In The Macquarie Dictionary, 18-27. McMahons Point, N.S.W.: Macquarie Library. Bernard, John, and R.H. Mannell 1986 A Study of /h-d/ Words in Australian English. Working Papers of the Speech and Hearing Language Research Centre of Macquarie University. Berndt, Ronald 1998 A Profile of Good and Bad in Australian Aboriginal Religion. In Religious Business, Essays on Australian Aboriginal Spirituality, Max Charlesworth (ed.), 24-45. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

352

References

Berndt, Ronald, and Catherine Berndt 1996 The World of the First Australians. Aboriginal Traditional Life: Past and Present. Canberra: Aboriginal Studies Press. [= 3rd edition; 1st edition 1964] Berry, Michael 1989

Urbanization and Social Change: Australia in the Twentieth Century. In Australian Society, S. Encel and L. Byson (eds), 12-64. Melbourne: Longman. Birrell, Bob, Siew-Ean Khoo, Peter McDonald, and Dimi Giorgas 2002 Second Generation Australians. Report for the Department of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs. Commonwealth, Department of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs. Blair, David 1975

On the Origins of Australian Pronunciation. Working Papers of the Language Research Centre (Macquarie University): 1(2): 17-27. 1977 Judging the Varieties of Australian English. Working Papers of the Language Research Centre, Macquarie University, 1(5): 109-111. Blair, David, and Peter Collins (eds) 2001 English in Australia. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Blake, Barry 1991 Australian Aboriginal Languages. A General Introduction. St. Lucia: University of Queensland Press. [= 2nd edition; 1st ed. published by Angus and Robertson, Sydney] Blake, Barry, and Robert W.M. Dixon 1991

Introduction, In The Handbook of Australian Languages. Vol. IV. The Aboriginal Languages of Melbourne and Other Grammatical Sketches, Robert W.M. Dixon, and Barry Blake (eds), 1-30. Melbourne: Oxford University Press. Bot, Kees, de, and Michael Clyne 1994 A 16-year Longitudinal Study of Language Attrition in Dutch Immigrants in Australia. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 15(1): 17-28. Bradley, David 1980 Regional Differences in Australian English Phonology. Working Papers in Linguistics (= University of Melbourne) 6: 73-93. 1989 Regional Dialects in Australian English Phonology. In Australian English: The Language of a New Society, Peter Collins and David Blair (eds), 260-270. St. Lucia, Qld: University of Queensland Press.

References

353

Bradley, David 1991 /ae/ and /a:/ in Australian English, In English Around the World. Sociolinguistic Perspectives, Jenny Cheshire (ed.), 227-234. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bradley, David, and Maya Bradley 1985

2001

The Phonetic Realisation of a Morpheme Boundary in Australian English. In The Cultivated Australian. Festschrift in Honour of Arthur Delbridge, J.E. Clark (ed.), 333-340. Hamburg: Buske. Changing Attitudes to Australian English. In English in Australia, David Blair and Peter Collins (eds), 271-285. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Brick, Jean 1991

China. A Handbook in Intercultural Communication. [= Language and Culture. Series One]. National Centre for English Language Teaching and Research, Macquarie University, Sydney Brooks, M., and J. Ritchie 1994 Words from the West: A Glossary of Western Australian Terms. Melbourne: Oxford University Press. 1995

Tassie Terms: A Glossary ofTasmanian Words. Melbourne: Oxford University Press. Brown, Penelope, and Stephen Levinson 1987 Politeness: Some Universals in Language Use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Brutt-Griffler, Janina 2002 World English. A Study of its Development. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Bryant, Pauline 1989 Regional Variation in the Australian English Lexicon. In Australian English: The Language of a New Society, Peter Collins, David Blair, eds, 301-314. St. Lucia, Qld: University of Queensland Press. 1989 1991

1993

The South-East Lexical Usage Region of Australian English., Australian Journal of Linguistics. 9(1): 85-134. A Survey of Regional Usage in the Lexicon of Australian English. In Language in Australia, Suzanne Romaine, ed., 287-303. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Regional Variation in the Australian English Lexicon. In Style on the Move: Proceedings of Style Council 92, Pamela Peters, ed., 31-42. Macquarie University: Dictionary Research Centre.

354

References

Bryant, Pauline 1997 A Dialect Survey of the Lexicon of Australian English. English Worldwide 18(2): 211-241. Burchfield, Robert W. 1982 Review of The Macquarie. The Age. Monthly Review. 1984

Dictionaries, New and Old. Who Plagiarises Whom, Why and When? Encounter, 63(3): 10-19. 1985 Reply to Arthur Delbridge's Australian Defence. Encounter 64(2): 77. 1989 The Point of Severance: British and American English. In Unlocking the English language, Robert Burchfield (ed.), 116-124. London: Faber and Faber. Burridge, Kate, and Jean Mulder 1998 English in Australia and New Zealand. An Introduction to its History, Structure, and Use. Melbourne: Oxford University Press. Butler, Susan 1996 1997

New Words of the 90s, Australian Style. A National Bulletin 5(1): 9f. Selecting South-East Asian Words for an Australian Dictionary: How to Choose in an English Not Yet Your Own. In Englishes Around the World, Edgar Schneider (ed.), 273-286. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

2001

Dinkum Dictionary: the Origins of Australian Words, The. Melbourne: The Text Publishing Company. Calvert, Albert F. 1894 The Aborigines of Western Australia. London: Simpkin, Marshall, Hamilton, Kent & Co. Limited, [http://www.sacred-texts.com/ aus/awa/awa.htm. 12 December 2002] Camm, J.C.R., and J. McQuilton 1987 Australians: A Historical Atlas. Sydney: Fairfax, Syme & Weldon Associates. Cargile, Aaron, Howard Giles, Ellen Ryan, and James Bradac 1994 Language Attitudes as a Social Process: A Conceptual Model and New Directions. Language and Communication 14(3): 211-236. Clark, J.E. (ed.) 1985

The Cultivated Australian. Festschrift in Honour of Arthur Delbridge. Hamburg: Buske Verlag. Clark, Manning 1962

A History of Australia. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press.

References

355

Clark, Manning 1986 A Short History of Australia. Ringwood, Vict.: Penguin Books Australia. [= illustrated edition; revised ed. of the first ed. of 1963] Clyne, Michael 1982 Multilingual Australia. Melbourne: River Seine. 1985a Introduction. In Australia. Meeting Place of Languages, Michael Clyne, (ed.), 1-9. Department of Linguistics, The Australian National University, Canberra. 1985b Multilingual Melbourne Nineteenth Century Style. Journal of Australian Studies 17, 69-81. 1989 How the Macquarie Dictionary is Faring in some Victorian Schools and Offices, In Language, Learning and Community, Christopher Candlin, Tom MacNamara (eds), 35-45. Sydney: NCELTR. 1991 Community Languages. The Australian Experience. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1992a Australian English in Contact With Other Englishes in Australia. In Text - Culture - Reception. Cross-Cultural Aspects of English Studies, R. Ahrens, and H. Antor (eds), 305-315. Heidelberg: Winter. 1994 Intercultural Communication at Work. Cultural Values in Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2003 The Dynamics of Contact Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Clyne, Michael (ed.) 1985c

Australia. Meeting Place of Languages. Department of Linguistics, The Australian National University, Canberra. 1992b Pericentric Languages. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Clyne, Michael, Edina Eisikovits, and Laura Tollfree 2001 Ethnic Varieties of Australian English. In English in Australia, David Blair and Peter Collins (eds), 233-238. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Clyne, Michael, and Sandra Kipp 1997a Linguistic Diversity in Australia. People and Place 5(3): [http:// elecpress.monash.edu.au/pnp/free/pnpv5n3/kipp.htm. 12 December 2002] 1997b Language Maintenance and Language Shift: Community Languages in Australia. People and Place 5(4): n.p. [http://elecpress.monash.edu.au/pnp/free/pnpv5n4/clvne.htm. 22 January 2003]

356

References

Clyne, Michael, and Sandra Kipp 1997c Trends and Changes in Home Language Use and Shift in Australia. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 18(6): 451473. 1998 Language Concentrations in Metropolitan Areas. People and Place 6(2): [http://elecpress.monash.edu.au/pnp/free/pnpv6n2/clvne2.htnl· 10 January 2003] 1999 Pericentric Languages in an Immigrant Context: Arabic, Chinese, Spanish. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 2002

Australia's Changing Language Demography. People and Place 10(3): 29-35. Cochrane, G.R 1970 Some Vowel Durations in Australian English. Phonetica 22: 240250. 1989 Origins and Development of the Australian Accent. In Australian English: The Language of a New Society, Peter Collins, and David B. Blair (eds), 176-186. St. Lucia, Qld: University of Queensland Press. Collins, Beverley, and Inger Mees 1996 Spreading Everywhere? How Recent a Phenomenon is Glottalisation in Received Pronunciation? English World-Wide 17(2): 175-187. Collins, Peter C. 1975 The Sources of Australian Pronunciation, (= Macquarie University, Working Papers of the Speech and Language Research Centre) 1, 115-128. 1978 1979

1989

Dare and Need in Australian English: A Study of Divided Usage. English Studies 59: 434-441. Elicitation Experiments on Acceptability in Australian English. Working Papers of the Speech and Language Research Centre (= Macquarie University) 2(4): 1-50. Divided and Debatable Usage in Australian English. In Australian English: The Language of a New Society, Peter Collins and David Blair (eds), 138-149. St. Lucia, Qld: University of Queensland Press.

1991

Will and Shall in Australian English. In English Computer Corpora, Stig Johansson and Anna-Brita Stenstrem (eds), 181-199. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

1998

The Semantics of some Modals in Contemporary Australian English. Australian Journal of Linguistics 8(2): 261-286.

References

357

Collins, Peter C , and David Blair 2001 Language and Identity in Australia. In English in Australia, David Blair and Peter Collins (eds), 1-13. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Collins, Peter C., and David Blair (eds) 1989 Australian English. The Language of a New Society. St. Lucia, Qld: University of Queensland Press. Collins Australian Pocket Dictionary 1981 G.A. Wilkes, Australian consultant. Sydney: Collins. Concise Australian Oxford Dictionary, The 1992

Edited by J.M. Hughes, P.A. Mitchell, and William S. Ramson. Melbourne: Oxford University Press.

Concise English Dictionary 1982 Sydney: Collins. [Australian edition] Concise Oxford Dictionary of Australian History, The 1994 Melbourne: Oxford University Press. Cornelius, S. 1989 A Comparison of Magazine Articles from "The Bulletin" and "Newsweek" Magazines Based on Readers' Perceptions of Differences Between American and British English. S.H.L.R.C. Working Papers: 71-110. Cox, Felicity 1996

An Acoustic Study of Vowel Variation in Australian English, unpublished doctoral dissertation, Sydney: Macquarie University. [http://www.ling.mq.edu.au/courses210901/course/phontetics/vowel graphs/AusE Diphtongs.html. 24 October 2002]

Craig, C., and Arthur Delbridge 1984 Australians at Talk: Language and the Listener. Canberra: Curriculum Development Centre. Crowe, C. 1895 The Australian Slang Dictionary, Containing the Words and Phrases of the Thieving Fraternity. Together with the Unauthorised, though Popular Expressions in all Classes in Australia. Fitzroy, Vic.: Robert Barr. [Cruttenden] Gimson's Pronunciation of English 2001 6th revised ed. by Alan Cruttenden. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [White Paper] Dawkins, John 1991 Australia's Language: The Australian Language and Literacy Policy. Canberra: Australian Government Printing Service.

