East Midlands English 9781501502354, 9781501510724

Citation preview

Natalie Braber, Jonnie Robinson East Midlands English

Dialects of English

Editors Joan C. Beal Karen P. Corrigan Bernd Kortmann

Volume 15

Natalie Braber, Jonnie Robinson

East Midlands English

ISBN 978-1-5015-1072-4 e-ISBN (PDF) 978-1-5015-0235-4 e-ISBN (EPUB) 978-1-5015-0237-8 ISSN 2164-7445 Library of Congress Control Number: 2018942855 Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data are available on the internet at http://dnb.dnb.de. © 2018 Walter de Gruyter, Inc., Boston/Berlin Typesetting: Integra Software Services Pvt. Ltd. Printing and binding: CPI books GmbH, Leck Cover image: Dukki Ltd. Can www.degruyter.com

Contents List of Figures  List of Tables 

 IX  X

Acknowledgements 

 XI

Map of the East Midlands 

 XII

1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9

 1 Geography, demography, and cultural factors  Introduction   1 Geography of the East Midlands   1 History of the region and its language   3 Language in the East Midlands   6 Demography   8 Trade and culture   8 Representation of the East Midlands in popular culture  Conclusion   15 Sources consulted for this volume   16

2 2.1 2.2 2.2.1 2.2.2 2.2.3 2.3 2.3.1 2.3.2 2.3.3 2.3.4 2.3.5 2.4 2.4.1 2.4.2 2.4.3 2.4.4 2.5

 20 Phonetics and phonology  Introduction   20 Vowels   22 Short vowels   22 Long vowels   32 Unstressed vowels   49 Consonants   55 Plosives   55 Nasals   57 Fricatives   58 Laterals   59 Glides   61 Connected speech processes  Elision   63 Liaison   68 Substitution   69 Miscellaneous   70 Conclusion   72

 63

 10

VI  3 3.1 3.2 3.2.1 3.2.2 3.3 3.3.1 3.4 3.4.1 3.4.2 3.4.3 3.4.4 3.5 3.5.1 3.5.2 3.5.3 3.5.4 3.5.5 3.6 3.6.1 3.6.2 3.6.3 3.6.4 3.7 3.7.1 3.7.2 3.7.3 3.8 3.8.1 3.8.2 3.8.3 3.8.4 3.9 3.9.1 3.9.2 3.9.3 3.10

 Contents

Morphology and syntax   76 Introduction   76 Determiners   77 Demonstratives   77 Articles   78 Nouns   80 Plural   80 Pronouns   81 Personal pronouns   81 Possessive pronouns   82 Reflexive pronouns   83 Relative pronouns   84 Verbs   85 Be   85 Have   87 Past   89 Infinitive phrase   89 Other   93 Negation   94 Auxiliary contraction   94 Secondary contraction   95 Dialectal & none   96 Vernacular ain’t, don’t & multiple negation  Prepositions   99 Preposition deletion   99 Preposition substitution   100 Double prepositions   101 Adverbs   101 Intensifiers   101 Unmarked adverbs   102 as, so (as), that   102 Otiose what   103 Discourse   104 Forms of address   104 Narrative devices   105 Like   105 Conclusion   107

 97

Contents 

4 4.1 4.2 4.2.1 4.2.2 4.3 4.3.1 4.3.2 4.3.3 4.3.4 4.3.5 4.4 4.4.1 4.4.2 4.5 4.5.1 4.5.2 4.5.3 4.5.4 4.6

 111 Lexis  Introduction   111 Past research on East Midlands vocabulary   113 Nationwide lexical studies which include the EM   113 Contemporary East Midlands language collections   114 Place names   115 Celtic influence   115 Roman influence   116 Anglo-Saxon influence   116 Viking influence   117 Norman influence   119 Case studies   120 Mining-related vocabulary   120 Farming language   126 Popular local language   131 Cob   133 Mardy   134 Duck   136 Other local expressions   138 Conclusion   143

5 5.1 5.1.1 5.1.2 5.1.3 5.2 5.2.1 5.2.2 5.2.3 5.3 5.3.1 5.3.2 5.3.3 5.4 5.4.1 5.4.2 5.4.3

 145 Annotated transcripts  Kniveton, Derbyshire   145 Glossary   146 Phonological points of interest   146 Grammatical points of interest   148 Oxton, Nottinghamshire   149 Glossary   150 Phonological points of interest   151 Grammatical points of interest   152 Ullesthorpe, Leicestershire   153 Glossary   154 Phonological points of interest   155 Grammatical points of interest   156 Swadlincote, Derbyshire   157 Glossary   158 Phonological points of interest   158 Grammatical points of interest   160

 VII

VIII  5.5 5.5.1 5.5.2 5.5.3 5.6 5.6.1 5.6.2 5.6.3 6 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 Index 

 Contents

Nottingham   160 Glossary   162 Phonological points of interest  Grammatical points of interest  Leicester   163 Glossary   165 Phonological points of interest  Grammatical points of interest 

 162  163

 165  167

 168 Annotated bibliography and references  Geography, demography, and cultural factors  Phonetics and phonology   169 Morphology and syntax   170 Lexis   171 References cited in this text   172  181

 168

List of Figures Figure 1.1 Figure 1.2 Figure 2.1 Figure 2.2 Figure 2.3 Figure 4.1 Figure 4.2 Figure 4.3 Figure 4.4 Figure 4.5 Figure 4.6 Figure 4.7 Figure 4.8 Figure 5.1

Map of the East Midlands   2 Brian Clough statue in Nottingham city centre   12 Written representation of mardy   51 Image of lavenda at a Nottingham market   53 Nottingham accent and commercial products   74 Example of cob on a menu in Nottingham   112 Miners at work at road junction underground   124 Miners ascending in the cage   125 Local language on merchandise   132 Cob   134 Mardy   135 Examples of duck in merchandising   137 Advert for Notts TV on a local bus   137 Map of locations referred to in this chapter   144

https://doi.org/10.1515/9781501502354-201

List of Tables Table 1.1 Table 1.2 Table 1.3 Table 1.4 Table 1.5 Table 2.1 Table 2.2 Table 2.3 Table 3.1 Table 3.2 Table 3.3 Table 3.4 Table 3.5 Table 3.6 Table 4.1 Table 4.2 Table 4.3 Table 4.4 Table 4.5 Table 4.6 Table 4.7 Table 4.8

EM clubs and individuals who have won major sporting honours since 2000   13 SED localities in the East Midlands   16 SED recordings in the East Midlands with BL Shelfmarks   17 MMB recordings in the East Midlands   18 BBC Voices recordings in the East Midlands   18 Examples of secondary contraction in present-day East Midlands English   65 Examples of dialectically noteworthy elision processes in present-day East Midlands English   67 Localised negative constructions in present-day Derbyshire English   70 Examples of non-standard past forms in present-day East Midlands English   90 Examples of secondary contraction in present-day East Midlands English   95 Localised negative constructions in East Midlands English   97 Examples of ain’t in present-day BL sound recordings of East Midlands English   98 A selection of examples from East Midlands speakers of clause internal like   106 The grammar of Alan Sillitoe’s Nottingham (1958)   108 A selection of EM farming terms   127 A selection of EM animal terms   129 A selection of EM animal names   129 A selection of EM bird names   130 A selection of EM insect names   131 A selection of local expressions   138 A selection of EM weather terms   141 A selection of EM food and drink terms   142

https://doi.org/10.1515/9781501502354-202

Acknowledgements We are extremely grateful to the members of the advisory board of the Dialects of English series and to the anonymous referees for their helpful comments on the proposal for this volume. We are also grateful to Chris Montgomery for the production of the two maps in the book. Our thanks go to the Local Studies Library in Nottingham for allowing us to use two of their coal mining images. We would like to thank Norma Braber-McKinney for allowing us to use two of her photographs and also to Heidi Hargreaves at Dukki for allowing us to use images from the shop as well as producing the image on the front cover. We would also like to thank Ben Braber for reading through earlier drafts and his helpful comments on these. Neither of us would have been able to complete this work without the support of our families and so our final thanks must go to them.

https://doi.org/10.1515/9781501502354-203

Map of the East Midlands

SCOTLAND NORTH EAST

NORTH WEST YORKSHIRE AND THE HUMBER Liverpool Manchester

Derby

Nottingham EAST MIDLANDS Leicester

WALES

WEST MIDLANDS EAST OF ENGLAND

Bristol

LONDON SOUTH EAST

SOUTH WEST

Note: Map produced by Chris Montgomery. This work is based on data provided through EDINA UKBORDERS with the support of the ESRC and JISC and uses boundary material which is copyright of the Crown and the ED-LINE Consortium. Contains OS data © Crown copyright and database right 2015, 2017. Contains National Statistics data © Crown copyright and database right 2017.

1 Geography, demography, and cultural factors 1.1 Introduction The East Midlands includes a variety of types of towns and countryside, ranging from the uplands of north-west Derbyshire to the lower levels of the Lincolnshire fens in the east. It is an area which has received relatively little linguistic study and is frequently overlooked in overviews of language variation in the UK. This chapter provides an outline of the geographical, historical and linguistic background of the region. This region is not an unproblematic one and this chapter aims to discuss these issues and justify our particular focus. The purpose is to examine the features which unite and differentiate the localities within the region as well as surrounding regions and justify why the East Midlands is a variety worthy of investigation.

1.2 Geography of the East Midlands Geographically, the region poses some ambiguities, for example, what exactly is included within the East Midlands (for full details see Braber 2014). The Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics (NUTS) defines the East Midlands as containing the six counties of Derbyshire, Leicestershire, Lincolnshire, Northamptonshire, Nottinghamshire and Rutland. However, there are problems with such definitions, as they are not universally agreed upon in the literature, with particular problems surrounding Lincolnshire and Northamptonshire (see for example Beckett 1988: 2–3; Horton and Gutteridge 2003: iii). Beckett states that there is no doubt that the ‘East Midlands’ has existed since the 1980s due to the presence of the airport and many organisations and services which use the definition ‘East Midlands’ (Beckett 1988: 2). But this is not an automatically formal or natural region and is therefore used differently by different people and organisations (see also Read 1981: 4). K.C. Edwards, who was founder and first editor of the East Midlands Geographer incorporated the six counties stated above on “the grounds that since this was the 1939 administrative unit for Civil Defence it was functionally coherent” (Edwards 1954, cited by Beckett 1988: 2). Others have included Oxfordshire, Bedfordshire and Huntingdonshire (Holderness 1979: 27 cited by Beckett 1988: 2–3). Others have omitted the Lincolnshire Fenlands or concentrated on Derbyshire, Leicestershire and Nottinghamshire (for all these see Beckett 1988: 2–3). Palmer and Neaverson (1992: xii) comment that “Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire and Leicestershire, including Rutland, are https://doi.org/10.1515/9781501502354-001

2 

 1 Geography, demography, and cultural factors

generally accepted as part of the area” and add that Lincolnshire shows a separate and distinctive development. Townsend comments that it was not “renamed the East Midlands until 1965” (Townsend 2006: 4) and that it is a difficult region to define and describe. The East Midlands (see Figure 1.1) forms England’s fourth largest region making up 12% of England’s land area, spread over 15,600 km² and consisting of most of the eastern half of the traditional region of the Midlands. It has a population of just over 4.5 million people (7% of the UK total), making it one of the less populated regions of the UK (data taken from www.nomisweb.co.uk and the Office for National Statistics). It is a largely rural area and half of the population live in and around Nottingham, Derby and Leicester. The region has the second lowest population density in England (East Midlands Regional Plan 2009: 5). It has no areas which are classified as ‘Major Urban’, suggesting much of the region is rural. It is an area with many natural resources, including coal, limestone, igneous rock and iron.

W. Yorkshire

S. Yorkshire Lincolnshire

Derbyshire Notts

Staffs Leicestershire

Shropshire

Rtlnd

W.Midlands Cambridgeshire

Northants Worcs Herefordshire

Warwickshire Beds

Figure 1.1: Map of the East Midlands (map from www.picturesofengland.com).

1.3 History of the region and its language  

 3

For this study, only Derbyshire, Leicestershire and Nottinghamshire are included in the linguistic analysis. However, these counties include the three main urban centres of the region, containing the three largest cities, that is, Nottingham, Derby and Leicester, and as such the most easily recognised centres of the East Midlands. They are frequently treated as the base of the East Midlands, both in official contexts and by many inhabitants. For example, the BBC East Midlands Today news programme, despite its title, currently excludes most of Northamptonshire, north Nottinghamshire and north Derbyshire, while most of Lincolnshire is covered by the BBC’s Yorkshire and Lincolnshire region. Northamptonshire is part of the BBC East region, based in Norwich, and can also receive Central News East, with the south of the county receiving Thames Valley. Given the important role of local news media in representing and constructing regional identity, this suggests that the counties of Lincolnshire and Northamptonshire might be regarded as peripheral to the ‘core’ East Midlands region. Northamptonshire has a greater focus towards southern England, while Lincolnshire is on the periphery of the East Midlands, distinctly more rural and due to its large size, certain areas are connected more closely to East Anglia or Humberside. Because of these issues, the ‘three shires’ of Derbyshire, Leicestershire and Nottinghamshire will be chosen to represent the East Midlands in this book.

1.3 History of the region and its language The 1951 Ordnance Survey Map of Prehistoric Britain shows only 29 locations in the East Midlands before the time of the Romans. However, Stocker (2006: 35) suggests that this does not mean that there were no people in the region before this time, but that it is likely that as one of England’s main arable areas such historic sites may have been eradicated. Molyneux and Dwelly claim that the East Midlands “can claim the site of some of the oldest known homes in Britain” (Molyneux and Dwelly 1992: 13). They discuss that cave dwellings at Creswell Crags (between Chesterfield and Worksop) prove habitation of the region over 100,000 years ago and that these are like to have been occupied until Roman invasion. The dialects of the East Midlands owe aspects of their lexis and syntactic structure to Nordic influences, as the region was part of the Danelaw resulting from Danish invasion in the late 9th century. This created the partition of Mercia and is roughly the region of the East Midlands today. This is still clearly seen in some place names which retain these influences, for example the ‘thwaite’ (woodland clearing) sometimes converted to ‘wood’ as in Eastwood, ‘thorpe’ as

4 

 1 Geography, demography, and cultural factors

in Woodthorpe (outlying farm or settlement) and ‘by’ as in Derby (homestead or village). This is discussed in more detail in section 4.3. By 942, Nottingham, Lincoln, Stamford, Derby and Leicester had been named ‘burhs’ which during the Danelaw suggested fortification and urban settlement (Stocker 2006: 198). This domination lasted only a short time and by the early 10th century the East Midland counties had been incorporated into the kingdom of the English (Beckett 1988: 3). Nottinghamshire was a county by 1016 and Derbyshire by 1049, although they may actually have been founded earlier. By 1089 the populations of Nottingham, Leicester, Stamford and Northampton were likely to have been greater than 2,000 and the largest city at the time, Lincoln, may have had a population of around 10,000 (Stocker 2006: 72). Nottingham, Leicester and Derby became important regional agricultural and industrial centres and grew increasingly large. Important industries included coal mining, stone quarrying and the textile industry, but farming has long dominated the region. By the time of the census in 1801, the distribution of population and settlement in the region bore a close resemblance to the patterns occurring after Anglian and Danish colonisation although the actual numbers were obviously higher than previously (Osborne 1966: 341). As will be discussed in the following section, there are few contemporary studies on language variation in the region, but it is an important variety historically. We know that the ‘East Midland’ dialect of Middle English was an important influence in the early development of Standard English (see for example Barber 2000; Freeborn 1992; Leith 1997; Nevalainen and Tieken-Boon van Ostade 2006: 271), while McIntyre states that “present day English derives ultimately from the East Midlands dialect” (McIntyre 2009: 20). As a result, it can be argued that the dialect has been described and discussed more from the historical perspective than as a living and changing regional dialect still in use today. London, the capital city, political centre, as well as the centre of commerce and administration (Culpeper 2005: 87), and the language used by the higher social classes towards the end of the Middle English period were mainly influenced by East Midland dialects (McArthur 1998: 378). Much of London’s commerce was carried out to the north of the city and it experienced significant immigration from the north (Culpeper 2005: 87). Although it is known that the London dialect was a very mixed one, by the late Middle English period it seems to be a primarily East Midlands dialect, with influences from surrounding southern varieties (Algeo 2009: 119; Barber 2000: 144; Culpeper 2005: 87; Freeborn 1992: 95; Freeborn 2006: 235; Kerswill and Culpeper 2009: 237). Baugh and Cable state “London English took as well as gave. It began as a Southern and ended as a

1.3 History of the region and its language  

 5

Midland dialect”. They add that by the fifteenth century the East Midlands had a fairly uniform dialect, and that the language of London was similar in all important respects with it (Baugh and Cable 2002: 194). The standard which came to be used was based on the East Midland dialect of Middle English. It is thought that “this was probably due to the importance of  the East Midlands in English cultural, economic and administrative life” (Barber 2000: 144). There were other reasons for the East Midlands dialect to play an important role in ‘selecting’ a suitable variety for standardisation. It was a very rich agricultural area leading to higher prosperity for its inhabitants (Baugh and Cable 2002: 192). It was also a very important economic centre due to its wool and corn exports (Fennell 2001: 123). Furthermore, it was the dialect spoken by the largest number of people (Baugh and Cable 2002: 192; Nevalainen and Tieken-Boon van Ostade 2006: 275). Another important factor of the East Midlands dialect was that the varieties used there “occupied a middle position between the extreme divergences of the north and south. It was less conservative than the Southern dialect, less radical than the Northern. In its sounds and inflections it represents a kind of compromise, sharing some of the characteristics of both its neighbours” (Baugh and Cable 2002: 192). This concept of a dialect continuum is discussed frequently in the literature, the Cornish writer John of Treviso made the argument that the dialects of the middle of England were more likely to be understood by people to either side on the north and south, making a strong argument for a Midlands dialect (see Chambers and Trudgill 1998: 14; Culpeper 2005: 87; Fennell 2001: 122). This “usefulness of communication with people who spoke another dialect” made it an ideal candidate for usage in a changing England (Leith 1997: 39). Moreover, the East Midlands area was one of the least ravaged by the Black Death (Fennell 2001: 123; Nevalainen and Tieken-Boon van Ostade 2006: 275). The Black Death, a deadly disease which peaked in the mid-fourteenth century, had caused a major labour shortage as the population had been reduced by a third. This led to the inflation of labourers’ wages and was followed by an increase of importance in the social system (Horobin 2010: 21). The decline in population also caused an increase of migration to London, and an increasing amount of London city government officials were from the Midlands and the north (Fennell 2001: 123; Burnley 1989: 23; Freeborn 1992: 95; Freeborn 2006: 235). Added to these factors was also the close proximity of the two universities (Oxford and Cambridge) to London. These two universities had become important centres of intellect and monasteries were becoming increasingly less important in the ‘dissemination of learning’ (Baugh and Cable 2002: 193;

6 

 1 Geography, demography, and cultural factors

Barber 2000: 144). Students from all over the country were mixing in these two institutions, and it has been suggested that in this triangle (London/Oxford/ Cambridge) “a great deal of East Midland speech would have been heard, and possibly used as a kind of lingua franca among a mobile social group” (Leith 1997: 39). Particularly the geographical placement of Cambridge would make it a very strong candidate for supporting the East Midlands dialect (Baugh and Cable 2002: 193).

1.4 Language in the East Midlands There has been no regional survey of the dialects of the East Midlands since the Survey of English Dialects in the 1950s (Orton et al., 1962–71). Much of the research on language in the East Midlands comes from a historical angle, where the dialect has been studied in relation to the development of Standard English (e.g. Baugh and Cable 2002; Fennell 2001). Its characteristics as a living and changing dialect in the recent past and at the present time have received little attention and more recent localised studies presenting an overview of regional speech in the UK either lack up-to-date research data from the East Midlands or simply ignore the region (e.g. Britain 2007; Kortmann and Upton 2008). There are a few publications which focus on individual areas within the East Midlands, for example Docherty and Foulkes (1999) and Milroy (1996) who focus on Derby, and Braber and Flynn (2015) and Flynn (2007) who examine Nottingham, as well as some which examine a specific linguistic feature over a wider area, such as Maidment (1995) and Upton (1995, 2012). There are also some non-academic pieces which examine language in the area, such as Scollins and Titford (2000), Wright (1975, 1979), Stennett and Scollins (2006) and Beeton (1999). Anecdotally it appears that language in the East Midlands remains distinctive (both within the region and compared to other regions) and local residents insist there is considerable difference, for instance, between speech in the major urban centres of Nottingham, Derby and Leicester (see for example Scollins and Titford, 2000: 5). In linguistic studies we can see different terminology used to describe the area. The region is described in the literature as south Midlands (Britain, 2007); North-west, East, South and West Midlands (Hughes et al. 2012); Central Midlands (Trudgill, 1999b) which is divided into West-Central and East-Central. In some indexes only the term Midlands is used. Other studies also use county names (for example Leicestershire, northern Nottinghamshire and north east Derbyshire in Trudgill, 1999b: 42). Wales (2000) comments that although the East Midlands may be the geographical centre of England, it is not in any sense the perceived