358

References

Delbridge, Arthur G. 1967 The Australian Accent and Articulatory Merit. English in Australia 4, 21-26. 1970 The Recent Study of Spoken Australian English. In English Transported, William Ramson (ed.), 15-31. Canberra: Australian National University Press. 1973 Making a Dictionary of Australian English. Linguistic Communications 11,41-50. 1981 The Need for an Australian Dictionary. In The Macquarie Dictionary, 12-17. McMahons Point, NSW: Macquarie Library. 1985a Australian Defence. Encounter 64(2): 77. 1985b The Making of The Macquarie. In The Cultivated Australian. Festschrift in Honour of Arthur Delbridge, J.E. Clarke (ed.), 273288. Hamburg: Buske. 1990 Fourth Edition AGPS Style Manual, In Frontiers of Style: Proceedings of Style Councils 87 and 88, Pamela Peters (ed.), 119125. North Ryde, N.S.W.: Dictionary Research Centre, Macquarie University. 1993

Standard Australian English. Australian Style. A National Bulletin 1(2): 6.

1998

Lexicography and National Identity: The Australian Experience. In The Major Varieties of English, Hans Lindquist, Steffan Klintborg, Magnus Levin, and Maria Estling (eds), 49-58. Växjö: Växjö University.

2001

Lexicography and National Identity: The Australian Experience, In English in Australia, David Blair, Peter Collins (eds), 303-316. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Denison, David 1998

Syntax. In The Cambridge History of the English Language. Vol. IV. 1776-1997, Suzanne Romaine (ed.), 92-329. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [DIMA] Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs, Statistics Section 2001a Immigration: Federation to Century's End. 1901-2000. Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs, Commonwealth of Australia. [October 2001] 2001b Immigration in Brief. 2000. 2002a Germany Born Community Profile. rhttp://www.immi.gov.au/ statistics/infosummarv/textversion/germanv.htm, 11 Dec 2002]

References

359

[DIMA] Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs, Statistics Section 2002a Viet Nam Born Community Profile, [http://www.immi.gov.au/ statistics/infosummarv/textversion/germanv.htm, 11 Dec 2002] 2003 Viet Nam-Born Community Profile, [http://www.immi.gov.au/ statistics/infosummarv/textversion/vietnam.htm, updated version, August 2003; 17 September 2003] Deverson, Tony 2000

Handling New Zealand English Lexis. In New Zealand English, Allan Bell and Koenraad Kuiper (eds), 23-39. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Dictionary Research Centre, Macquarie University, Sydney (ed.) Regularly Australian Style. A National Bulletin. Edited under the auspices of Language Australia. Dijk, Teun van 1998

Opinions and Ideologies in the Press. In Approaches to Media Discourse, Allan Bell and Peter Garrett (eds), 21-63. Oxford: Blackwell. Dixon, Robert W.M. 1997 The Rise and Fall of Languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2002

Australian Languages. Their Nature and Development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Dixon, Robert M.W., and Barry Blake (eds) 1991

The Handbook of Australian Languages. Vol. IV. The Aboriginal Languages of Melbourne and Other Grammatical Sketches. Melbourne: Oxford University Press. Dixon, Robert W.M., William Ramson, and Mandy Thomas 1990

Australian Aboriginal Words in English: Their Origin and Meaning. Melbourne: Oxford University Press. Duckworth, Mark 1993 News from Downunder. Progress on Plain Language in Australia. Update. The Second Draft. Legal Writing Institute 9(1): 3. Durie, M., and J. Hajek 1994

A Revised Standard Phonemic Orthography for Australian English Vowels. Australian Journal of Linguistics 14(1): 93-107. Eades, Diana (ed.) 1995 Language in Evidence. Issues Confronting Aboriginal and Multicultural Australia. Sydney: University of NSW Press.

360

References

Eagleson, Robert D. 1964 The Australianisms in Early Migrant Handbooks, 1788-1826 (= University of Sydney, Australian Language Research Centre, Occasional Paper 2). 1965a

1965b 1967

1972a

1972b 1976

1982

1985 1986

1991

The Australianisms in Early Migrant Handbooks, 1827-1830 (= University of Sydney, Australian Language Research Centre, Occasional Paper 4). Convict Jargon and Euphemism. Australian Literary Studies: 2(2): 141-146. Prolegomena to a Dictionary of Australian English. In Proceedings and Papers of the 11th Congress of the Australasian Universities Language and Literature Association (AULLA), 16-23 August, R. Dunlop (ed.), 362-372. Sydney. Grammar, Meaning and Style. In Good Australian English and Good New Zealand English, George Turner (ed.), 85-101. Sydney: Reed Education. Some Divergences in Australian Usage. Kivung 5: 103-114. The Evidence for the Existence of Social Dialects in Australian English. In Australia Talks: Essays on the Sociology of Australian Immigrant and Aboriginal Languages, Michael Clyne (ed.), 7-27. Canberra: Australian National University Press. Variation in English Language. In English and the Aboriginal Child, Robert D. Eagleson, Susan Kaldor, and Ian G. Malcolm (eds), 11-30. Canberra: Curriculum Development Centre. Progress in Plain English: A Report on Recent Developments Overseas. Canberra: Department of Sport, Recreation and Tourism. Legislation, Legal Rights and Plain English, In Legislation, Legal Rights and Plain English [= Discussion Paper No. /]. Law Reform Commission of Victoria, Attorney-General of Victoria, Melbourne. 1-57.

Plain English: Some Sociolinguistic Revelations. In Language in Australia, Suzanne Romaine (ed.), 362-372. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Eagleson, Robert D., and I. McKie 1968a The Terminology of Australian National Football. Part 1: A-C (= University of Sydney, Australian Language Research Centre, Occasional Paper 12) 1968b The Terminology of Australian National Football. Part 2: D-O (= University of Sydney, Australian Language Research Centre, Occasional Paper 13)

References

361

Eagleson, Robert D., and I. McKie 1969

The Terminology of Australian National Football. Part 3: P-Z (= University of Sydney, Australian Language Research Centre, Occasional Paper 14) Eagleson, Robert D., Susan Kaldor, and Ian G. Malcolm (eds) 1982 English and the Aboriginal Child. Canberra: Curriculum Development Centre. Eisikovits, Edina 1981 Inner-Sydney English: An investigation of Grammatical Variation in Adolescent Speech. PhD thesis, University of Sydney. 1989 Girl-talk/boy-talk: Sex Differences in Adolescent Speech. In Australian English: The Language of a New Society, Peter Collins and David Blair (eds), 35-54. St. Lucia, Qld: University of Queensland Press. Eltis, Ken J. 1989

Pupils' Speech Style and Teacher Reaction. In Australian English. The Language of a New Society, Peter Collins and David Blair (eds), 103-110. St. Lucia, Qld: The University of Queensland Press. Encyclopaedia Britannica 1999

Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Encyclopedic World Dictionary 1971 Edited by Patrick Hanks. London: Hamyln. Engel, Dulcie, Marie-Eve Ritz 2000 The Use of the Present Perfect in Australian English. Australian Journal of Linguistics 20(2): 119-140. Fesl, Eve 1993 Conned. St. Lucia, Qld.: University of Queensland Press. Foster, Robert, and Peter Mühlhäusler 1996 Native Tongue, Captive Voice. The Representation of the Aboriginal 'Voice' in Colonial South Australia. Language & Communication 16(1): 1-16. Fowler, Henry W. 1926

Modern English Usage. Oxford: Clarendon Press, [second edition, edited by Ernest Gowers, 1965] 1968 A Dictionary of Modern English Usage. Oxford: Clarendon. Fowler, Henry.W., and Francis G. Fowler 1931

The King's English. Oxford: Clarendon Press. [3rd edition]

362

References

Fowler, Roger 1991 The Language in the News. London: Routledge. Fritz, Clemens 1998 Letters from Early Australia - Linguistic Variation and Change. Dialectología et Geolinguistica 6: 25-42. 2000 The Irish in Australia: Aspects of Linguistic Accommodation. In The Celtic Englishes II, H. Tristram, 57-74. Heidelberg: Carl Winter. in progr. The Development of Australian English in the 19th Century. Ph.D. thesis, Dept of English, Freie Universität Berlin. Fudge, Eric 1977 Long and Short [as] in one Southern British Speaker's English. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 7(2): 55-65. Gem Australian English Dictionary 1981 Sydney: Collins. Gillam, Doreen 1982 'Defensively Australian'. Some Australian Attitudes to Australian English. Studia Germanica Gandensia XXI: 153-169. Gordon, Elizabeth 1998 The Origins of New Zealand Speech: The Limits of Recovering Historical Information from Written Records. English World-Wide 19(1): 61-85. Görlach, Manfred 1990

1995

The Development of Standard Englishes. In Studies in the History of the English Language, Manfred Görlach (ed.), 9-64. Heidelberg: Winter.

More Englishes: New Studies in Varieties of English 1988-1994. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 1997 Language and Nation: The Concept of Linguistic Identity in the History of English. English Worldwide 18(1): 1-34. 1999 English in Nineteenth Century England. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2000 Rhyming Slang Word-Wide: Homegrown or Imported. English World-Wide 21(1): 1-24. Gowers, Ernest 1973 The Complete Plain Words. London: Her Majesty's Stationary Office. Greenough, James Bradsheet, and George Lyman Kittredge 1902 Words and their Ways in English Speech. London: Macmillan.

References

363

Grolier International Dictionary 2000 Sydney: The Macquarie Library. Grose, F. 1962 A Classical Dictionary of the Vulgar Tongue. London: Routledge; New York: Barnes & Noble [originally published in 1785 without Australian material; 3rd edn, 1796, with Australian material] Gunn, John S. 1965 The Terminology of the Shearing Industry. Part 1: A-L (= University of Sydney, Australian Language Research Centre, Occasional Paper 5) 1966 The Terminology of the Shearing Industry. Part 2: M-Z (= University of Sydney, Australian Language Research Centre, Occasional Paper 6) 1975 A Possible Source of Some Australian Sounds and Their Relationship with Received English. Talanya 2: 5-15. 1992 Social Contexts in the History of Australian English. In English in Its Social Contexts, T.W. Michan and C.T. Scott (eds), 204-229. New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press. Guy, G.R., and J.P. Vonwiller 1989

The High Rising Tone in Australian English. In Australian English: The Language of a New Society, Peter Collins and David Blair (eds), 21-34. St. Lucia, Qld: University of Queensland Press. Hammarström, Gunnar 1980

Australian English: Its Origin and Status (= Forum Phoneticum 19), Hamburg: Buske.

1985

On the Origin of Australian English. In The Cultivated Australian. Festschrift in Honour of Arthur Delbridge, J.E. Clark (ed.), 369-372. Hamburg: Buske. Irritating Expressions in Australian English. Language and Speech 30(4): 357-372.

1987 Harkins, Jean 1994

Bridging Two Worlds. Aboriginal English and Crosscultural Understanding. St. Lucia, Qld: University of Queensland Press. Harrington, J., Felicity Cox, and Z. Evans 1997

An Acoustic Phonetic Study of Broad, General and Cultivated Australian English Vowels. Australian Journal of Linguistics 17(2), 155-184.