1.4 Language in the East Midlands 

 7

centre of England. It is an area which can be hard to locate perceptually and is referred to by Wales (2000: 7–8) as “neither here nor there”, and by Montgomery (2007: 352) as a “no-man’s land”. The East Midlands, while defined as a dialect area in several dialectological texts (Hughes et al. 2012; Trudgill 1999b; Wells 1986), is largely ignored by variationists and is frequently subsumed into a general “northern” dialect region (as in Kortmann and Upton’s 2008 text) as it shares similar features with those of the north (Beal 2008: 124; Wells 1986: 350). There are, however, also shared features with varieties found in southern England (Hughes et al. 2012: 63). It is said to be a difficult area to place by Hoskins (1951: v) who writes that “everybody’s geography is weakest when it comes to the midlands”. Beckett states that most peoples’ notion of the region is “vague” (Beckett 1988: xiii) and it has been suggested that the boundaries of the region are relatively arbitrary (Sylvester-Bradley and Ford 1968: xv). Evidence from perceptual research has revealed that inhabitants of the East Midlands area find it difficult to define the boundaries of ‘the East Midlands’ as a region, and vary in their placement of a dividing line between the linguistic north and south (Braber, 2014). It is therefore perhaps not surprising that dialectologists have so far failed to agree consistently on how to classify and treat the dialects of the East Midlands, and its major urban areas of Nottingham, Derby and Leicester. Linguists frequently consider the north/south divide when examining language variation in the UK and the linguistic markers separating the two regions (see for example Trudgill 1999b; Wells 1986), but it has been noted that this is not a straightforward division (e.g. Beal 2008; Goodey et al. 1971; Montgomery 2007; Wales 2002). There are clear stereotypes for the north and south – but how do areas like the East Midlands fit into the picture? The boundaries between north and south are defined in different ways. Beal’s linguistic North does not include the East Midlands (Beal 2008: 124–5), neither does Wales’ (2002: 48). Trudgill states that in traditional dialectology the East Midlands area falls under ‘central’ dialects, which come under the ‘southern’ branch, but in modern dialectology it falls in the ‘north’ (Trudgill 1999b: 35, 67). Hughes et al. (2012: 70) contains a map which has the East Midlands in the north. Linguistically, the question has been raised whether there is a clear north/south boundary (see for example Upton (2012) where it is proposed that it is a transition zone). Stocker (2006: 9) adds to this stating that the East Midlands is not an extension of the north or south but is a “third place altogether, with its own distinctive landscape and history”. We will argue throughout the following chapters that there are similarities between speakers in the region which justify a term such as ‘East Midlands English’. This is not to say that there is just one variety in the region (see for example Docherty and Foulkes 1999: 48

8 

 1 Geography, demography, and cultural factors

who state that there are differences between the city of Derby and the rest of Derbyshire), but there are enough common features to suggest they are related varieties.

1.5 Demography The East Midlands is geographically diverse and the Regional Spatial Strategy identifies five distinct sub-areas: Peak (the National Park and surrounding rural areas); eastern sub-area (including Lincolnshire and Rutland); northern subarea (north Derbyshire and north Nottinghamshire); Southern sub-area (Northamptonshire); Three Cities sub-area (East Midlands Regional Plan 2009). This sub-area is made up of Derby, Nottingham, Leicester and their surrounding districts. These cities contain the East Midlands’ major administrative, commercial and cultural centres, including the largest local economies. This area accounts for around half of the entire population of the region as well as being the most enclosed location of the five sub-areas of the East Midlands, with only one border external to the East Midlands. According to the 2001 census, approximately 9% of the East Midlands population classify themselves as belonging to an ethnic minority background (Regional Economic Strategy 2006: 23) and according to the 2011 census this had increased to 10% of the population, where 448,000 residents were not born in the UK. These populations are not spread uniformly around the region with urban areas, particularly Leicester, containing higher numbers of ethnic minority groups. In fact, in Leicester, such ethnic groups make up 39% of the population, which is equivalent to over 110,000 individuals. Nottingham city accounts for the next largest share at almost 15% of the regional total. In 2011 (Office for National Statistics) the largest ethnic minority groups classified themselves as Indian, Other White, Pakistani, Black African, White and Black Caribbean, Other Asian, Black Caribbean, Irish and Chinese. This is higher than the national average, where 7.5% of the population of England self-classified as ‘Asian’ and 3.3% as ‘Black/African/Caribbean/Black British’ in 2011 (Office for National Statistics 2011).

1.6 Trade and culture Industrial growth and rise of trade (due to the establishment of new road, water and rail communications) increased the importance of towns in the East

1.6 Trade and culture 

 9

Midlands, and by 1900 a new population structure emerged, with Nottingham, Leicester and Derby (along with their satellites) as greatly expanded urban centres. Migration from the surrounding countryside led to further population growth in these towns. However, there was never a distinctive regional capital, because both Nottingham and Leicester dominated their individual counties but not the entire region (Beckett, 1988: 5). Rivalry for local capital has been long-standing (Leicester Mercury 2011) and remains unresolved. Local press delight in challenging the two cities for ‘capital’ of the East Midlands, particularly following instances provoking such debate, for example, the name changes undergone by the main local airport which has changed names twice since 2006 from East Midlands Airport to Nottingham East Midlands Airport to East Midlands Airport: Nottingham, Leicester, Derby (The Guardian 2006). Nottingham is treated by many as the regional centre as many headquarters of organisations and institutions serving the entire East Midlands are situated there and it is the centre for regional offices of government departments (Edwards 1966: 2) and is referred to by Beckett (2006: 1) as “Queen of the Midlands”. The close proximity of Leicester and Derby have stopped Nottingham from being a dominant city and the region remains oriented around several county centres. The region was important in industrial terms. The East Midlands played an important role in the growth of the canal system, the Romans built the first commercial canal in Lincolnshire and trade improved substantially as a result of the canal systems (East Midlands Tourist Board 1981: 15). The river Trent was also an important feature of the region and crucial for local trade and later, for trade outside the region. Coal has been mined in the East Midlands since at least the 13th century (Read 1981: 35) but the coal fields only became important nationally following the construction of canals and railways. For many years, regions within the East Midlands focused on textile production. The knitting frame was developed by Rev. Lee of Calverton near Nottingham in the 1590s and Sir Richard Arkwright built Derbyshire’s first cotton mill in 1771. Changes in the East Midlands were most apparent as a result of the Industrial Revolution. Textile production, coal and iron output were important in the region and farming also increased substantially. Improved road, water and later rail communication facilitated movement of people and goods on a very high scale (Beckett 1988: 189). Improved railways also affected the coal industry as cheap transport allowed coal to be moved around the country more easily and for further expansion into deep-seam collieries. The coal industry flourished until the inter-war years although even in the 1980s the East Midlands were still the major coal producer in the country (Molyneux and Dwelly 1992: 38). The region suffered ever increasing closures following the miners’

10 

 1 Geography, demography, and cultural factors

strike in 1984–5 until the last colliery closed in July 2015 at Thoresby. The contraction of the coal industry has led to large-scale unemployment and high levels of social deprivation in the coalfield areas of Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire. Increasingly, the region relies on tourism for income – providing 100,000 jobs in this sector which serve around 141 million visitors annually. Much of this tourism is centred around Robin Hood and Sherwood Forest as well as National Trust and English Heritage sites, including stately homes and country gardens. The Derbyshire Peak District draws in large numbers of tourists for outdoor pursuits.

1.7 Representation of the East Midlands in popular culture The East Midlands is also unusual in its lack of representation in popular media, as confirmed by Townsend’s observation that “In January 2004 the East Midlands made a rare appearance in the national press” (Townsend 2006: 1). Studies have also examined the role of the media on representation and recognition of geographical areas (for example Bayard 1990; Goodey 1973; Montgomery and Beal, 2011; Stuart-Smith et al. 2007). The East Midlands region lacks TV representation: there are almost no soap operas or reality TV programmes set in the East Midlands as there are in other regions of the UK (popular reality shows with a geographical focus include Geordie Shore, Desperate Scousewives, The Only Way is Essex, Educating Yorkshire and The Real Housewives of Cheshire, which promote awareness of and reinforce familiarity with local speech forms in Newcastle upon Tyne, Liverpool, Essex, Yorkshire and Cheshire respectively). There have been a few contemporary dramas (Peak Practice was set in the Derbyshire Peak District; Boon and Truckers in Nottingham, but very few characters in either used recognisably local accents) and there are comparatively few media celebrities from the East Midlands who ‘represent’ this area (see Braber 2016). This is an important issue which could affect people’s familiarity with, and perceptions of, the East Midlands, because Wales states that “mental stereotypical landscapes have powerful ‘real-world’ implications” (Wales, 2000: 6). For the north-east of England, for instance, Pearce suggests that outsiders’ perceptions are not based on direct experience, but from representations on TV (Pearce, 2009: 164). On a literary level Nottinghamshire enjoys a certain level of recognition nationally, with writers such as D.H. Lawrence and Alan Sillitoe, both of whom use authentic dialect extremely effectively in their work. Also, one of the great British folk heroes – Robin Hood – has well-known ties with Nottingham and Nottinghamshire but of the several film and TV versions produced none use local

1.7 Representation of the East Midlands in popular culture 

 11

speech or local places for colour as we suspect would be the case if the legend had links with e.g. London, Yorkshire, Cornwall or Scotland. Sport seems to be a different matter. By happy coincidence we write this volume shortly after Leicester City Football Club became English champions for the first time in their history. They secured the 2015–16 Barclays Premier League title despite starting the season rated 5,000–1 outsiders, prompting respected observers worldwide to wonder whether this was the most unexpected sporting triumph ever (e.g. Fordyce, 2016; Masters, 2016). This reaction is uncannily typical of the lack of wider recognition afforded the East Midlands generally. Granted, the East Midlands has the second smallest population (after the North East) of England’s nine regions (Office of National Statistics, 2011) and Leicester, Nottingham and Derby are statistically the 16th, 31st and 60th most populous of England’s 326 districts (Office of National Statistics, 2015), so one might expect the region’s sporting profile to be commensurate with this. However, the East Midlands makes a disproportionately impressive contribution to British sporting culture. If we consider football alone, then the East Midlands played a central role in the development of the world’s most popular game. Notts County, formed in 1862, is the oldest professional football club in the world (Anderson, 2014: 260) and, along with Derby County, became founder members of the Football League in 1888. Despite an unbroken presence in English professional football they have, however, never been champions of England, but their city neighbours, Nottingham Forest, are the only club anywhere to have won more European crowns (successive European Cups in 1978–9 and 1979–80) than domestic titles (Anderson, 2014: 256). Forest won their only league title in 1977–78 at the start of a period of unprecedented success under legendary manager Brian Clough, who also masterminded arch rivals Derby County to their first ever Football League Championship in 1971–72 (Anderson, 2014: 150). Despite managing clubs who enjoy a passionate rivalry, Clough is equally revered in both cities and his achievements and popularity were recognised when a stretch of the A52 dual carriageway between Derby and Nottingham was re-named ‘Brian Clough Way’ in 2005 (see Figure 1.2). The East Midlands has also produced several notable footballing individuals: Gary Lineker, born in Leicester in 1960, and now a well-known TV presenter, is England’s third highest goal scorer and in 1986 became the only British player to win FIFA’s Golden Boot award for scoring most goals at a World Cup Finals tournament (Montague, 2004: 322), while Viv Anderson, born in Nottingham in 1956, became in 1978 the first black player to represent England at senior international level (Montague, 2004: 289). The domestic championship of England’s other major professional team sport, cricket, is contested between professional clubs competing as counties. Prior to the 1974 governmental re-organisation of England’s administrative counties there