364

References

Harris, John 1986 Northern Territory Pidgins and the Origin of Kriol. [= Pacific Linguistics, Series C, No. 89]. The Australian National University, Canberra. Haugen, Einar 1972

Dialect, Language, Nation. In Sociolinguistics. Selected Readings, John Pride and Janet Holmes (eds), 97-111. Harmondsworth: Penguin. [HRA] The Library Committe of the Commonwealth Parliament 1914

Historical Records of Australia (Series I, Volume 1, 1788-1796, etc.). Commonwealth of Australia. Holleuffer, Henriette von 2003

Ordnungshüter oder Reformer? Charles La Trobe und das Prinzip Humanität. GASt Newsletter 17: 54-65.

Honey, John 1989 Does Accent Matter? London: Faber and Faber. Horvath, Barbara M. 1985 Variation in Australian English. The Sociolects of Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Sydney.

Horvath, Barbara M., and R.J. Horvath 2001

Short /as/ in Australian English: A Geolinguistic Study. In English in Australia, David Blair and Peter Collins (eds), 341-355. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Hotton, J.C. 1859 A Dictionary of Modern Slang, Cant, and Vulgar Words. London: Hotton. House of Representatives Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs 1993

Clearer Commonwealth Law. Report of the Inquiry into Legislative Drafting by the Commonwealth. Canberra: Australia Government Publishing Service. Hudson, Nicholas 1993 Modern Australian Usage. Melbourne: Oxford University Press. Hudson, Richard 1996 Sociolinguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hume, Amanda 1986 F.W.C. Gerstäcker: An Overlooked Informant on Language in Mid^ - C e n t u r y Australia. AU MLA 66: 272-285.

References

365

Hundt, Marianne 1998

New Zealand English Grammar Fact or Fiction? Amsterdam: Benjamins. Ihalainen, Ossi 1994 The Dialects of England Since 1776. In The Cambridge History of the English Language. Vol. IV: 1776-1997, Robert Burchfield (ed.), 197-274. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ingram, John 1989 1995

Connected Speech Processes in Australian English. Australian Journal of Linguistics 9: 21-49. One Step Forward and Two Backwards: Reflections on Durie and Hajek's Proposed Revisions to the Phonemic Transcription of Australian Vowels. Australian Journal of Linguistics (15): 215-239.

Jones, Alex I. 1966 An Outline of Word Phonology of Australian English. Occasional Papers 8, Australian Language Research Centre, The University of Sydney, Sydney. 1999 An Australian English Grammar, 3 parts, The University of Sydney, Sydney, [unpubl. ms] 2001 Australian English Grammar. Glebe, NSW: Wild & Woolley. Jones, Daniel 1909 The Pronunciation of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1960 An Outline of English Phonetics. Cambridge: Heffer & Sons. Jupp, James 1995

Ethnic and Cultural Diversity in Australia. [= Special Article in Australia Now - a Statistical Profile, website of the ABS, August 1999; originally published in Year Book of Australia. 1995] 1998 Immigration. Melbourne: Oxford University Press. 1999 Seeking Witnesses; the Recruitment of Nordic Immigrants to Oceania. In Scandinavian and European Migration to Australia and New Zealand, Olavi Koivukangas and Charles Westin (eds), 28-41. Institute of Migration, Turku, Finland, CEIFO, Stockholm, Sweden. Jupp, James (ed.) 1988

The Australian People. An Encyclopedia of the Nation, its People and their Origins. Sydney: Angus and Robertson Publishers. [2nd edition 2001]

366

References

Kachru, Braj 1985

Standards, Codification and Sociolinguistic Realism: The English Language in the Outer Circle. In English in the World, Randolph Quirk and H.G. Widdowson (eds), 11-30. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kelly, D. St L. (ed.) 1988

Essays on Legislative Drafting. Adelaide: The Adelaide Law Review Association, Law School, University of Adelaide. 13-27.

Kennedy, Graeme, Shunji Yamazaki 1999

The Influence of Maori on the New Zealand English Lexicon. In Corpora Galore: Analyses and Techniques in Describing English, John Kirk (ed.), 33-44. Amsterdam: Rodopi.

Khoo, Siew-Ean, and Charles A. Price 1996

Understanding Australia's Ethnic Composition. Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs, Commonwealth of Australia.

Kipp, Sandra, Michael Clyne, and Anne Pauwels 1995

Immigration and Australia's Language Resources. Melbourne: Bureau of Immigration, Multicultural and Population Research.

Kytö, Meqa, Juhani Rudanko, and Erik Smitterberg 2000

Building a Bridge Between the Present and the Past: A Corpus of 19lh-Century English. ICAME Journal 24, 85-97.

Labov, William ar. 1997

The Organization of Dialect Diversity in North America, [http:// www.ling.upenn.edu/phono atlas/ICSLP4.html. 15 January 2003]

Lake, Joshua 1898

A Dictionary of Australasian Words. Springfield, Mass.: G&C Merriam & Co. [uncertain about publisher, acc. to Emily Brewster, email, 15 January 2003]

Lang, T. 1995

When a 'He' is not a 'He'. Ozwords 2(1): 4-5.

Langker, R.K. 1981

The Vocabulary of Convictism in New South Wales 1788-1850 (= University of Sydney, Australian Language Research Centre, Occasional Paper 19).

Language talkback project #/ 2000

Australian English Diminutives. rhttp://www.cltr.uq.edu.au/ languagetalkback/Proiects/T3 iminitutives-list.html. 11 September 2003]

References

367

Lawson, E. 1986 'Pinkie-Plonk' in Australia: A Lexical Note. AUMLA 66: 286-288. Leitner, Gerhard 1984 Australian English or English in Australia - Linguistic Identity or Dependence in Broadcast Language, English Worldwide 5(1): 55-85. 1986 1989 1990

Reporting the Events of the Day. Uses and Functions of Reported Speech, Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 18: 189-204. BBC English und Englisch lernen mit der BBC. München: Langenscheidt. Ist das australische Englisch wirklich wie das Londoner Cockney? In Australienstudien in Deutschland. Grundlagen und Perspektiven, Gerhard Stilz and Harald Lamping (eds), 185-200. Frankfurt/Main: . Peter Lang.

1992

Pluricentric English. In Pericentric Languages. Michael Clyne (ed.), 178-237. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

1996

Australiens Sprachökologie. In Australien. Eine interdisziplinäre Einführung, Rudolf Bader (ed.), 215-262. Trier: WVT Wissenschaftlicher Verlag Trier. The Sociolinguistics of Communication Media. In Handbook of Sociolinguistics, Florian Coulmas (ed.), 187-204. Oxford: Blackwell.

1997 2000a

Australian Linguistics: A Module in Australian Studies. In Australian Studies: A Topic for Tertiary Education?, Gerhard Leitner and Bruce Bennett (ed.), 37-60. Universität Potsdam: Interdisziplinäres Zentrum für Australienforschung.

2000b

Der Beitrag der Sprachen der Aborigines fur das australische Englisch. In Australien auf dem Weg ins 21. Jahrhundert, Rudolf Bader (ed.), 47-70. Tübingen: Stauffenburg Verlag. Lexical Frequencies in a 300 Million Word Corpus of Australian Newspapers: Analysis and Interpretation. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 5(2): 2000, 1-32.

2001a

2001b

2002a

2002b

The Aboriginal Contribution to Mainstream Australian English. A Corpus-Based Study. In Text - Varieties - Translation, Albrecht Neubert, Wolfgang Thiele, and Christian Todenhagen (eds), 130171. Tübingen: Stauffenburg Verlag. Australiens Sprachökologie. In Australien. Eine interdisziplinäre Einfuhrung, Rudolf Bader (ed.), 215-262. Trier: WVT Wissenschaftlicher Verlag Trier. Complex Language Situations. In Festschrift fur Wolfgang Thiele, Christian Todenhagen (ed.), 93-115. Tübingen: Stauffenburg Verlag.

368

References

Leitner, Gerhard 2002c

Varietätenkontakt: Der amerikanische Einfluss auf das australische Englisch. In Vergangenheit und Zukunft in Australien, Rudolf Bader, Boris Braun, and Adi Wimmer (eds), 83-99. Tübingen: Stauffenburg Verlag.

2003

On the History of Australian English. Zeitschrift fur Anglistik und Amerikanistik 51(2): 134-155. Transforming Australia's Language Habitat, CALLR E-Journal [http://www.cowan.edu.au/ses/research/CALLR/onlineiournal/fronti. htm, 5 April 2004],

2004a

2004b

Australia's Many Voices. Ethnic Englishes, Indigenous and Migrant Languages, Policy and Education. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 2004c Beyond Alexander Mitchell's Views on the History of Australian English. Australian Journal of Linguistics 23(2): 281-309. Leitner, Gerhard, and Inke Sieloff 1998

Aboriginal Words and Concepts in Australian English. World Englishes 17(2): 153-169. Leitner, Gerhard, Brian Taylor, and Clemens Fritz forthc.

Language in Australia and New Zealand, A bibliography 1788-2001. CD-ROM. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Lentzner, Κ. 1882 Dictionary of the Slang-English of Australia and of some Mixed Languages. Halle-Leipzig: Erhardt Karras. 1891 Colonial English: A Glossary of Australian, Anglo-Indian, Pidgin English, West Indian, and South African words. London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trübner & Co. Levinson, Stephen C. 1983

Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lloyd James, A. (ed.) 1928 Broadcast English I. Words of Doubtful Pronunciations. London: BBC. Lockwood, Kim 1994 Don't Blame Mr Webster. Write Words 8: 3. 1995 Let's Talk Strine. Write Words 18:1. 2002 Newspaper Style: From Local to National. Paper given at the Style Council, 2002, Macquarie University, Sydney.

References

369

Lo Bianco, Joseph 1987 2001

National Policy on Languages. Canberra: Australian Government Printing Service. From Policy to Anti-Policy: How Fear of Language Rights Took Policy-Making Out of Community Hands. In Australian Policy Activism in Language & Literacy, Lo Bianco, Joseph, Rosie Wickert (eds), 13-44. Melbourne: Language Australia Ltd.

Lo Bianco, Joseph, and Mari Rhydwen 2001

Is the Extinction of Australia's Indigenous Languages Inevitable?, In Can Threatened Languages be Saved?, 391-422, Joshua Fishman, (ed.). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Lo Bianco, Joseph, and Rosie Wickert (eds) 2001 Australian Policy Activism in Language & Literacy Melbourne: Language Australia Ltd. Lonergan, Dymphna 2003

An Irish-Centric View of Australian English. Australian Journal of Linguistics 23(3).

Ludowyk, Frederick 1998

Ab(h)ominable (h)aitch. Ozwords, vol. 4(1): 1-3.

Macquarie Dictionary of Colloquial Language, The 1988

Macquarie University: The Macquarie Library.

Macquarie Dictionary, The 1998.

Edited by Arthur Delbridge et al., Sydney: The Macquarie Library. [3rd updated and revised CD-ROM edition; 1st ed. 1981] 2000-02 Book of Slang. [http://www.macquariedictionarv.com.aU/p/ dictionarv/slang.html. 4 January 2003]. Macquarie Essential Dictionary, The 1999 Macquarie University: The Macquarie Library. Mackerras, Lindsay 2000 A Reflection on Style. [http://www.shlrc.edu.au/style/ mackerras.html, 13 January 2003; Paper presented at the Style Council 2000], Mair, Christian 1997

Parallel Corpora: A Real-Time Approach to the Study of Language Change in Progress. In Corpus-Based Studies in English, Magnus Ljung (ed.), 195-209. Amsterdam: Rodopi.