12 

 1 Geography, demography, and cultural factors

Figure 1.2: Brian Clough statue in Nottingham city centre (photo taken by Norma Braber-McKinney).

were 37 ‘historic counties’, but first-class cricket in England has never featured more than 18. Nonetheless, the three East Midlands counties are long-established participants: Nottinghamshire first appeared in the County Championship in 1890 and Leicestershire and Derbyshire five years later, and have subsequently competed continuously with varying degrees of success. Derbyshire claimed their only County Championship in 1936; Leicestershire have won 3 titles – most recently in 1998; and Nottinghamshire 5 – most recently in 2005 (Booth, 2013: 435). The County Ground at Trent Bridge, Nottingham, has regularly hosted Test matches (the most prestigious form of International cricket) since 1899, making it the fourth oldest international cricketing venue in England and tenth in the world (Booth, 2013: 1369). All three counties have produced numerous cricketers who have represented England and arguably one of cricket’s most famous incidents – the so-called ‘Bodyline’ Test series between Australia and England in 1932–33 – revolved around one of Nottinghamshire’s most famous cricketers, Harold Larwood. Larwood, a miner’s son from Nuncargate born in 1904, was one of the fastest bowlers of his generation and the main protagonist of a controversial tactic devised by England captain, Douglas Jardine, in which he and other England fast bowlers were encouraged to bowl a hostile type of delivery aimed at intimidating

1.7 Representation of the East Midlands in popular culture 

 13

opposing Australian batsmen (Montague, 2004: 219). The tactic caused a diplomatic incident and the ensuing controversy meant that Larwood, sadly, never again played for England but continued to excel for Nottinghamshire. It would be inappropriate to give a detailed account of every sport played in the East Midlands but it is nonetheless instructive to note the breadth and depth of the region’s sporting prowess both nationally and internationally. Table 1.1 below lists a selection of other notable achievements of professional and amateur teams based in the East Midlands and of individuals from the area. Sports vary in the nomenclature of domestic and international competitions (e.g. Super League, Premiership, Cup etc.) but we only record here references to English, British, European or World championships – i.e. significant triumphs. Column 4 notes key successes of the last fifteen years. Table 1.1: EM clubs and individuals who have won major sporting honours since 2000. Sport

Club/Individual

Basketball Leicester Riders (men)

Notable achievements

Most recent success

Britain’s oldest professional basketball club with 3x national championships

British Basketball League champions 2016–17 (British Basketball League 2016)

Nottingham Founder members of Wildcats (women) Women’s British Basketball League in 2014

Women’s British Basketball League winners 2016–17 (Women’s British Basketball League 2017)

Boxing

Carl Froch (b. Nottingham, 1977)

4x world titles

Retired 2015 as reigning World Boxing Association and International Boxing Federation super-middleweight champion (BBC 2015)

Golf

Lee Westwood (b. Worksop, 1973)

Participated in more Ryder Cup team victories (Europe vs. USA) than any other European golfer

Ranked no. 1 golfer in the world for 17 weeks in 2010 (Official World Golf Ranking 2016)

Hockey

Beeston (men)

3x national championships since 2000

Premier League winners 2013–14 (Beeston Hockey Club 2016)

Leicester (women) 5x national championships since 2000

Premier League winners 2011–12 (Fixtures Live 2016); EuroHockey Club Trophy winners 2013–14 (European Hockey Federation 2016) (continued)

14 

 1 Geography, demography, and cultural factors

Table 1.1 (continued) Sport

Notable achievements

Most recent success

Ice Hockey Nottingham Panthers

2x national championships

Challenge Cup winners 2012–13; Elite League PlayOffs Championship winners 2012–13 (Nottingham Panthers 2016)

Netball

Loughborough Lightning

Founder members of Netball Super League in 2005

Super League runners-up 2008 (Netball Super League 2017)

Rugby Union

Leicester Tigers

England’s most successful club with 10x national championships and 2x European championships

Premiership winners 2012–2013; Heineken Cup (Europe) winners 2001–2 (Leicester Tigers 2016)

Martin Johnson CBE (b. Warwickshire but grew up in Market Harborough)

Captained Leicester Tigers, England and British and Irish Lions

Captained England to Rugby World Cup victory 2003 (Montague 2004: 616)

Mark Selby (b. Leicester, 1983, ‘The Jester from Leicester’)

3x world championships; one of only nine players to complete Triple Crown of World Snooker Championship, UK Championship and Masters

World Snooker Championship winner 2017 (World Snooker 2017)

Former 800m freestyle British, Commonwealth, European, Olympic and World record holder

800m freestyle Gold and 400m freestyle Gold 2008 Beijing Olympics – first British swimmer to win more than one medal at single Olympic Games since 1908 (Wallechinsky and Loucky 2012: 1082)

Snooker

Club/Individual

Swimming Rebecca Adlington OBE (b. Mansfield, 1989)

Table 1.1. only includes teams and individual athletes, but it is worth noting that the East Midlands is also home to several famous sporting institutions. Loughborough University, renowned for its world-class sporting facilities and sports science teaching, has nurtured numerous international athletes. Its many illustrious alumnae include Lord Coe, former middle distance runner and world record holder, erstwhile Chairman of the British Olympic Association and current President of the International Association of Athletics Federations and Sir Clive Woodward, former international rugby union player who coached

1.8 Conclusion 

 15

England to victory in the 2003 Rugby Union World Cup. And finally, Donington Park in Leicestershire regularly hosts international motor sport events, including the Formula One European Grand Prix in 1993 and is a mainstay of the MotoGP circuit, the most prestigious class of motorcycle racing.

1.8 Conclusion Regardless of this sporting prowess it seems that the East Midlands does not form an important region in the mental maps of people outside the area and is seen as being “neither here nor there” (Wales, 2000: 7–8). It seems that the region does not have much cultural salience to the general public outside the East Midlands itself, either from direct experience or through representations on TV (Pearce 2009). The region lacks a “positive cultural identity” (Beckett 1988: 7) enjoyed by other areas of the country (such as Tyneside for example). This lack of salience was illustrated by Braber (2015a) in a study that showed that local students were unlikely to include the East Midlands when naming dialect areas around the UK. Furthermore, they were also inaccurate in identifying and correctly labelling East Midlands voices in dialect recognition tasks. Previous perceptual studies have shown that there are trends towards self-identification (Preston, 1989: 118) – so do these empty spaces in the East Midlands reflect something else? Preston (1989) comments that areas which lack popular cultural recognition may be harder to label in perceptual studies. Kerswill and Williams attribute this lack of recognition to the influence of the broadcast media (Kerswill and Willliams, 2002: 200), a theory supported by other studies which have shown that participants were only able to identify dialects that are often heard in the media (see Inoue, 1999: 162). The East Midlands appears to lack cultural salience, which in turn might explain why students made errors in recognising and categorising recorded voices from the area. From some of the maps students drew as part of this study we might infer that celebrities and media personalities from a region may aid recognition and there are comparatively few obvious high-profile figures from the East Midlands. Not only were students in the study unable to identify and label local varieties accurately, they also rated local speech negatively when discussing mind maps they had drawn as part of the exercise. This might be linked to the concepts of ‘claiming’ and ‘denial’ in that voices are not recognised as local if they are not perceived positively (see Braber 2016; Long, 1999: 220; Montgomery and Beal, 2011: 138; Williams et al., 1999: 356). Only two students out of around fifty made positive comments about the local varieties (categorising them as ‘friendly’ and ‘easy to understand’); a few commented that their local variety was ‘relatively neutral’; and the rest were overwhelmingly negative, classifying it as ‘common’,

16 

 1 Geography, demography, and cultural factors

‘plain’, ‘boring’, ‘slang’, ‘rough’, ‘horrible’, ‘nothing unique’, ‘not proper’, ‘chavvy’, ‘disgusting chavs’, ‘lazy’, and even claimed that they were ‘trying to get rid of it’. In conclusion, while we acknowledge that the concept of the East Midlands is problematic on multiple levels – geographically, culturally, linguistically – nevertheless, we hope our discussion of language in the region in the following chapters offers a long overdue description of local varieties of English.

1.9 Sources consulted for this volume The following description of the East Midlands varieties discussed in this monograph draws on several sources. Details of several previous studies and print publications are mentioned at 1.4 above and other titles are given in the relevant chapter, where appropriate, but we draw primarily on sound recordings held at the British Library (BL) and selected from three major collections that span the last sixty-five years. The Library holds digital copies of the entire audio archive of the Survey of English Dialects (BL shelfmark: C908), including recordings made between 1952 and 1965 in 14 rural localities in the East Midlands (five in Derbyshire, three in Nottinghamshire and eight in Leicestershire). These recordings consist of five to ten minutes of spontaneous conversation between SED fieldworker and informant and contain reflections on working life and domestic routine in the early part of the 20th century. The recordings supplement the extensive data contained in the relevant volumes of the SED Basic Material (Orton et al. 1962–1971) and we also refer here to evidence from inventories of the previously unpublished Incidental Material created by Robinson (University of Leeds 2003), now available online via the Leeds Archive of Vernacular Culture. Table  1.2 lists SED localities visited in Table 1.2: SED localities in the East Midlands. Derbyshire

Leicestershire

Nottinghamshire

Charlesworth (Db1) Bamford (Db2) Burbage (Db3) Youlgreave (Db4) Stonebroom (Db5) Kniveton (Db6) Sutton on the Hill (Db7)

Harby (Lei1) Hathern (Lei2) Seagrave (Lei3) Packington (Lei4) Markfield (Lei5) Great Dalby (Lei6) Sheepy Magna (Lei7) Goadby (Lei8) Carlton Curlieu (Lei9) Ullesthorpe (Lei10)

North Wheatley (Nt1) Cuckney (Nt2) South Clifton (Nt3) Oxton (Nt4)

1.9 Sources consulted for this volume 

 17

each of our three East Midlands counties covered in this description; table 1.3 gives details of extracts from corresponding sound recordings available at sounds.bl.uk. Table 1.3: SED recordings in the East Midlands with BL Shelfmarks. Location

BL Shelfmark

Content

Derbyshire, Charlesworth Derbyshire, Kniveton

C908/11 C5 C908/51 C7-10

Derbyshire, Stonebroom Derbyshire, Sutton on the Hill Derbyshire, Youlgreave Leicestershire, Goadby Leicestershire, Great Dalby Leicestershire, Harby Leicestershire, Hathern

C908/51 C6 C908/51 C8 C908/51 C5 C908/57 C1 C908/56 C9 C908/56 C5 C908/56 C6

Leicestershire, Markfield Leicestershire, Seagrave Leicestershire, Sheepy Magna

C908/56 C8 C908/56 C7 C908/56 C10

Leicestershire, Ullesthorpe Nottinghamshire, North Wheatley Nottinghamshire, Oxton Nottinghamshire, South Clifton

C908/57 C2 C908/52 C3 C908/52 C5 C908/52 C4

Working at Broadbottom Mill Anecdote about selling a car and a recent thunderstorm Coal mining Agricultural jobs Bad winters, timber and lead mining Sheep farming Local pastimes Sheep farming Working on a brickyard, memories of WW1 Zeppelin raids Sheep farming Making Stilton cheese Changing farming practices and effects on labour market Living and working conditions Running a smallholding and orchard Working with difficult horses Ferry services across the River Trent and local flooding

We also include previous research carried out by Robinson (British Library 2005) on the Millennium Memory Bank (BL shelfmark: C900), an archive of oral history recordings made by BBC Local Radio and the BL in 1998 and 1999. Although not chosen according to linguistic criteria, contributors to the Millennium Memory Bank (MMB) come from a wide range of social backgrounds and detailed biographical data compiled at time of interview enable linguists to make informed decisions about this collection as a source of reliable speech data. There are approximately 500 speakers from the East Midlands in the MMB archive as a whole, from which 23 are included in the Library’s online dialect archive at sounds.bl.uk and incorporated into our data set (six from BBC Radio Derby, eight from BBC Radio Nottingham and seven from BBC Radio Leicester). These 23 recordings consist of an hour long interview with a native of the nearest location within the MMB archive to each of the SED localities in the East Midlands plus additional speakers from Derby, Leicester and Nottingham; details are given in table 1.4 below.

18 

 1 Geography, demography, and cultural factors

Table 1.4: MMB recordings in the East Midlands. Location

Shelfmark

Content

Derbyshire, Coplow Dale Derbyshire, Crich Derbyshire, Derby Derbyshire, New Houghton

C900/14635 C900/03010 C900/03118 C900/12543

Derbyshire, Swadlincote

C900/03055

Derbyshire, Wirksworth Leicestershire, Barlestone Leicestershire, Hinckley Leicestershire, Leicester Leicestershire, Lutterworth Leicestershire, Quorn Leicestershire, Tilton on the Hill Leicestershire, Tonge Nottinghamshire, Arnold Nottinghamshire, Kimberley Nottinghamshire, Meden Vale Nottinghamshire, Nottingham

C900/03012 C900/09131 C900/09127 C900/09073 C900/09070 C900/09097 C900/09087 C900/03123 C900/12562 C900/12604 C900/12505 C900/12530

Farming life Working at a limestone quarry Working at Toyota car plant Loss of local wildlife due to modern food production methods Children’s errands in the past, mother’s home cooking Policies surrounding young offenders Working in a pub and career change Being a Leicester City football fan Working at a shoe factory Differences living in England and Finland Life as a youth worker Improving life for over 65s Watching football matches with father Blackberry picking and rabbit poaching Life as a pawnbroker’s assistant in the 1920s Retirement and holidays Work as a machinist and at John Player’s factory Memories of St Ann’s (an area of Nottingham) and Boots the Chemist Self-sufficiency during the war years in Bulwell (an area of Nottingham) Changes to local landscape due to farming practices How West Stockwith has changed in recent times

Nottinghamshire, Nottingham C900/12606 Nottinghamshire, Nottingham C900/12616 Nottinghamshire, Wellow

C900/12517

Nottinghamshire, West Stockwith

C900/12620

Table 1.5: BBC Voices recordings in the East Midlands. Derbyshire

Leicestershire

Nottinghamshire

Belper Heanor Swadlincote Two Dales

Arnesby Coalville Groby Leicester Leicester

Eastwood Kirkby-in-Ashfield Mansfield Nottingham Nottingham Nottingham

1.9 Sources consulted for this volume 

 19

Finally, we draw extensively on the BBC Voices Recordings (BL shelfmark: C1190), a set of group conversations made by BBC Local Radio in 2004 and 2005 according to an innovative sociolinguistic methodology developed by researchers at the University of Leeds (Upton, 2013), in which members of the public contributed their words in response to a set of 40 carefully chosen prompts and reflected on the language they used and encountered in their daily lives. 303 group conversations were recorded across the UK, including four made by BBC Radio Derby, six by BBC Radio Nottingham and 5 by BBC Radio Leicester; details are given in table 1.5.

2 Phonetics and phonology 2.1 Introduction This chapter focuses on the local accents of the three East Midlands counties of Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire and Leicestershire. Popular discourse about local accents in England invariably revolves around a deep-rooted sense of a northsouth divide with the Midlands consistently overlooked. Descriptions that acknowledge the Midlands as an equally distinctive speech community generally do so by way of reference to the West Midlands, particularly the city of Birmingham and/or the Black Country – the former industrial area to the immediate north and west of Birmingham. Such binary and/or three-way models are perhaps understandable if one considers the relative size of  –  and, therefore, greater number of speakers from  –  London in the south, Birmingham in the Midlands and the sprawling northern conurbations of Greater Manchester, Merseyside, Leeds-Bradford and Tyneside and, consequently, the higher profile and greater public recognition accents in these areas enjoy. Perhaps more surprisingly, though, this same neglect of local pronunciation patterns in the East Midlands is mirrored in contemporary academic descriptions, even those which seek to provide comprehensive coverage of regional speech in the UK. Kortmann and Upton (2008), for instance, features a chapter on the phonology of each of England’s nine administrative Government Office Regions  –  including the West Midlands  –  but the East Midlands is curiously absent. Wells discusses the Midlands within a section on the north of England (1982: 349–370), noting that the East Midlands “includes the large cities of Leicester and Nottingham, whose local accents are similar to those of the middle north” and identifying “a north-western transition area including […] Derby and Stokeon-Trent” (1982:350). This, then, would seem to imply Derby accents more closely resemble those of Stoke-on-Trent (29 miles apart and linked circuitously via the A50 and by an hourly train service of 50 minutes’ duration) than Nottingham (13 miles apart and linked directly via the A52 and by a half-hourly 20 minute train journey). It also suggests that Nottingham accents are more akin to those of Leicester (22 miles apart and linked via the M1 and by a half-hourly train service of 30 minutes’ duration) and the ‘middle north’, which is defined as the Pennine triangle with Leeds at its northern apex and Manchester and Sheffield at its south-western and south-eastern corners respectively (1982: 349). Wells includes a vowel table for Birmingham and for Leeds and extended sub-sections on speech in Merseyside and Tyneside, but other than the general observation cited above there is only very occasional reference to speech varieties in the East Midlands. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781501502354-002

2.1 Introduction 

 21

This is not intended as a criticism of these two publications, both of which are invaluable reference points for linguists undertaking present-day variationist studies; rather it reflects the fact that post-SED research data on the East Midlands is frustratingly elusive. Of other sources, Docherty and Foulkes present an extremely useful account of speech in Derby (1999: 47–71), summarising it as a “northern variety […] with numerous similarities to the accent of Sheffield” (1999: 48), a view that tallies more accurately with our data than with Wells’ comparison with Stoke-on-Trent. Hughes et al. (2005: 91–94) includes analysis of a speaker from Ashby-de-laZouch whom they consider sufficiently representative, given his age and social profile, of speech in Leicester. This is a welcome addition to earlier editions, especially as the commentary identifies features that distinguish his speech from that of the corresponding speaker chosen to exemplify a West Midlands accent (Walsall). Flynn (2007, 2010) focuses specifically on sociophonetic variation in Nottingham, while Braber and Flynn (2015) examine Nottingham and use perceptual data alongside phonological variation. There are, in addition, a small number of informative publications dedicated to individual counties, the most notable of which are Evans (1881) for Leicestershire and Wright (1975, 1979) for Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire respectively. Scollins and Titford (2000) focus primarily on the dialect of Ilkeston, but reassuringly include ‘East Midlands’ in the sub-title and this, presumably, implies that the authors, as locals, place Ilkeston and Derbyshire firmly in the context of a wider East Midlands dialect area. More recently Sheffield publisher Bradwell has commissioned a new series of slim dialect volumes written by local authors with an intention to provide nationwide coverage arranged by county and/or key urban area. Relevant to this discussion are Smith (2013) for Derbyshire, Braber (2015b) for Nottinghamshire and Davies (2015) for Leicestershire. Although these are principally intended for non-specialist audiences, as an SED fieldworker and academic linguist Wright’s work in particular draws on empirical research, albeit SED data collected in the 1950s. Both Evans, and Scollins and Titford include helpful observations on pronunciation features, but the latter is arguably more useful as a record of the lexis of specific speech domains such as mining, agriculture and childhood. The Bradwell volumes also privilege dialect vocabulary, but include several forms that offer insight into local pronunciations (see Chapter 4 for more detailed information). The following description draws on these sources, but relies principally on the BL sound recordings listed at 1.9 above. SED and MMB audio files available at sounds.bl.uk are accompanied by PDF files that provide an overview of noteworthy pronunciation features in a given location and researchers for the British Library’s Voices of the UK (VoUK) project (Robinson et al. 2013) created detailed linguistic descriptions of BBC Voices Recordings that contain extensive phonetic

22 

 2 Phonetics and phonology

and phonological data on each recording. Details of all the recordings consulted and links to online access to the audio files and linguistic descriptions are given in the bibliography. This account, then, gives an overview of speech in the East Midlands based on previous descriptions and on auditory analyses of historic and present-day sound recordings with local speakers. Deviating slightly from conventional academic practice we also make occasional reference to the speech of well-known celebrities and media figures from the East Midlands. A key motivation for this book is a desire to raise awareness of speech in the region and we sense this might assist in anchoring speech in the East Midlands more firmly in the public imagination. As the biggest cities in the region, we offer greater detail on the established local accents in Derby, Leicester and Nottingham as data from these speech communities are more widely available. Nonetheless, we are aware we do not present a comprehensive picture of accent diversity in each city, nor of the region as a whole, and are particularly conscious that research is long overdue on the speech of recent migrant communities, particularly the strong British Asian presence in Leicester and Derby and the British Caribbean community in Nottingham, of which we offer only brief observations here. Where data are available we also comment on noteworthy accent features in smaller towns and in rural areas across the region and, more especially, on important distinctions within the East Midlands as a whole. As a previously overlooked dialect region too often dismissed as a transition area between more extensively documented ‘northern’ and ‘southern’ varieties, we hope to show how this transition manifests itself in terms of features that point northwards or southwards, but equally importantly to show how speech differs from the West Midlands – a very important distinction locally – and how it exhibits uniquely East Midland features. We start with a description of vowel realisations, based on Wells’ lexical sets (1982: 127–167), before considering consonantal variation and significant connected speech processes and morpho-phonological phenomena.