370

References

Maley, Yon 1972 Usage: Variety in our Language. In Good Australian English and Good New Zealand English, G.W. Turner (ed.), 65-82. Sydney: Reed Education. Malouf, David 1993 Remembering Babylon. Milsons Point, NSW: Random House. Mannell, Robert, and Felicity Cox 2000-2001 Australian English Diphthongs. Sydney: Macquarie University. [http://www.ling.mq.edu.au/units/ling210-901/phontetics/ vowelgraphs/AusE Diphtongs.html. 5 February 2003] Mattingley, Christobel, and Ken Hampton (eds) 1992 Survival in own Land. 'Aboriginal' Experiences in 'South Australia' Since 1836, Told by Nungas and Others. Sydney: Hoddon and Stoughton. Mawer, Giselle, and Laurie Field 1995

One Size Fits Some! Competency-Based Training and Non-EnglishSpeaking Background People. Department of Employment, Education and Training, Canberra. McArthur, Tom 1991 The Pedigree of Plain English. English Today 21\ 13-19. McBurney, S. 1887 Australia South Eastern - A Comparative Table of Australasian Pronunciation. In Early English Pronunciation, Part V, A.J. Ellis, 236-248. London: Early English Text Society. McCrum, Robert, William Cran, and Robert MacNeil 1986 The Story of English. London: Faber for the BBC. McGregor, R.L. 1980 The Social Distribution of an Australian English Intonation Contour. Working Papers of the Speech and Language Research Centre, School of English, Macquarie University, 2(1): 6-26. McMahon, Michael 1998 Phonology. In The Cambridge History of the English Language, Suzanne Romaine (ed.), 373-535. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Mellinkoff, David 1963 The Language of the Law. Boston/Toronto: Little, Brown and Company.

References

371

Milroy, James 2001

Received Pronunciation: Who "Receives" it and How Long Will it be "Received"? Studia Anglia Posnaniensia 36: 15-33. Mitchell, Alexander 1942

A Glossary of War Words. Southerly 3(1): 11-16.

1945

The Pronunciation of English in Australia. Sydney: Angus and Robertson. 1995 The Story of Australian English. Sydney: Dictionary Research Centre, Macquarie University. 2001 The Story of Australian English. [= edited draft by Colin Yallop from the original manuscript. Macquarie University, Sydney]. Mitchell, Alexander, and Arthur Delbridge 1965a The Speech of Australian Adolescents. Sydney: Angus and Robertson. 1965b The Pronunciation of English in Australia. Sydney: Angus and Robertson. Moore, Bruce 1994

Of Gelati, Gelato and Other Australian Oddities. Ozwords 1(3): 2.

1996

Regional Australian English. Ozwords 2(2): 4-5.

1998 2001

From the Centre. Ozwords 4(1): 5. Australian English and Indigenous Voices, In English in Australia, David Blair, and Peter Collins (eds), 133-149. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

2004 The Dialect Evidence. Australian Journal of Linguistics 24( 1 ). Morris, E.E. 1898 Austral English. A Dictionary of Australasian Words, Phrases and Usages, with Those Aboriginal-Australian and Maori Words which have Become Incorporated in the Language and the Commoner Scientific Words that have had Their Origin in Australasia. London: Macmillan. Mühlhäusler, Peter 1996

Linguistic Ecology. Language Change and Linguistic Imperialism in the Pacific Region. London: Routledge. Mufwene, Salikoko 1996 The Founder Principle in Creole Genesis. Diachronica 8: 83-134. Mulder, Jean, Michael Clyne, Caroline Thomas, Kate Burridge, and Anne Isaac 2002 Macmillan English Language. VCE Units 3&4 [plus a student CDROM], South Yarra, Vic.: Macmillan.

372

References

Naughtin, Pat 2001 Is 07 04 2002 the 4th of July?, [lead article in] Australian Style. [http://www.shlrec.mc.edu.au/stvle/iune2002.html: website no longer accessible; hard copy necessary] New Oxford Dictionary of English, The 1998

Edited by Judy Pearsall. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Newbrook, Mark 1992 Unrecognised Grammatical and Semantic Features Typical of Australian English: Checklist with Commentary. English WorldWide 13(1): 1-32. 2001

Syntactic Features and Norms in Australian English. In English in Australia, David Blair and Peter Collins (eds), 113-132. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Newbrook, Mark (ed.) 1999 English is an Asian Language. The Thai Context. Sydney: Macquarie Library Pty Ltd. News Limited 2003 Style. 2003 Edition. Fully Revised and Updated. A Guide for Journalists. Surry Hills, NSW: News Limited. Oasa, H. 1989 Phonology of Current Adelaide English, In Australian English: The Language of a New Society, Peter Collins, David Blair (eds), 271287. St. Lucia, Qld: University of Queensland Press. O'Grady, John [pseud.] 1966 Aussie English. An Explanation of the Australian Idiom. London: Nicholas Vane. Oizki, Itamo 1998 American and British Influences on Australian English, Seikei Hôgaku 47. [pages irretrievable] Oxford Dictionary of New Zealand English, The 1997 Melbourne: Oxford University Press. Oxford English Dictionary 1991 Oxford: Clarendon Press. [2nd edition] Ozolins, Uldis 1993 The Politics of Language in Australia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

References

373

Pauwels, Anne F. 1984 Research into Gender Differences in Language: A Feminist Approach, In Women and Education, R. Burns, B.H. Sheehan (eds); 91-104. Melbourne: Australian and New Zealand Comparative and International Education Society, La Trobe University. 1989 Some Thoughts on Gender, Inequality and Language Reform. Vox 3: 78-84. 1991 Non-Discriminatory Language. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service. 1995 Cross-Cultural Communication in the Health Sciences. Communicating with Migrant Patients. South Melbourne: Macmillan Education. Peters, Pamela H. 1987 Survey of Spelling Variants in Australian Newspaper Style Guides. In Style in Australia: Current Practices in Spelling, Punctuation, Hyphenations, Capitalisation, etc, Pamela Peters (ed.), 172-180. North Ryde, NSW: Macquarie University. 1994 American and British Influence on Australian Verb Morphology. In Creating and Using English Language Corpora [etc.], Udo Fries, Gunnel Tottie and Peter Schneider (eds), 149-158. Zürich 1993. Amsterdam: Rodopi. 1998 Australian English, In Américanisation and Australia, P. Bell, R. Bell (eds), 32-44. Kensington: University of New South Wales Press. Peters, Pamela H. (ed.) 1987

Style in Australia: Current Practices in Spelling, Punctuation, Hyphenation, Capitalisation, etc. Being the Proceedings of Style Council 1986. North Ryde, NSW: Macquarie University.

1990

Frontiers of Style: Proceedings of Style Councils 87 and 88. North Ryde, NSW.: Dictionary Research Centre, Macquarie University.

ar. 1992 Australian Style into the Nineties. Being the Proceedings of Style Council 1990 and 1991. Macquarie University: Dictionary Research Centre. 1993 Style on the Move: Proceedings of Style Council 92, Macquarie University: Dictionary Research Centre. 1994 The National Language. Being the Proceedings of Style Council 1994. North Ryde, NSW: Macquarie University. ar. 1996 Australian English in a Pluralist Australia. Being the Proceedings of Style Council 1995. North Ryde, NSW.: Macquarie University.

374

References

Peters, Pamela H. (ed.) ar. 1999 Style in Context: Language at Large. Being the Proceedings of Style Council 1996, 1997 and 1999. North Ryde, NSW.: Macquarie University. Peters, Pamela H., and Arthur Delbridge 1989 Norms and Standards. In Australian English. The Language of a New Society, Peter Collins and David Blair (eds), 127-137. St. Lucia, Qld: University of Queensland Press. 1997 Fowler's Legacy. In Englishes Around the World: Studies in Honour of Manfred Görlach, Edgar Schneider (ed.), 301-318. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Peters, Pamela H., and Margaret Fee 1989 New Configurations: The Balance of British and American Features in Australian and Canadian English. Australian Journal of Linguistics 9(1): 135-147. Pilch, H. 1971

Some Phonemic Peculiarities of Australian English. In Form and Substance, Phonetic and Linguistic Papers, L.L. Hammerich, R. Jacobson, and E. Zwirner (eds), 269-276. Akademisk Forlag. Potts, E. Daniel, and Annette Potts 1985 Yanks Downunder 1941-45. Melbourne: Oxford University Press. Pringle, John Douglas 1958 Australian Accent. London: Chatto and Windus. Purchase, S. 1998 The Little Book of Style. Canberra: Auslnfo. Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech, and Jan Svartvik 1985 A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman. Quirk, Randolph, and Gabriele Stein 1990 English in Use. London: Longman. Ramson, William S. 1966 Australia English. An Historical Study of Vocabulary, 1788-1898. Canberra: Australian National University Press. 1988

The Australian National Dictionary: A Preview of the Letter B. In The Cultivated Australian. Festschrift in Honour of Arthur Delbridge, J. E. Clark (ed.), 200-306. Hamburg: Buske.

References

375

Ramson, William S. 2001

Anna Wierzbicka and the Trivialization of Australian Culture. Australian Journal of Linguistics 21(2): 181-194.

Reeve, J. 1989

Community Attitudes to Australian English. In Australian English. The Language of a New Society, Peter Collins and David Blair (eds), 111-126. St. Lucia, Qld: The University of Queensland Press. Richardson, Sue, Frances Richardson, and Diana Ilsley 2001 The Labour Force Experience of New Migrants. National Institute of Labour Studies, Flinders University, Adelaide. Romaine, Suzanne 1998 Introduction, In The Cambridge History of the English Language. Vol. IV. 1776-1997, Suzanne Romaine (ed.), 1-5. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2000 Language in Society. An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. London: Longman. Romaine, Suzanne (ed.) 1991 Language in Australia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ronowicz, Edmund 1995a Aussies are Friendly and Poles aren't Rude. Papers and Studies in Contrastive Linguistics 30: 31-44. 1995b Poland. A Handbook in Intercultural Communication. National Centre for English Language Teaching and Research, Macquarie University, Sydney. Ronowicz, Edmund, and Colin Yallop 1999

Australia: The Great South Land. In English: One Language, Different Cultures, Eddie Ronowicz and Colin Yallop (eds), 83-135. London: Cassell. Said, Halimah, Mohd Siew, and Ng Keat (eds) 1997

English is an Asian Language. The Malaysian Context. Persatuan Bahasa Moen Malaysia; Sydney: Macquarie Library Pty Ltd. Schneider, H.G. 1882

Missionsarbeit der Brüdergemeine in Australien. Gnadau: Verlag der Unitätsbuchhandlung. Schoenheimer, H.P. 1972 Sanity in Spelling. In Good Australian English and Good New Zealand English, George Turner (ed.), 143-162. Sydney: Reed Education.

376

References

Schoneil, F.J., and J.G. Middleton, et al. 1956 A Study of the Oral Vocabulary of Adults. Brisbane: Queensland University Press. Schwarz, L.D. 1990 Social Class and Social Geography: The Middle Classes in London at the End of the Eighteenth Century. In The Eighteenth-Century Town. A Reader in English Urban History. 1688-1820, Peter Borsay (ed.), 315-337. London: Longman. Scott, Allan, and Donna Starks 2000 "No-One Sounds Like Us?' A Comparison of New Zealand and Other Southern Hemisphere Englishes. In New Zealand English, Allan Bell and Koenraad Kuiper (eds), 53-83. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Seal, Graham 1999 The Lingo. Listening to Australian English. Sydney: University of New South Wales Press. Sebba, Mark 1997 Contact Languages. Pidgins and Creoles. Basingstoke: Macmillan Press. Secombe, Margaret, and Joseph Zajda (eds) 1999 J.J. Smolicz on Education and Culture. Albert Park, Vic.: James Nicholas Publishers. Shnukal, Anna 1978

A Sociolinguistic Study of Australian English: Phonological and Syntactic Variation in Cessnock, N.S.W. PhD thesis, Georgetown University.

1989

Variable Subject Relative Pronoun Absence in Australian English. In Australian English: The Language of a New Society, Peter Collins and David Blair (eds), 70-77. St. Lucia, Qld: University of Queensland Press.

Shu, Jing, Siew Ean Khoo, Andrew Struik, Fiona McKenzie 1995 Australia's Population. Trends and Prospects. 1994. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service. Siegel, Jeff 2000a Koine Formation and Creole Genesis. In Processes of Language Contact. Studies from Australia and the South Pacific, Jeff Siegel (ed.), 175-197. Saint-Laurent: Fides. Siegel, Jeff (ed.) 2000b

Processes of Language Contact. Studies from Australia and the South Pacific. Saint-Laurent: Fides.

References

377

Smart, B.H. 1812 A Grammar of English Sounds. London: Richardson. Smolicz, Jerzy J. 1999

Postscript: Overview of Humanistic Sociology, In J.J. Smolicz on Education and Culture, Margaret Secombe, and Joseph Zajda (eds), 283-308. Albert Park, Vic.: James Nicholas Publishers.

Stem, George, Robert Bolitho, and Russell Lutton 1993 The Guide to Australian Usage and Punctuation. North Blackburn, Vic.: CollinsDove. Strevens, Peter 1985 Standards and the Standard Language. English Today 2: 5-8. Stubbe, M., and Janet Holmes 1995

"You Know", "Eh" and Other "Exasperating Expressions": An Analysis of Social and Stylistic Variation in the Use of Pragmatic Devices in a Sample of New Zealand English. Language and Communication 15(1): 63-88. Sussex, Roland 1978

North American English as a Prestige Model in the Australian Media. Talanya 5: 36-41.

Taylor, Brian 1975 Towards a Structural and Lexical Analysis of 'Swearing' and the Language of Abuse in Australian English. Talanya 2: 17-43. 1976

1978 1989

Towards a Sociolinguistic Analysis of 'Swearing' and the Language of Abuse in Australian English. In Australia Talks, Michael Clyne (ed.), 43-62. Canberra: Australian National University Press. German as a Source of American Prestige Forms Entering Australian English. Talanya 5: 1-14. American, British, and Other Foreign Influences on Australian English Since World War II. In Australian English: The Language of a New Society, Peter Collins and David Blair (eds), 225-254. St. Lucia, Qld: University of Queensland Press.

Taylor, Brian 1997 The Inner-City Working Class English of Sydney, Australia, Around 1900: A Linguistic Critique of Louis Stone's Novel Jonah. In Language in Time and Space. Studies in Honour of Wolfgang Viereck on the Occasion of his 60th Birthday, Heinrich Ramisch and Kenneth Wynne (eds), 258-270. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner. 2000

Grammatical Change in Australian English. Paper Given at the University of Bamberg, Germany, 8 June, 2000.

378

References

Taylor, Brian 2001 Australian English in Interaction With Other Englishes. In English in Australia, David Blair and Peter Collins (eds), 317-340. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 2003

Englishes in Sydney around 1850. Australian Journal of Linguistics 23(2). nd Syntactic, Lexical and Other Transfers from Celtic in (Australian) English. Mimeograph. Thomason, Sarah 1997 2001

Contact Languages. A Wider Perspective. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Language Contact. An Introduction. Washington: Georgetown University Press. Thomason, Sarah, and Terence Kaufmann 1988

Language Contact, Creolization, and Genetic Linguistics. Berkeley: University of California Press. Thompson, F.M. 1990 Town and City. In The Cambridge Social History of Britain 1750 to 1950, F.M. Thompson (ed.), 8-86. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Tollfree, Laura 2001 Variation and Change in Australian Consonants: Reduction of /t/. In English in Australia, David Blair and Peter Collins (eds), 45-67. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Troy, Jakelin 1990 Australian Aboriginal Contact With the English Language in New South Wales: 1788 to 1845 (= Pacific Linguistics, Series B-103) Department of Linguistics, Australian National University, Canberra. 1994 Malaleuka: A History and Description of New South Wales Pidgin, Ph.D. thesis, The Australian National University, Canberra. Trudgill, Peter 1986 Dialects in Contact. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. 1990 The Dialects of England. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Trudgill, Peter, and Joan Hannah 1994 International English. A Guide to Varieties of Standard English. London: Arnold. [3rd edition; 4th ed. 2003] Turner, George W. 1960 On the Origin of Australian Vowel Sounds. A UMLA 13: 33-45.

References

379

Turner, George W. 1966

The English Language in Australia and New Zealand. London: Longman. 1997 Australian English as a National Language. In Englishes Around the World 2. Caribbean, Africa, Asia, Australasia, Edgar Schneider (ed.), 335-348. Amsterdam: Benjamin. Turner, George W. (ed.) 1972 Good Australian English and Good New Zealand English. Sydney: Reed Education. Urdang, L. 1984 'To Plagiarise, or to Purloin, or to Borrow...?' A Reply to R.W. Burchfield. Encounter 63(5): 71-73. Vamplew, Wray (ed.) 1987 Australians. Historical Statistics. Sydney: Fairfax, Syme & Weldon Associates. Vater, Heinz 1996 Einßhrung in die Sprachwissenschaft. München: Fink. [2nd edition] Vaux, James Hardy 1819

The Memoirs of James Hardy Vaux, Including a New and Comprehensive Vocabulary of the Flash Language. Edited by B. Field. London: W. Clowes. Viviani, Nancy 1997

Vietnamese in Sydney and Melbourne in 1996: Some Preliminary Results from the Census. People and Place 5(3): 1-5.

Vondra, Josef 1981

German-Speaking Settlers in Australia. Melbourne: Cavalier Press.

Walsh, Michael, and Colin Yallop (eds) 1993 Languages and Culture in Aboriginal Aboriginal Studies Press. Walsh, B. 1989

Australia,

Canberra:

Communicating in Writing. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.

Walshe, R.D. 1972 Good Writing. In Good Australian English and Good New Zealand English, George Turner (ed.), 211-229. Sydney: Reed. Wannan, Bill (ed.) 1982

Great Aussie Insults. Ringwood, Vic.: Viking O'Neill.

380

References

Ward, Rüssel 1965 Concise History of Australia. St. Lucia, Qld.: University of Queensland Press. Warren, Paul, and David Britain 2000

Intonation and Prosody in New Zealand English. In New Zealand English, Allan Bell and Koenraad Kuiper (eds), 146-172. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Watts, Richard 2002 From Polite Language to Educated Language: The Re-Emergence of an Ideology. In Alternative Histories of English, Richard Watts and Peter Trudgill (eds), 155-172. London: Routledge. Webster, Noam 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language. Springfield, Mass.: G&C Merriam & Co. 1900 Webster's International Dictionary, Australasian Edition Springfield, Mass.: G&C Merriam & Co. [contains a Supplement of some 25,000 words from Australasia, which includes Australia] Wells, John 1982 Accents of English. London: Cambridge University Press. [3 vol.s] Welsch, Alexandra 1999 Sprachkontakt in Australien: Der Einfluss des Englischen auf die Sprachen der Aborigines, besonders auf das Warlpiri (NT). Staatsexamensarbeit, Institut für englische Philologie, Freie Universität Berlin. White, Richard 1871 Words and Their Uses, Past and Present. New York. [3rd ed., Boston: Houghton, Mifflin & co., 1881] Wierzbicka, Anna 1986 1992 2001 Wignell, 1997

Does Language Reflect Culture? Evidence from Australian English. Language in Society 15: 349-373. Semantics: Culture and Cognition. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Australian Cultural Scripts - Bloody Revisited. Journal of Pragmatics 33(2): 195-214. Peter The Influence of Aboriginal English. Australian Style. A National Bulletin 5(2): 1 and 3-4.

References

381

Wilkes, G.A. 1990

A Dictionary of Australian Colloquialisms. Sydney: Sydney University Press in association with Oxford University Press. Winter, Joanne 1992 Discourse as a Resource: Methods of Collecting Language Attitudes.i4Mi/ra/i'an Review of Applied Linguistics 15(1): 1-22. Wrigley, E.A., and R.S. Schofield 1981 The Population History of England. 1541-1871. London: Edward Arnold. Wurm, Stephen Α., Peter Mühlhäusler, and Darrell T. Tryon (eds) 1996 Atlas of Intercultural Communication in the Pacific, Asia, and the Americas. 3 vols. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Name Index Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission (ATSIC) 126 Adams, Philip 165 Adult Migration Education Service (AMES) 314 Agassie, Andre 144 Age, The 1, 90, 104, 106-107, 120, 124, 127-128, 130, 141, 143-144, 156,159,163, 169-171, 175-176, 182-185, 187, 189,207,209-210, 213,215,218, 220, 229, 232, 241-243, 296, 301 Ager, Denis 91 Alford, Henry 293 Algeo, John 133-134,330 Allan, Keith 236 Alt, Freiherr August Theodor 79 American Times Atlas 291 Anglican Church 104,215,317 Arthur, Jay M. 9, 79, 83,132, 164, 175, 180, 276, 323 Attorney General, Simplification Task Force 290 Australia Council 301 Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering 334 Australian Agricultural Company 54 Australian Associated Press (AAP) 167, 303 Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) 92, 102-105, 121, 124, 132-133, 137, 142, 155, 193,196197, 200, 202, 204-206, 209-210, 214, 232, 234, 236, 240, 260-261, 264-277, 280-282, 293, 297-298, 300-301, 303-304, 329, 334, 342

Australian Bureau of Statistics 47, 51, 59-60, 68-69, 71 Australian Club 318 Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU) 301 Australian English Association 98 Australian Government Style Manual (AGSM) 279-280,285, 291-292, 296, 301 Australian Language Research Centre (University of Sydney) 287 Australian, The 3,71,92, 100-101, 106, 115, 125, 131, 141, 161-162, 165,217, 241,244, 250, 265, 282, 285, 288, 297, 333, 339 Bailey, Richard W. 313 Ball, P. 94, 103, 105 Bauer, Laurie 110, 134, 216, 218, 324 Bautista, Maria Lourdes S. 287 Béai, Christine 146-147 Beattie, Lachlan 222 Beazley, Kim 125, 189, 209,243 Bennett, George 221, 222 Bernard, John 109-111, 114, 214, 228, 230, 234,240, 251,276, 281,283, 286, 320, 324, Bemdt, Ronald and Catherine 68, 162-163 Berry, Michael 59-60 BHP 196 Bigge, Thomas 54, 198 Birds, I.L. 199 Birrell, Bob 63-64, 85 Black, Paul 303 Blair, David 9, 12, 94-96, 198, 222, 275