2.2 Vowels 2.2.1 Short vowels trap & bath [a]  Arguably the most salient pronunciation feature in England is the distinction between speakers in the north who generally pronounce the vowel in words such as laugh, grass and dance with a short, front vowel, [a], and those in the south,

2.2 Vowels 

 23

who use a long open vowel of the type, [ɑː ~ aː]. Thus native speakers of British English invariably place a person who pronounces maths to rhyme with baths or crass to rhyme with class as coming from somewhere north of an intangible ‘north-south’ divide. Maps deriving from SED data show the isogloss for bath runs just to the south of the East Midlands (Upton and Widdowson 1999: 18), confirming the trap-bath split (Wells 1982: 232–234) that characterises RP and southern English did not apply to local speech in Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire or Leicestershire in the 1950s. Indeed this remains true today with [a] the dominant form for both sets in the East Midlands, giving realisations such as cat [kat] and cast [kast] and confirming that words such as ant [ant] and plant [plant] are perfect rhymes locally. This is endorsed by Docherty and Foulkes for Derby (1999: 49) and Hughes et al. for Leicester (2005: 91) and overwhelmingly supported by our data, albeit with the few exceptions noted below. We also agree with Docherty and Foulkes’ observation (1999: 49) that master and plaster are realised with [a] in the East Midlands, in contrast to Yorkshire, Lancashire and the North East – areas where British Library recordings show many speakers favour a realisation with [aː  ~ ɑː] (see also Beal et al. 2012: 36). A pronunciation of bath with [a] is favoured by all the speakers in our data with one exception, a female sixth-form student recorded in Leicester (C1190/20/04) who consistently uses [ɑː]. Recorded as one of eight students from a mixture of social and ethnic backgrounds in Leicester – the other seven all consistently use [a] – she comments that she is aware she is almost unique among her peers in using [ɑː]. Perhaps, then, this reflects the social significance of [ɑː] and its clear association with Received Pronunciation (RP), which allows it to be used as a key social marker – subconsciously or otherwise – by speakers anywhere in England. In this regard it is instructive to note that Clark and Asprey (2013: 36–40) devote considerable space to a discussion of the status of trap-bath in the West Midlands. They found significant variation between [a] and [ɑː] for bath and offer conflicting assessments, from different sources, of the direction of change. They also report awareness among the general public that Birmingham straddles this key isogloss and, moreover, of the social prestige enjoyed locally by [ɑː]. There is also a fascinating discussion in the BBC Voices Recording in Wilmcote, Warwickshire (C1190/01/05), where a speaker describes how her daughter favours the ‘southern’ variety, [ɑː], in conversations within the family, but apparently feels under pressure in other social situations, such as among school friends, to adopt the ‘northern’ variety, [a]. As our data shows almost universal preference for [a] we are inclined to suggest that the East Midlands remains much more firmly aligned with the ‘northern’ variant, and, along with greater consistency in footstrut realisations (see below), is arguably more resistant to change in these two key pronunciation markers than its near neighbour, the West Midlands.

24 

 2 Phonetics and phonology

We can provide useful anecdotal support for this view. As noted above, the situation in England is complicated by the fact that because bath with [ɑː] is the RP variant it has a presence in speech communities everywhere, especially among the middle classes. Interestingly, however, Geoff Hoon and Richard Bacon – two high-profile, middle-class figures from the East Midlands whose speech is virtually indistinguishable from RP in most aspects – both favour a pronunciation of bath with [a]. TV and radio presenter Richard Bacon was born in Mansfield in 1975 and attended Worksop College prior to a broadcasting career, to date predominantly at the BBC. In the opening sequence of his afternoon radio show he refers to “a fancy villa in France” [fɹans] and explains he has invited studio guests to “answer [ansə] questions” in a mock TV debate in which they have been asked to change political allegiance so that “the Conservative is playing the Liberal Democrat for example” [fəɹ ɛgzampɫ̩] (Richard Bacon 2010). Geoff Hoon was born in Derby in 1953 and educated at Nottingham High School and Cambridge University before serving as a Labour MP and Cabinet Minister. In a 2010 radio interview he comments that he was unaware a previous discussion had been “recorded for broadcast” [bɹɔːdkast], reflects on what he will do in the “time after [aftə] I leave parliament” and gives details of what was said “in answer [ansə] to conversations” (BBC Radio 5 Live 2010). Both speakers attended prestigious independent schools (and, in the case of Geoff Hoon, an elite university) and subsequently entered professions where RP both dominates and is, potentially, advantageous so it is striking that both consistently use [a] for bath, perhaps indicating that for East Midlanders its prestige transcends class barriers – as is certainly the case in much of the north of England, but apparently not so clearly in the West Midlands. A sample of two speakers is, of course, by no means comprehensive, but nonetheless indicative we think of a comparatively strong preference for bath with [a] among middle-class East Midlanders. The precise situation across the whole of the East Midllands is extremely difficult to define with absolute confidence, but the direction of change nationally – albeit extremely gradual in terms of geographical diffusion from south to north – is historically from [a] to [aː] to [ɑː] – with the potential for diffusion along a social scale as well as geographically. Evidence from contemporary British Library recordings suggests that the [ɑː] variant is making inroads into places like Northamptonshire to the south of our region. Here the traditional [aː] recorded in all the SED localities for GRASS (II.9.1) and in corresponding sound recordings is still heard among older speakers in present-day sound recordings, but a BBC Voices Recording with local students at Northampton College (C1190/25/04) shows intra- and inter-speaker variation between [aː ~ a ~ ɑː]. It is perhaps not surprising, then, that the only evidence of [ɑː] in our data is at the southern end of the region and it is certainly possible that [ɑː] is more evident in south Leicestershire areas along the border with Warwickshire and Northamptonshire.

2.2 Vowels 

 25

There is evidence that a small set of words in both the trap and bath sets were historically realised with [ɛ] in East Midland dialects. SED fieldwork records GRASS (II.9.1) as [gɹɛs] and CATCH (IX.3.8) as [kɛʧ] throughout Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire, for instance, and there are examples in SED sound recordings of catch as [kɛʧ] in Sutton-on-the Hill (C908/51 C8), dam as [dɛm] in South Clifton (C908/52 C4), grass as [gɹɛs] in Oxton (C908/52 C5) and slack as [slɛk] in Hathern (C908/56 C6), although as this is a term used by miners  –  slack [= ‘small or refuse coal’]  –  it could be interpreted as the lexicalised form, sleck. The fieldworker’s notebook for Great Dalby includes a note of hance (= ‘earnest-money’, i.e. payment received by hired worker to confirm employment) as [ɛns mʊnɪ] in the Incidental Material (Playford 1956). The SED Basic Material (IX.6.1) also records HAVE as [ɛv], HAS as [ɛz] and HAD as [ɛd] (and equivalent dialectal forms hae as [ɛ] and han as [ɛn] (see chapter 3 below for more detailed discussion of verbs) for all sites in Nottinghamshire and in some localities in Derbyshire and Leicestershire. Recorded examples can also be heard in North Wheatley, Nottinghamshire (C908/52 C3) and in Leicestershire in Markfield (C908/56 C8), Great Dalby (C908/56 C9), Sheepy Magna (C908/56 C10) and Ullesthorpe (C908/57 C2). Although we consider this to be a recessive feature, there are examples in more recent sound recordings, albeit all from speakers born in the 1940s or earlier. Notable examples include you can’t hae [ɛ] somebody doing the national news speaking like us recorded in Mansfield (C1190/26/04); swimming in the brook as we used dam up [dɛm ʊp], he comes along and asked [ɛst] what the trouble were, I’d never had [ɛd] a cob until I were married and I were having [ɛvɪn] my snap (= ‘packed lunch, mid-morning snack’) – all recorded in Swadlincote (C1190/12/05); and we used to block it up to catch [kɛʧ] fish recorded in Heanor (C1190/12/04). Older dialectal pronunciations of trap with [ɒ] continue to survive, especially preceding a nasal – e.g. MAN (VIII.1.6) is recorded as [mɒn] in the SED Basic Material in several sites in Derbyshire and in the sound recording in Kniveton (C908/51 C9–10), which also includes several examples with can and one token with laugh: if a man [mɒn] ain’t ne’er drunk then I think he ought be shouldn’t you; hoo can [kɒn] make wine (i.e. ‘she can make wine’); and if thee startest and does a lot of work folks laugh [lɒf] at thee. Such pronunciations are extremely rare nowadays but examples of pit bank [pɪt bɒŋk], hammer [ɒmə], rat-man [ɹɒtmɒn] and old man [ɛʊd mɒn] (= ‘father’) from ex-miners in Swadlincote (C1190/12/05) and caggy [kɒgɪ] (= ‘left-handed’) in Eastwood (C1190/26/01) show they still occur among older dialect speakers. An example in Nottingham (C1190/26/02) of grandma as [gɹɒmːɒː] from a speaker born in the 1950s suggests this historic reflex might survive among younger speakers in the East Midlands, albeit restricted to grandma and its counterpart grandpa.

26 

 2 Phonetics and phonology

strut & foot [ʊ] Just as we are able to predict with a degree of confidence a speaker’s rough geographic background by their use of [a] in the bath set, most speakers in approximately the same area tend not to distinguish between words in the foot and strut sets. Words in these two sets are most commonly pronounced with a lax, close, back, rounded vowel, [ʊ], throughout the East Midlands, although there are areas outlined below where this gives way for words in the strut set only to an open-mid, back, unrounded vowel, [ʌ], the most common realisation in local accents in the south of England. The picture is, of course, further complicated by the fact that [ʌ], as the RP variant, is a nationally prestigious form and thus potentially an aspirational target for middle-class speakers everywhere in England. As with the lengthening of bath to [ɑː], the social prestige of strut with [ʌ] and continued dialect contact resulting from migration has meant that this pronunciation has been diffusing northwards as a result of a sound change known as the foot-strut split that was well-established in southern dialects by the 17th century (Wells 1982: 196–199). An isogloss for strut plotted using SED data follows a similar course but slightly to the south of the corresponding isogloss for bath (Upton and Widdowson 1999: 26), showing that [ʊ] was the dominant realisation in the East Midlands in the 1950s. Due to this gradual transition from [ʌ] to [ʊ] as one moves northwards, in areas where the two forms compete individual speakers may vary between one variant and the other (as is the case with bath), but more pertinently, one also encounters realisations with [ə] or [ɤ] that represent a phonetic compromise between the two extremes  –  pronunciations labelled a ‘fudge’ by Chambers and Trudgill (1998: 110). Wells (1986: 352) also notes that [ə] is a common realisation in what he terms ‘northern Near RP’ and thus presumably an articulation that results from attempts by middle-class speakers to avoid the more obviously regional [ʊ], without quite being able to produce an authentic version of the target, [ʌ]. Clark and Asprey (2013: 40–41) report considerable evidence of this mixing and fudging in their West Midlands data and in previous studies of speech in Birmingham, but as with bath our data shows much greater conformity within the foot and strut sets for the East Midlands, with most speakers making no distinction between the two sets so that stood [stʊd] is homophonous with stud [stʊd] and bush [bʊʃ] rhymes with gush [gʊʃ]. Docherty and Foulkes (1999: 48–49) record strut and foot with [ʊ] in Derby, but note this ‘[m]ay appear as [ə] in more self-conscious speech styles, particularly by females’, although it is unclear whether the schwa variant occurs in both sets or, as we presume, more commonly with strut words. Hughes et al. (2005: 91) confirm ‘no distinction between pairs of words like put and putt: they both have [ʊ]’ in Leicester and SED data records BUTTER (V.5.4) and FOOT (VI.10.1) with [ʊ] for all sites in Derbyshire, Leicestershire and Nottinghamshire