Name Index Blake, Barry 10 Bolitho, Robert 293 Bonner, Senator 280 Bot, Kees, de 23 Bounty 33, 73 Bourke, D.F. 123,184, 318, 342 Bradley, David and Maya 92, 94, 98, 105, 251-253 Brewster, Emily 93-94, 366 Brick, Jean 11 Britain, David 115-116,238 British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) 104,197, 202, 266-270, 275-277, 281 Brown, Penelope 68, 142,238 Brutt-Griffler, Janina 313,320 Bryant, Pauline 254-258, 260-262 Bulletin, The 98-99, 129, 159-161, 169, 207, 241,343 Burchfield, Robert W. 201-202, 285-286, 293 Burridge, Kate 107,128, 134,137, 219, 289,310 Butler, Susan 215, 287, 341, 342 Callan, V. 94, 103, 105 Calvert, Albert F. 157-158 Calwell, Arthur A. (former Minister of Immigration) 58, 83, 142 Camm, J.C.R. 48, 59, 77-78, 80, 261 Canberra Times, The 135, 137, 141, 189,243 Cargile, Aaron 15,91 Carmichael 318 see Lang, Rev. Dunmore Carney, Jilea 300 Carr, Bob (Premier of NSW) 121 Carter, Jimmy (former President) 306 Chamber of Commerce 197 Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry 83 Chinese National Alliance 83

383

Clapp, Francis 196 Clark, J.E. 9 Clark, Manning 53, 55, 99, 194, 354 Clyne, Michael 5, 11-12, 17-19, 23, 27-29, 64-65, 80, 85, 87, 214215,249, 257, 282, 285, 336, 343 Cobb, Freeman 196,317 Cochrane, G.R. 111,323,355 Collins, Beverley 321 Collins, Peter 9, 12, 121,123, 136, 140, 262,288, 292 Commonwealth Government 285 Commonwealth Literature Board 289 Commonwealth of Australia 4,47 Commonwealth of Australia Year Book 47 Cook, Captain 53, 79, 152, 158 Corbyn, Adam 191 Cox, Felicity 112, 228-229, 248, 311 Craig, C. 101,228 Cran, William 90, 178, 193 Crichton-Browne, Senator 241-242 Crowley, Terry 70 Cruttenden, Peter 204,357 Cunningham, Peter 96 Curtin, John 197 Dawkins, John (former Minister of Education) 12,311,340 see also Green Paper, White Paper Delbridge, Arthur 9, 40, 94, 97-98, 101,104-105, 111, 114-116, 125, 136,179, 198, 203, 222, 224-231, 234-235, 238, 248, 250-251, 253, 269, 271, 276, 283-286, 289-291, 295, 311, 319, 324-326, 338-340 Denison, David 330-331, 334 Dennis, C.J. 99 Department of Education (ACT) 310

384

Name Index

Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (DIMA) 84 Deverson,T. 218 Dixon, James 95-96 Dixon, Robert W. 10, 153, 156, 158, 166, 288, 344 Downer, L. J. 202-203, 234, 269, 281 Driscoll, Henry 100 Ducange, Anglicus 333 Duckworth, Mark 307 Dundas 54 Dune, M. 109-112,359 Eades, Diana 12 Eagleson, Robert D. 10,12,135, 166, 246, 283, 290, 292, 306-307, 309 Eisikovits, Edina 246, 249,299 Ellis, A.J. 313,320,326 Eltis, Ken J. 94, 103 Engel, Dulcie 139,247 English Association 224, 266 Evans, Nicholas 163, 229, 248 Fairfax Publishers 296 Famechon, Johnny 121 Farouk, King 214 Fee, Margaret 207 Fesl, Eve 44, 176 Field, Laurie 310 Fielding, Helen 145 Fischer, Jacky 174 Fishman, Joshua 18-19 Flynn, Christina 225 Foster, Robert 10, 100, 332 Fowler, Francis G. 293 Fowler, Henry W. 290, 293, 295 Fowler, Roger 28-29 Franklin, Benjamin 192 Fritz, Clemens 8,44, 181, 216, 218, 241,260,282, 288, 309, 334 Fudge, Eric 110

Gallois, C. 94, 103, 105, 350 Gane, D.M. 97 Gerstäcker, Friedrich 182 Gibson Committee 265, 267 Gibson, Grace 196,265,267 Gidley, Philip 73 Gilbert, Kevin 32 Giles, Howard 354 Gillam, Doreen 106,336 Goodge, W.T. 242 Gordon, Elizabeth 97, 323 Görlach, Manfred 72, 95, 112, 125, 218,282,312-313, 333-334, 341 Gowers, Ernest 291,295 Graf, Steffi 144 Grassby, Al 279 Grayston, G. 291 Greenough, James Bradsheet 93, 106, 362 Grenville, W.W. 53,323 Grice, Paul 146 Grose, F. 95 Gunn, JohnS. 198,271,283,323, 324, 325, 327 Guy, G.R. 116,234,237 Hajek, J. 109-112 Hammarström, Gunnar 215,321, 323 Hampton, Ken 69, 157 Hannah, Joan 134, 137, 140 Harkins, Jean 10, 162 Harrington, John 229, 248 Harris, John 10, 13, 160 Haugen, Einar 263, 264 Hawkins, Bob (former Prime Minister) 104, 114 Henry C. 198 Herald Weekly Times (HWT) 296 Herrnhuter Brüdergemeine (Moravians) 158 Historical Records of Australia (HRA) 47, 53-54, 69, 138, 151-

Name Index 152,180, 188, 194,199, 207, 210, 323,331-332 Hobart, Lord 59-60, 78, 131, 138, 249, 251,253 Hobart Town Courier 131 Hogan, Paul 130,220 Holleuffer, Henriette von 57 Holmes, Janet 113, 142,219 Honey, John 90 Horvath, Barbara M. 105,110,185, 222, 230-234, 238, 248 Horvath, R.J. 110 Hotton, J.C. 282 House of Representatives 307 Howard, John, Prime Minister 165, 167,243, 245, 354 Hudson, Nicholas 293-284 Hudson, Richard 238 Hume, Amanda 181 Hundt, Marianne 134 Hunt, Rex 183 Hunter, John 195,210,331 Ihalainen, Ossi 313-314,321,325 Ilsley, Diana 139 Ingram, John 110,115 Jacaranda Press 283-284 James, G.L. 53, 81, 95, 108 Johns, Brian (former managing director of ABC) 105, 142, 304 Johnston, William 313 Jones, Alex I. 120, 134, 289 Jones, Daniel 110,115,134,145, 289, 324, 325, 326, 327, 332, Jupp, James 3, 48-58, 61, 65-70, 7376, 78, 80-84, 87, 96-98, 178, 187, 194, 261,311,318, 328, Kachru, Braj 39 Kaldor, Susan 10 Kaufmann, Terence 29 Keat, Ng 287

385

Keating, Paul (former Prime Minister) 88, 106, 160, 175, 217, 306, 341 Kelly, D. St L. 305 Kenneally, Thomas 217 Kennedy, Graeme 153, 154 Kennett, Jeff (former Premier of Victoria) 122,262 Khoo, Siew-Ean 49-50, 351 King, Philip Gidley (Governor and Lieutenant) 73, 78, 92, 100, 138, 194-195,207, 214, 237,293 Kipp, Sandra 5,11,18, 64-65, 85 Kittredge, George Lyman 93,106 Kording, Christine 199-200 Kramer, Professor Leonie 301 Kytö, Meija 312 La Trobe, Charles 185 Labov, William 249 Lake, Joshua 93,209,257, 283 Lang, Rev. Dunmore 318,328 Langker, R.K. 283 Lawson, E. 186 Leichhardt, Ludwig 122, 160 Leitner, Gerhard 2, 8-9, 13-14, 17, 20, 29, 33-35, 37,42-44, 83, 8586, 90, 92, 98, 106, 127, 137, 139,141, 145, 150, 153-155,157, 168-170, 191, 193, 195, 200, 206, 208-209, 241, 248, 260, 265-269, 278,281-282, 288-289, 291, 299, 304, 309, 325, 331, 335-336, 340341,343 Lentzner, Κ. 282 Leoni, Franco 184-185 Levinson, Stephen C. 146, 238 Lions Club 197 Lloyd James, A. 268 Lo Bianco, Joseph 12, 23, 37, 297, 306, 340 Lockwood, Admiral 199 Lockwood, Kim 170, 201, 207, 212, 296

386

Name Index

Lonergan, Dymphna 179-180, 216 Ludowyk, Frederick 112 Lutton, Russell 293 MacArthur, General 200 MacArthur, Michael 313,320,324327 Mackerras, Lindsay 290-291 MacMahon, Michael 313-314,320, 324-327 MacNeil, Robert 90,178,193 Macquarie (= all dictionaries and Macquarie Library) 120, 123, 125, 127, 130-131, 153,160-163, 166, 178, 181-184, 186-188, 190, 195, 199, 243, 251,270, 275, 282-284,286-291, 295-297, 339, 341 Madden, Chief Justice 97 Mair, Christian 142 Malcolm, Ian 10 Maley, Yon 134, 135, 333-334 Malouf, David 222, 339 Mannell, Robert 311,351 Masay, William (Bill) 219 Matthews, R. 202,324 Mattingley, Christobel 69,157 Mawer, Giselle 310 McArthur, Tom 305 McBurney, Samuel 97, 102, 325, 326 McCrum, Robert 90, 178, 193 McDonald, Peter 212,351 McGregor, R.L. 234 McGuire, Eddie 128 McKay, Graham 10 McKie, I. 283 McLoskey 266 McQuilton, J. 48, 59, 77-78, 80, 261 Mees, Inger 321 Melbourne Club 318 Mellinkoff, David 308 Meredith, Louisa A. 96 Middleton, J.G. 225,283

Milroy, James 217, 312, 314, 320 Mitchell, Alexander 13,77-78,94, 97, 100,104, 111, 114-116, 179, 186,198,200, 222, 224, 226-231, 234-235, 238, 241,248,250-251, 253,261, 265-269,311, 315-320, 324-340 Moore, Bruce 141, 167, 217,219, 261 Moravians see Herrnhuter Brüdergemeine Morris, E.E. 93,119,283,341 Mossmann 96 Mufwene, Salikoko 6 Mühlhäusler, Peter 10, 13, 17, 20, 30, 100, 332, 343 Mulder, Jean 107, 128, 134, 137, 219,289,310 Murdoch, Rupert 170, 198 Murray-Smith, S. 293-294 National Centre for English Language Teaching Research (NCELTR) 11,310 Naughtin, Pat 212 Nelson, Lord 194 Newbrook, Mark 136, 140, 287 News Corporation 296 News Limited 198,297 Noyce, Phillip 5 Oasa, H. 111,253 Oizki, Itamo 342 Ozolins, Uldis 19, 58, 142, 340 Ozwords 131-132, 141 Page, David 164 Päschke 32 see Strehlow, Theodor Paterson, Banjo 182 Pauwels, Anne 11-12, 64, 291, 299, 301-303 Peters, Pamela H. 192-193, 207208,213, 290, 295,298

Name Index Phillip, Arthur (governor) 47, 5354, 69, 79, 151-152, 180, 188, 198,207,316, 323,331-332 Pilch, H. 108,114 Porter, Hal 98 Potts, Annette and E. Daniel 142, 196, 197, 198, 199 Price, Charles A. 49,50 Pringle, John Douglas 3, 87 Purchase, S. 291-292 Quirk, Randolph 39-40, 92, 134135,206, 221,292 Radcliffe-Brown 68 Ramson, William S. 119, 126-127, 145, 153, 156, 158, 166, 182-183, 193, 195, 239, 243, 276, 283, 288, 332 Rando, Gaetano 184-185 Redshaw, Roland 266 Reeve, J. 102,103 Rhydwen, Mari 23 Richardson, Frances and Sue 121, 139 Ridgeway, Senator 124 Ritz, Marie-Eve 139,247 Romaine, Suzanne 202, 264 Ronowicz, Edmund 11, 146,147 Rose, Sheryl 323 Rudanko, Juhani 312 Ryan, Ellen 156,243,322 Said, Halimah 287 Schäffer, Philip 79 Schmidt, Annette 10 Schneider, H.G. 158 Schoenheimer, H.P. 206 Schofield, R. S. 52 Schonell, F.J. 225, 283, 304 Schwarz, L.D. 314 Scott, Allan 218, 277 Seal, Graham 101, 117-118, 173174, 240, 304

387

Sebba, Mark 26, 37, 246 Secombe, Margaret 92 Sherrod, Robert 197 Shnukal, Anna 246 Shortland, Lieutenant 195 Shu, Jing 51 Siegel, Jeff 10, 26, 27, 312, 327 Sieloff, Inke 127, 138, 146, 168-169 Siew, Mohd 287,351 Simons, Margaret 121,173 Smart, B.H. 313 Smith, L.R. 68 Smith, D.Sc.W. Ramsay 68 Smitterberg, Erik 312 Smolicz, Jerzy J. 11, 50, 61 Special Broadcasting Service (SBS) 203,214 Starks, Donna 218 Stein, Gabriele 92,221 Stern, George 293 Stone, Louis 99, 100, 187 Strehlow, Theodor 32 Strevens, Peter 107 Stubbe, M 219 Style Council 290, 296, 297, 298, 307, 343 Summers, Anne 290 Sussex, Roland 193 Sweet, Henry 320, 326, 327 Sydney, Baron 188 Sydney, Lord 47, 69, 152, 331-332 Sydney Morning Herald, The 122, 126, 137, 156, 158, 161, 163-164, 166-167, 170-171, 173-175, 199, 318 Tagesspiegel, Der 342 Tate, Frank 98,196 Taylor, Brian 44, 97, 99, 123,126, 139 168, 178, 180, 184-186, 191, 193, 195, 201, 205, 215-217, 241242,260, 282, 288, 309, 321-322, 325,331-332, 335-336 Taylor, Thomas 242

388

Name Index

Tench, Alan 152 Thomas, Caroline 310 Thomas, Mandy 153, 156, 158, 166 Thomason, Sarah Grey 25-27, 29, 31,33, 37 Thompson, F.M. 52 Tickner, former Senator 173 Tollfree, Laura 232,233,234, 249 Troy, Jakelin 10, 13, 152, 331 Trudgill, Peter 27, 112, 134, 137, 140, 179-180, 245, 312, 322, 324, 327 Truth, The (Sydney) 199 Tryon, Darrell T. 10,13 Turner, George W. 9, 39-40, 186, 216,283,324, 332 Union Club (Hobart ) 318 Urdang, L. 285 Vamplew, Wray 47, 51, 68 Van Diemen's Land Company 5455 Vater, Heinz 14 Vaux, James Hardy 95, 282 Viviani, Nancy 65, 85 Vondra, Josef 61, 87 Vonwiller, J.P. 116,234,237 Walker, John 313 Wallace-Crabbe, Chris 339 Walsh, Michael 10,68 Walsh, B. 291 Wannan, Bill 97 Ward, Russel 87, 132 Warren, Paul 115,238

Washington, George 193 Watt, Jim 210 Watts, Richard 314 Webster, Noah 192,206 Wells, John 108, 112-114, 204, 234, 324,327 Welsch, Alexandra 32 West Australian, The 165 Weston, Adeline 199 White, Richard 4-5, 12,48, 56-58, 62, 82-83, 189,214,268, 276, 293,340 White, S.A. 4-5, 12, 48, 56-58, 62, 82-83, 189,214, 268, 276, 293, 340 Whitlam, Gough (former Prime Minister) 58 Wickert, Rosie 37 Wierzbicka, Anne 118,143,144145 Wignell, Peter 164, 176, 177 Wilkes, G.A. 124, 186, 187, 243 William, Captain 73, 79,195 Wing Young, William 82 Winter, Joanne 92 Witton, Nie 178, 191 World Chinese Masonic Society 83 Wrigley, E. A. 52 Wurm, Stephen A 10, 13 Yallop, Colin 10,68,148,316 Yamazaki, Shunji 153-154 Year Book Australia 69 Zajda, Joseph 92 Zweig, Arnold 92

Subject Index Aboriginal English (AborE) 6, 10, 18, 27, 30, 33,35-36,38,41-42, 88, 155, 161-162, 164-165, 167169, 176-177, 195, 245, 287, 336337 Aboriginal languages 12, 25, 259, 261, 283, 332 see also indigenous language, traditional language, individual language names ACT's Interpretation Amendment Act 301 Adult Migration Education Service (AMES) 310 Afrikaans 188,259,261 Afro-American English 195,196 American College Dictionary, The 285 American English (AmE) 1, 38-39, 90, 106, 108, 113, 115, 122-123, 128,131, 133-135, 138, 141-143, 150, 159, 180-181, 184, 187-188, 190-216, 247, 250, 257-258, 261262, 266, 268, 275, 277, 283-284, 294-295, 298, 305, 322, 324-325, 330-331, 334-335, 338, 342-343 Americanisms 118,193,198-199, 201-203, 209, 211-214, 216, 258259, 297 Anglicization 343-344 Anglo-American heritage 206,210, 311,330-331 Anglo-Celtic 1,4,7,42,61,67,72, 86-89, 142, 149, 338 Anglo-Irish English 150 see also Irish English Arabic (language) 11,18 Arrernte 160 Asian languages 189, 277, 352, 376

Asian language 189, 277 see also individual languages, Language Other Than English attitudes (to language) 7-9, 11, ΜΙ 7, 20, 22, 37, 54, 56, 58, 60, 74, 87-92, 94-95, 100, 103, 105, 114, 116, 136,145, 192-193,199,202, 226,249, 265, 277, 282, 294, 298,311,321,329 attrition 23 Austral English 101, 119, 283, 341 Australian accent 92,98, 102-103, 108,116-117, 200, 224, 226,271, 323, 340 Australian base 215,336 Australian Concise Oxford Dictionary, The 270 Australian Language Research Centre (University of Sydney) 283 Australian Literacy and Language Policy (ALLP) 340 Australian National Dictionary, The (AND) 119,129,131-132,153, 159-163, 166, 180-182, 186-187, 191,199, 218, 232, 257-258, 260, 288, 333 Australian Oxford Dictionary, The 288 Australian Rules 183 Australianism 118-119,128,153, 213-214, 254, 256, 259, 284 Australianization 266, 285, 290, 293, 329, 343-344 avoidance 12, 115, 140, 148-149 Bahasa Indonesia 11, 178, 243, 277278 Bahasa Malay 277-278

390

Subject Index

bilingualism 23-24,27-28,32,291, 298 see also multilingualism bilingually mixed languages 25, 27 see also language contact borrowing 27-29, 33, 35, 128, 151, 164,185,211 see also language contact Briticism (also Britishism) 118, 258, 294 British English (BrE) 1, 9, 38-39, 89, 92, 94, 99, 101, 103-104, 106, 113-114,118, 122, 126, 128, 131, 133-143,145, 150, 180-182,191192, 199-202, 205-207, 214-216, 243,247, 257, 259, 261,265, 267-269,275-276, 277, 283-284, 286, 291-292, 295, 298, 311, 325, 330, 333-336, 338, 342-343 see also EngE Britishism see Briticism Broad (Australian accent) 104-105, 111, 200, 209, 226-235, 240, 248251,253,263,266, 269, 271, 278,318-320, 322, 326, 346 Broken 155 camel drovers (Afghan) 56,189 Cantonese 83 see also Mandarin, Chinese (language) Cape Barren English 27, 34, 36, 88, 89, 337 Celtic languages 178, 216 see also Gaelic Chinese (language) 4-5, 11, 17-18, 24,49, 56, 60, 62, 64-66, 81-85, 178, 189-190,214, 278 Cockney 90, 92, 96, 101-102, 111, 138, 191, 199-200, 249, 314, 321, 324-325,331-333 see also popular London code-switching 24, 28, 31-32, 111

codification 44, 114,221, 264, 267, 271-272, 274, 280,282, 288, 291, 293,298,307, 329 see also standardization codifier 9, 264, 281-282, 286, 289, 297, 301 colloquialism 117,187,200,241, 274,294 see also informality common core (of AusE) 39,118, 286,299 Common English 133, 177, 179, 220 see also General English contact language 6, 8, 10,13, 22, 23, 25-26, 29-31,34-35, 37,4142, 90, 176, 260, 283, 344 see also pidgin, creole, Kriol, etc. conversational norm 148 conversational principle 237 conversational rule 146 Convict Period 52, 59, 61 convictism 53, 55, 61, 258, 315, 367 core value 37 Cornish (English) 73 creole 1, 6, 18, 25-27, 30-31, 33-36, 38,41,88, 169, 195 see also pidgin, language contact Cultivated (Australian accent) 9, 103-105, 111, 114,226-234, 239240,248-249, 251, 267-269, 271, 278-279, 319-320, 328-329, 334335 Danish (language) 193 decreolization 31 see also langage contact, pidgin, creole Dharuk 152 dialect 1, 6, 8, 15-16,19-20, 25, 33, 38-40, 42, 52, 72-73, 76, 83, 90, 93,95-99, 104-107, 112, 1 ΠΙ 18, 122, 126, 131, 135, 139, 149,153, 179-182,191,196, 209,

Subject Index 211,215, 218, 221-222,234, 238240,245-246, 248-251, 254-255, 258, 260-261, 263-264, 280, 282, 296, 312-313, 322-323, 328-330, 332, 334-335, 337-338, 343 dialectalism 152,254,256,261-262 discriminatory language 290, 292, 298, 301-302 see also gender, sexist etc., racist language divided usage 135-136, 202, 246, 280, 292 see also good/correct usage, standard domain 8, 12, 88, 145,150,154155, 177, 186,214, 262, 344 Dutch (language) 153,182,184, 188,193 Dyirbal 245 endo-normativism 329 see also exo-normativism English as a Native Language (ENL) 309-310 English as a Second Language (ESL) 288,310-311 English Dialect Dictionary (EDD) 257-258 English English (EngE) 108, 1 ΙΟΙ 13, 117, 127, 134-135,138, 150, 164, 179, 192, 201, 204-205, 208, 211, 213, 217, 245-246, 261, 312, 319-320, 322, 324-325, 328-329, 331 see also BrE English language industry 309 Englishes 33, 35-36, 39,42, 90, 94, 108,216,218, 341 see also individual varieties of English, Australian varieties epi-centre 1,14, 17, 38, 192,336, 338, 343-344 see also pluricentric