2.2 Vowels 

 27

and for all foot and strut tokens in the corresponding sound recordings, other than in a restricted set of lexical items noted below. All the speakers in our corpus of present-day recordings from Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire consistently use [ʊ] in both sets. This is also the picture for most of our speakers in Leicestershire, but there are examples of strut with [ʊ ~ ə] from a female speaker in Tilton-on-the-Hill (C900/09087) and a male speaker in Hinckley (C900/09127), close to the border with Warwickshire. The eight sixth-form students recorded in Leicester (C1190/20/04) show quite marked variation in the strut set with some speakers favouring [ʊ], others [ʌ ~ ə] and/or [ʊ ~ ə] and one speaker consistently using [ʌ]. This is also the only recording in our corpus with examples of the type of foot-fronting widely reported among younger speakers in south east England (Torgersen 2002) as some of the female participants occasionally produce pronunciations such as good [gɵd]. Speakers in the south of England and indeed RP speakers ascribe one, once, none and nothing to the strut set, giving for instance one /wʌn/ and nothing /nʌθɪŋ/. One might therefore predict that speakers who use [ʊ] for the strut set extend this usage to the one subset, but speakers in the East Midlands share the same tendency as northerners to use an open, back, rounded [ɒ], particularly on one and none, although there is greater variation on once and nothing. Newbrook (1999: 95) notes that on the Wirral, the variant in [ɒ] is very resistant to RP influence and this seems to apply across the whole of the East Midlands with examples of one as [wɒn] in several SED sound recordings and most modern recordings with one exception – the recording with young speakers in Leicester (C1190/20/04) in which all four possible variants, [wɒn, wʊn, wʌn, wən] occur. The use of a weak schwa vowel and deletion of initial /w/ when one receives little prominent stress following an adjective, giving pronunciations such as good ones [gʊdn̩z, gʊdənz] and big ones [bɪgənz], is also clearly permissible in the East Midlands, although its greater frequency in SED sound recordings suggests it is perhaps less common now than previously. The SED Basic Material shows pronunciations of NONE (VII.1.18) with [ɒ > ʊ > ʊə] for Derbyshire, [ɒ > ʊə] for Nottinghamshire and [ʊ > ɒ] for Leicestershire. As a low-frequency word there are very few tokens in our audio data but none [nɒn] occurs in several SED sound recordings and in a modern recording in Swadlincote (C1190/12/05) and there is one present-day example of none [nʊn] in Leicester (C1190/20/02) but none of the broader dialectal [nʊən]. The picture for once is also mixed, but [wʊns] is considerably more common than [wɒns] both in our SED and present-day audio data. Although the final consonant in nothing can, of course, vary (see consonants below), the initial vowel is most commonly [ʊ] with several examples in SED sound recordings and in present-day recordings in Two Dales (C1190/12/03), Heanor (C1190/12/04), Swadlincote (C1190/12/05) and Nottingham (C1190/26/05) and one token with

28 

 2 Phonetics and phonology

[ɒ] in Nottingham (C1190/26/05) and with [ə] in Leicester (C1190/20/04). Thus, although we do not have sufficient examples of each item from every location to make a definitive judgement, it would appear that East Midlanders show a strong preference for one and none with [ɒ], but once and nothing with [ʊ]. Other lexically restricted pronunciations within the strut set in our data include instances of come(s) as [kɒm(z)] in a recording with ex-miners in Coalville (C1190/20/05) – also noted once in the SED Basic Material in Hathern (IX.3.4); tongue as [tɒŋ] in the MMB recording in Leicester (C900/09073), among as [əmɒŋst] in Nottingham (C1190/26/05) and one example of such as [sɪʧ] in Stonebroom (C908/51 C6). Perhaps surprisingly this latter pronunciation appears in several East Midland localities in the SED Basic Material (VIII.9.7) but we consider it extremely rare other than perhaps among older speakers nowadays. An apparently uniquely East Midland pronunciation feature is the survival of a dialectal pronunciation of mother and bugger with [ɒ], also confirmed by Docherty and Foulkes for Derby (1999: 49). SED Basic Material reports MOTHER (VIII.1.1) with [ɒ] for all sites in Derbyshire, and several sites in Nottinghamshire and Leicestershire, and there are spontaneous examples in sound recordings in Kniveton (C908/51 C9–10), Oxton (C908/52 C5), Goadby (C908/57 C1) and Ullesthorpe (C908/57 C2). The BBC Voices survey also includes MOTHER as a prompt word and pronunciations with [ɒ] were supplied in Heanor (C1190/12/04), Swadlincote (C1190/12/05) and Coalville (C1190/20/05) and there is, in addition, a spontaneous example from an MMB speaker in Swadlincote (C900/03055). As all these tokens are supplied by older speakers we cannot say whether it continues to be used by younger speakers in the area, but as a high frequency and extremely personalised term it is certainly possible. An analogous pronunciation of bugger as [bɒgə] is volunteered by speakers in two separate BBC Voices Recordings in Nottingham as a phrase they associate strongly with their childhood in the 1960s in the form of a mild parental rebuke: I’ll bat your tab you little bugger [bɒgə] when you come in (C1190/26/02) and you get it all the time, don’t you, you know if you do summat naughty when you’re little – ‘eh, you little bugger’ [bɒgə] (C1190/26/05). Interestingly this second example is from a first-generation British Kittitian who comments her parents (born in St Kitts) did not use the phrase but she heard it from friends’ and neighbours’ parents and now uses it herself. Both speakers consider it a Nottingham dialect word bogger, a spelling confirmed in Green (2010) and a form that occurs repeatedly in Alan Sillitoe’s ‘Saturday Night and Sunday Morning’, set in Nottingham in the 1950s: you little bogger (Sillitoe 1958: 20), boggerlugs (Sillitoe 1958: 65), bogger off (Sillitoe 1958: 161) and jealous be boggered (Sillitoe, 1958: 200), suggesting this pronunciation perhaps endures as it is so clearly a non-standard term with strong local and personal associations.

2.2 Vowels 

 29

Wells (1986: 362) notes that words in the foot set ending orthographically in ‘retain a historical long vowel in much of the north’ noting that book as /buːk/ ‘although still widespread’ appears to be ‘recessive in the face of standard /ʊ/ forms’. This certainly included local speech in the East Midlands in the 1950s with LOOK (VIII.2.3) recorded in the SED Basic Material as a long vowel in Derbyshire with a variety of localised realisations, in one site in Nottinghamshire as [lʊuːk] and in several sites in Leicestershire as [lʉːk], a pronunciation which is also captured spontaneously in sound recordings in Harby (C908/56 C5) and Hathern (C908/56 C6). Present-day British Library recordings suggest this persists even among young speakers in some parts of the north west Midlands, notably the Potteries, but there are only a handful of examples in our data from the East Midlands, all in Derbyshire where took can be heard as [tʉːk] in a recording in Coplow Dale (C1190/14635), looks as [luːks] in Wirksworth (C1190/03012) and book as [bʊuːk] in Heanor (C1190/12/04) and Swadlincote (C1190/12/05). This means, then, that some speakers in some parts of the East Midlands may maintain a two-way distinction between luck /lʊk/ and look~Luke /luːk/, while for most there is no distinction between buck [bʊk] and book [bʊk] nor between tuck [tʊk] and took [tʊk] (cf. RP buck [bʌk] vs. book [bʊk], tuck [tʌk] vs. took [tʊk]). Work currently in progress (by Braber and Flynn) examines the use of foot and strut vowels in older and younger speakers from around the East Midlands to investigate whether these speakers use either the ‘northern’ or ‘southern’ realisation or a ‘mixed’ or ‘fudged’ variant which falls between the two. Initial findings suggest that, as in northern varieties, strut is not distinct from foot in the region, however, younger speakers may exhibit fronting and/or lowering of both strut and foot to a position in vowel space phonetically intermediate between [ə] and [ʊ]. lot & cloth [ɒ]  As with trap-bath there is scant evidence of the lot-cloth split (Wells 1986: 204) having had any impact on speech in the East Midlands, so an open, back, rounded vowel, [ɒ], is pretty universal for words in these two sets, as is increasingly the case across much of England. Thus pairs such as cop /kɒp/ and cough /kɒf/ or lot /lɒt/ and lost /lɒst/ share the same vowel. SED Basic Material confirms HOT (V.6.8) and CROSS (VIII.5.14) with [ɒ] for all localities, although the entry for Charlesworth, Derbyshire includes two spontaneous examples of across as [əkɹɔːs]. Given that cloth with [ɔː] was until relatively recently a conservative variant in RP, it is possible that older middle-class speakers in the area maintain a distinction, but given that this pronunciation is recessive in modern RP it is likely to be extremely rare. There are very few examples of lexical variation within the two sets, although SED Basic Material includes examples of DOG (III.3.1) with [ʊ] in two sites in Derbyshire and a handful of sites in Leicestershire and in the

30 

 2 Phonetics and phonology

sound recording in Markfield (C908/56 C8). Words beginning orthographically with are nowadays most commonly realised with [ɒ], although historic pronunciations of WASP (IV.8.7) with [a] are recorded in the SED Basic Material for all sites in Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire and in the northern localities in Leicestershire and WASH (V.9.5) with [ɛ] in Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire but not in Leicestershire. Such broad dialectal pronunciations are considered recessive in the East Midlands today, although there is one example in a present-day recording in Mansfield (C1190/26/04): I’m going to have a quick wash [wɛʃ] and put a clean shirt on. Clark and Asprey (2013: 42–43) note a preference in broad West Midland dialect for words ending orthographically in such as wrong and strong to be realised with [ʊ]. SED Basic Material records [ʊ] for WRONG (IX.7.1) in a handful of localities in Derbyshire and [ɒ] throughout Nottinghamshire and Leicestershire, but as we have no evidence of [ʊ] in our present-day data we would suggest this is now more likely to be a more clear-cut marker between West and East Midlands dialects. The only other examples of divergence from [ɒ] are one example of scones as [skɔʊnz] in Meden Vale (C900/12505) and one instance of posh as [pəʊʃ] in Leicester (C1190/20/02). Although interesting in themselves, neither is considered dialectally significant: scone is known to vary between the LOT and GOAT sets in British English and is indeed the subject of passionate popular debate over the relative merits of each variant. Actual geolinguistic or sociolinguistic motivation behind individual speaker choice is difficult to establish definitively, although Wells (2008: 719) reports a 65% preference among British English speakers for a rhyme with gone and a recent Cambridge University survey suggests this is the dominant form in the north of the UK, while elsewhere the picture is more mixed (McKie, 2017). Posh with /əʊ/, on the other hand, is a common light-hearted pronunciation categorised by the Oxford English Dictionary (online, OED) as ‘a supposedly refined way of saying the word’ and by Wells (2008: 630) as a “jocular form”. kit [ɪ]  For words in this set there is little divergence within England from an open-mid, front lax vowel, [ɪ], which is the realisation in all our audio data from the East Midlands. It is worth stressing, however, that this therefore constitutes one of several important local distinctions between speech in the East and West Midlands, where Clark and Asprey (2013: 34) report the widespread use of [i], especially in stressed environments, and note Thorne’s observation that this pronunciation is a salient feature of a Birmingham accent “often mocked by outsiders” (Thorne 2003: 90). Historically, mister was pronounced locally with [ɛ] and the dialectal variant gie [= ‘to give’] allows a number of present and past tense forms. SED Basic Material