391

Ethnic Broad (Australian accent) 230-231,248 ethnic variety 36,43, 86, 250, 334, 337 ethnolect 249 European language 184,186-187, 189 see also individual languages, Language Other Than English exo-normativism (also -ity, -ive) 103, 112, 283, 286, 328-329, 334, 344 see also endo-normativism First Fleet 4-5, 69, 152, 177,195, 319 foreigner English 33 see also lingua franca formative input (also element, role, etc. [into (m)AusE]) 42, 79, 192, 215,261,312,315, 326, 343 formative period (also of (m)AusE) 34, 40, 72, 78, 89, 96, 141,150, 191-192,215, 261, 314, 327, 329, 332 French (language) 11, 14, 52, 61, 69, 131,146,148, 185-186,216, 268,276, 335, 342 Gaelic, Irish 46, 74,178-181, 217 Gaelic, Scottish 46,49, 74, 178-179 gender 15,47,55,88, 117, 149, 161,212, 221, 225, 227-231, 233, 235, 238, 247, 272, 298-299, 301302, 305, 307, 338, 344 see also sexist, etc., discrimatory language genderlect 15 General English 331 see also Common English German (language) 11,16-17,24, 32-33, 37-38, 45, 49-50, 61, 65, 79-81, 87, 92, 108, 123-124, 150, 159,181-190, 193,213,216-217,

392

Subject Index

229, 250, 258, 261, 276, 335-337, 344 German loan 258 Germanism 182 Glaswegian (dialect) 90, 249 Gold Rushes 38, 55, 73, 77-78, 8081, 187,261,316, 320 good usage 9, 274-275, 278, 280281,283, 292, 298, 300 see also divided usage, standard Great Vowel Shift 111,324 Greek (language) 11,45,50,63, 178,185, 206, 231, 248-249, 279280 habitat (e.g. language habitat, habitat change, transformation) 2-3, 7, 13-14, 20-24, 27, 35-37, 41-412, 45, 85, 151,336, 343-346 High Rising Tone (HRT) 116-117, 223, 230, 234-238, 334, 344 Hindi (language) 11,190 Hokkien (language) 83 see also Cantonese, Mandarin, Chinese (language) indigenous languages 1,6,8-10,22, 24, 27, 30-31,37-38,41-42,61, 150-151, 156, 165, 168, 169, 176177, 338, 344 see also Aboriginal language, traditional language, individual language names informality 1, 39, 130,142-145, 148-149,213-214,217 see also colloquialism interactional norm 148 see also conversational rule international English 128,134,189190, 307 Irish English (IrE) 106,112,138, 140, 179, 181, 191,215-218, 234, 245,257, 321-322, 331 see also Anglo-Irish

Japanese (language) 11, 38, 57, 178, 190, 342 Joint Parliamentary Committee on Broadcasting (also Gibson Committee) 265 Junior Chamber of Commerce 197 Kamilaroi 153 Kauma 14 koiné 327 koinéization 27 Koori 3,154, 166, 168-169, 171172,174-176, 262 Korean (language) 11, 190 Kriol 6, 10, 18, 26-27, 30, 33-36, 38, 41, 168-169, 343 see also pidgin, creole, AborE Lake Tyers Anglian mission 209 language ecology see language habitat language habitat 1-3, 7, 13, 20-24, 35-37,41,45, 85,151,336, 343344,346 language loss (includes vocabulary loss) 8, 10-11,23-25,31,49,60, 67, 127-128 Language Other Than English (LOTE) 11, 35, 64, 79, 126, 177, 337 language maintenance 10-11,49-50, 63-65, 67, 72, 85, 127-128, 179, 214,261,270 language planning 285, 291 language policy (inludes politics) 8, 19, 43,61,91, 101,309, 329, 341 see also White Australia Policy language shift 10-11,23-24,30-31, 42,46, 63-65, 105, 168, 178, 270, language transmission (non-normal, normal) 6, 25 Latin 207

Subject Index lingo 100-101,117-118,149,220, 242, 284, 304, 335, 342 lingua franca 1, 11, 33, 36,41-42, 88

see also contact language loan translation 28, 32,151, 160, 162, 169,180 loanword 28,32, 150-151, 153-155, 157,160-162, 168-170, 180-184, 186,188-189,211-212,215-216, 219, 259-261,321,332, 344 local standard 341 see also epi-centre localization 192 see also epi-centre Low German 182,187-188 Mabo (Treaty) 167,170,172 Maltese 45 Mandarin 37, 83, 344 Maori 22, 113,153-154,170, 190, 218, 238 Melanesian Pidgin English 22 see also pidgin, creole, Kriol, Pacific pidgin migrant English 42 migrant language 1, 7, 9, 12,19, 2324, 28,31,36-38,40, 86, 88-89, 106, 150, 185-186, 338 see also individual languages, Language-Other-Than-English mixed language 27, 33 modification 24, 27-29, 31, 37, 42, 128, 192, 223, 264, 288 multiculturalism 3, 7, 280, 299, 304 multilingualism 24, 36,42 National Policy on Languages 12 natural increase (of population) 48, 62,70,315-316,318-319, 328 New South Wales (NSW) (includes New Holland) 6, 10, 34-35,48, 52, 55, 59, 65-66, 69-71, 73-75, 77-82, 84, 96, 153, 161, 166,180,

393

185, 193-194, 225, 246, 251-256, 259,262, 267, 275, 303, 316, 328 New Zealand English (NZE) 9,22, 108, 112, 115, 134, 153, 190, 215-216,218-220, 243, 252, 323324, 326 newspaper guide 292 see also usage guide, good usage, codification, etc. Ngarrindjeri 162 Non English Speaking Background (Australians, NESB) 88 non-biased language 7, 307, 344 non-discriminatory language 274, 309, 335 see also discriminatory language, gender, sexist language, etc. Norfolk (Island creole) 26-27,3336,41,48, 73, 88-89, 322, 337 see also Pitkern, Pitcairn creole norm of communication 20, 116, 238, 338 northern English 75, 137, 140-141, 208-209,213,321 see also northern type of English Northern Territory (NT) 10,48, 71, 81, 84, 137, 276 northern type (of English) 216, 246, 331 see also northern English Nyungar (also Nyoongar) 153 onomasiology {includes -ical) 154155,168, 177, 254, 256 onomastics 118,267 orthography 29,206,277 Pacific pidgin 196, 246 see also Melanesian Pidging English pidgin 10,25-26,34-35, 38, 79, 100, 153, 156, 169, 283, 287 see also creole, contact language, etc.

394

Subject Index

Pitcairn creole (Pitcaimese, Pitkern) 26-27, 33-34, 36 Pitkern see Pitcairn creole Pitjantjatjara 276 plain English 7, 12, 298, 305-307, 310-311,335 see also codification, standard, etc. pluralism (linguistic, cultural) 6-8, 12,24, 85,281 pluricentricity (-ic) 17-18, 33, 336 see also epi-centre Polish (language) 146-147,189 politeness 142,146-148,208,216, 238 see also conversational rule, norm popular London (English) 204, 215, 313-314, 321,327, 331 see also Cockney Port Jackson dialect 152 Portuguese (language) 38, 185 Pronunciation Committee (ABC) 267-268, 278 see also Standing Committee on Pronunciation Queensland (Qld) 4, 10, 34,43, 48, 56, 59-60, 65-66, 69-71, 74, 7778, 81, 84, 152-153, 166-167, 182, 254-260, 275, 303, 317, 328, 337 racist (connotation, expression, language, etc.) 149, 167, 199, 242, 303 Radio Transcription Company of America 196 Random House 211, 339 Received Pronunciation (RP) 6, 90, 102-104, 108-115, 204, 215, 223, 228, 232,265, 314, 319-321, 323326, 328-329 regional accent 234, 253,261, 315, 325

regional dialect 95, 250, 254, 261, 263,315, 335 see also Pitcairn creole, Cape Barren English regional variation 8,40, 135, 249251,253, 261,309, 338 regionalism 158, 262, 287, 329 rhyming slang 117, 122, 125,128, 200,332-333 Romance language 184 see also individual languages rules of communication 28 see also conversational norm, etc. rural mAusE 138 Russian (language) 11,61, 189 SCOSE (ABC) see Standing Committee on Spoken English Scottish English (ScotE) 90,106, 112, 138, 150, 208,211,215-218, 245, 321-322, 331 Scotitish Gaelic see Gaelic, Scottish second formative period (of mAusE) 261,327 self-control (in language development) 29-30, 33, 38,4043, 335 see also standardization, etc. Serbo-Croatian (language) 189 Sex Discrimination Act 301 sexist language (includes anti-sexist, non-sexist language) 291, 300 see also gender, discriminatory language Singaporean English 219 slang 39,93,101, 117, 120-123, 125, 127, 131-132, 145, 181,186187, 196,199, 213, 239-241, 243, 247, 250, 281-282, 284, 304, 309, 332 social class 15, 77, 131, 221, 238, 318, 328 social stratification 6, 95, 234, 253, 313,315-316, 327, 329,334

Subject Index social variation 186,223,229 sociolect 15, 105, 214, 231, 233, 257 Somali (language) 337 South African English (SthAfE) 215,219, 324 southern hemisphere (English, varieties) 218,324 see also NZE, South African English Spanish (language) 11,16,18,185, 190, 214 spoken style 265, 269, 281-282, 293 standard mainstream Australian English (standard mAusE) 141, 153,179, 195,208,223,240, 246, 264, 266, 278, 283,298, 302, 305,311,321,341 standardization 9, 15, 44, 89,129, 163,264, 282, 291,293,298, 314,338 see also good or divided usage, codification Standing Committee on Pronunciation (ABC) 268 see also next entry Standing Committee on Spoken English (SCOSE, ABC) 115, 152, 186, 202, 204-206,208-209, 211, 213, 234-235, 267-274, 277281,285, 291-293, 298-300, 303, 334 Stolen Generation 5, 163, 165 stratification 220-221, 230, 250, 315-316,318-319, 329, 332, 334, 340 strine 1, 107, 111 structural dialectology 222 see also regional variation etc. style guide 273,296-297 see also usage guide, divided usage sub-standard 224,239 see also standard, divided usage

395

swearing 125, 148, 242, 284 Swedish (language) 193 switching see code switching Sydney pidgin 153 see also pidgin, creole, contact language Tagalog 190 Tamil 190 Tax Assessment Act 308 Telugu 190 Thai (language) 11, 178,190 traditional language 10, 40 see also Aboriginal language, indigenous language transfer 27, 33, 123, 181 see also modification, codeswitching transference 27-29 see also modification, codeswitching Turkish (language) 189-190 Ulster Scots 216 see also Scottish English usage debate 202,280 see also good usage usage guide 15, 136, 264, 280, 282, 292,295, 297 see also stle guide, divided usage, etc. Van Diemen's Land 48, 54-55, 78, 194 Victoria (Vic.) 48, 55, 59, 65, 69, 71, 74, 77-78, 80-82, 84, 98, 122, 153, 158, 160, 166, 169, 175, 183, 185, 196, 225, 234,251-255, 258, 260, 262, 303, 306, 308, 317-318, 327-328 Victorian Certificate of Education 210,310

396

Subject Index

Waltzing Matilda 106,150,170, 181, 199,217, 331 Warlpiri 32 Welsh (language) 49, 66-67, 73, 179 Western Australia (WA) 48, 71, 7778,84, 154, 160, 185,242,251, 254,259-260, 275,316 White Australia Policy 4,48, 56-58, 62, 82-83, 189, 276

World War (I and II) 4,6, 57,61, 80, 83-84, 92, 104, 142-143, 183, 187, 189,193, 197, 201,204, 243, 289, 303 Yiddish 38, 184, 186-187,213 Yolngu 166, 169, 174 Yuwaalaraay 153