2.2 Vowels 

 31

records MISTER (VIII.2.3) with [ɛ] in 5 sites in Derbyshire, every site in Nottinghamshire and in several localities in Leicestershire (there is even one token of Mrs as [mɛsɪz] in Hathern). Although we consider this pronunciation to be recessive we suspect it survives in folk memory as a playful form and even crops up spontaneously among older speakers in Heanor (C1190/12/04) when telling anecdotes about local characters from the past – e.g. Mr Groom [mɛstə gɹuːm] and Mr Jones [mɛstə ʤəʊnz] – and in Belper (C1190/12/01) – mister’s [mɛstəz] gone to the pub. There is a more detailed discussion of verb forms in chapter 3 below, but gie certainly still survives in local dialects and in informal contexts more broadly. SED Basic Material (IX.8.2) shows variation between give [gɪv] and gie (generally realised as [gɪ] pre-consonantally and [giː] pre-vocalically) and an almost universal preference for gi’en [gɛn] as the past form (IX.8.3). Spontaneous examples of gi’en [gɛn] can be heard in SED sound recordings in Kniveton (C908/51 C7–C9), North Wheatley (C908/52 C3), Oxton (C908/52 C5), Harby (C908/56 C5), Hathern (C908/56 C6) and Markfield (C908/56 C8). The more mainstream give is certainly the most common form in the East Midlands today but there is sufficient evidence to assume gie persists for some speakers with examples such as I’d gie [giː] her one in Mansfield (C1190/26/04); if his mam were around and she’d heard him then she would’ve gi’en [gɛn] him a clout round the ear-hole in Heanor (C1190/12/04); my mam’s gi’en [gɛn] me this for some fags in Swadlincote (C1190/12/05); we’ll gie [gɪ] you five pence for cutting that in Leicester (C900/09073); and I haven’t gi’en [gɛn] him owt (= ‘anything’), also in Leicester (C1190/20/02). dress [ɛ]  In common with the vast majority of accents in England, speakers in the East Midlands use an open-mid, front, unrounded vowel, [ɛ], for words in this set and, as with kit, there is very little deviation. The SED Basic Material shows [ɪ] occurred across the region in a restricted set of words  –  more frequently with forms derived from such as everything, NEVER (VII.8.19) etc. than words like GET (VI.2.2), although YES (VIII.8.13) as [jɪs] is extremely common in Leicestershire (the data for Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire is less helpful here as most informants supplied the lexical variant, aye, in response to this prompt). There are a handful of examples of [ɪ] in SED sound recordings, including engines [ɪnʤənz] in Charlesworth (C908/11 C5), every [ɪvɹɪ] in Kniveton (C908/51 C7), yes [jɪs] in South Clifton (C908/52 C4) and never [nɪvə] in Goadby (C908/57 C1) and Ullesthorpe (C908/57 C2) and just three tokens in our modern recordings (all from older speakers): engine [ɪnʤɪn] in Heanor (C1190/12/04), engine [ɪnʤən] in Tonge (C900/03123) and every [ɪvɹi] in Swadlincote (C1190/12/05). Some dialects in the north of England show a preference for a weak vowel where DRESS precedes the semi-vowel /r/  –  witness, for instance, the local

32 

 2 Phonetics and phonology

pronunciation for the Lancashire town of Bury [bəɹɪ]. SED Basic Material entries for VERY (VIII.3.2) show only two instances of [vəɹɪ] in the East Midlands – in Oxton and Youlgreave. It is difficult to know whether this realisation might once have been more widespread in Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire, however, as several informants’ gave the lexical variant right (assigned locally to the fleece and/or face sets) but all ten localities in Leicestershire include examples of very exclusively with [ɛ]. A single example of this phenomenon in our audio data – derelict as [dəɹəlɛkt] in West Stockwith (C900/12620) – suggests it might persist among older speakers in the far north of the region, but we consider both NEVER with [ɪ] and VERY with [ə] as increasingly rare in the East Midlands.

2.2.2 Long vowels palm & start [ɑː ~ ɒː > aː]  The loss of rhoticity that characterises speech across much of England has resulted in the merger of the palm and start sets in the East Midlands as elsewhere (Wells 1982: 218), such that words like balm and farm are perfect rhymes. Charlesworth in the extreme north west of the region is the only site where consistent r-colouring was recorded by SED fieldworkers, with several examples also occurring in the corresponding sound recording (C908/11 C5), including: you want start [sta˞ːt] early with that job. Actual vowel quality for these two sets is, though, less uniform across the East Midlands than in other areas with three alternatives available locally – an open, front, unrounded vowel, [aː], that is typical of dialect areas to the immediate north; an RP-like [ɑː] that is the dominant form in the south of England; and in the central area that includes the cities of Derby, Nottingham and Leicester a fully back vowel, often with an element of lip-rounding, [ɒː], is both extremely common and highly distinctive. SED Basic Material suggests that the ‘northern’ variant was the established form throughout rural East Midlands until relatively recently with entries for PALM (VI.7.5) and BARN (I.1.11) showing [aː] in every locality bar Packington in Leicestershire, which has [ɑː]. This is corroborated by SED sound recordings which feature realisations exclusively with [aː] across the whole region. The greater presence nowadays of [ɑː] can probably be attributed to continued exposure to RP norms and increased contact with dialects to the south, but the lack of comparable data from towns and cities concurrent with SED fieldwork makes it difficult to know whether the localised form, [ɒː], is a very recent innovation or whether it has diffused from established dialects in one or all three of the East Midland’s largest urban centres. Docherty and Foulkes (1999: 49) report speakers in Derby favour ‘overwhelmingly [ɑː] or slightly rounded [ɒː]’ and Hughes et al. (2005: 91) concur that in Leicester the

2.2 Vowels 

 33

phoneme /ɑː/ is ‘quite back and often somewhat rounded at [ɑ̧ː]’. Given that both these descriptions represent closer phonetic proximity to [ɑː] than to [aː], it is possible to propose that the apparent rise of [ɑː ~ ɒː] over [aː] in the East Midlands is prompted by the diffusion of supra-local, as well as external and/or nationally prestigious variants, although closer investigation would be needed to confirm this. As the local realisation of words in the price set (see price below) in broad dialect in some parts of this area is [ɑː ~ ɑːɪ], pairs such as bark [bɑːk ~ bɒːk] and bike [bɑːk ~ bɑːɪk] or hard [hɑːd ~ hɒːd] and hide [hɑːd ~ hɑːɪd] can often sound extremely similar and are only distinguished by an extremely brief offglide or very slight lip-rounding. This is not true in the Potteries, where price is generally [aːɪ], but is certainly characteristic of speech in the Peak District and in towns like Ashbourne, in Derbyshire. Our present-day recordings show [aː] continues to prevail in the northern fringes and also among older speakers more widely. There is near-categorical use of [aː] in Wirksworth (C1190/03012), West Stockwith (C900/12620) and Kirkby-in-Ashfield (C1190/26/03), while the variation between [aː ~ ɑː] in Coplow Dale (C1190/14635) and Swadlincote (C1190/12/05) and between [aː ~ ɑː ~ ɒː] in Mansfield (C1190/26/04) is a typical indicator of change in progress. In the central area there is considerable intra- and inter-speaker variation between [ɒː ~ ɑː] with [ɒː] especially frequent in the recordings in Kimberley (C900/12604), Heanor (C1190/12/04), Derby (C900/03118) and Nottingham (C900/12616 & C1190/26/02). A recording in Leicester (C1190/20/02) is particularly intriguing as a young female speaker from Hinckley is teased by the other participants (all of whom grew up in Leicester) for her occasional use of [aː] on e.g. market [maːkɪʔ], as the other participants all favour [ɑː > ɒː]. The use of mardy [maːdɪ] in a recording with three generations of a family of Groby market traders (C1190/20/03) who otherwise consistently use [ɑː] illustrates how this pronunciation can also exist in isolation – mardy (= ‘sullen, spoilt, esp. of a child’) is an iconic East Midlands dialect term (see discussion of lexis in chapter 4 below) that these speakers clearly subconsciously associate with older local norms. Finally, included in the palm set, is a small sub-set of words that occasionally surface with a short [a] in some accents. Docherty and Foulkes (1999: 49) note that father and half are generally assigned to the palm set in Derby, but that ‘dialectal remnants of [ɛɪ] persist in older [working-class] and rural speech’. Responses to the SED questionnaire record FATHER (VIII.1.1) with [eː > eɪ] in Derbyshire, [a > eː] in Nottinghamshire and [aː > ɛɪ] in Leicestershire, HALF (VII.7.6) with [eː] in Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire and [aː > ɛɪ] in Leicestershire and indeed CALF (III.1.2) with [ɔː] in Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire, but all three are assigned the relevant palm-start vowel in our present-day data set. However, this rule can be overridden in the collocation half past which, impressionistically, we would say

34 

 2 Phonetics and phonology

can surface as [af past] throughout the region when referring to the time of the clock. SED Basic Material records HALF PAST (VII.5.4) as [eːf past] in Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire but there are several examples of [af past] in Leicestershire and we have spontaneous tokens in Kniveton (C908/51 C9–10), Coplow Dale (C1190/14635), Barlestone (C900/09131) and Swadlincote (C1190/12/05) alongside one example of residual [ɛɪ] in the special case of the now archaic word halfpenny [ɛɪpnɪ] in Heanor (C1190/12/04). Aunt and its derivatives aunts, aunty and aunties is, likewise, extremely variable and can be heard as [ant] in the East Midlands as attested by a speaker in Nottingham (C1190/26/05); a pronunciation also favoured by the wife, from Ashbourne, of one of the authors. A speaker in Heanor (C1190/12/04) also pronounces pyjama as [pəʤamə]. The enclitic negative modal constructions can’t and shan’t are assigned to the palm set by speakers of most dialects, including RP, but as with can (see trap & bath above) a number of vernacular forms, including e.g. canna [kanə] and conna [kɒnə] are available in some parts of the East Midlands and we deal with this in more detail in chapter 3 below. thought, north & force [ɔː]  As with palm and start the absence of r-colouring means these three sets are merged and generally realised with an open-mid, back, rounded vowel, [ɔː], throughout the East Midlands such that speakers make no distinction between words such as laud and lord or saw and sore. SED Basic Material records STRAW (II.84) and MORNING (VII.3.11) with [ɔː] in every East Midland locality (with rhoticity only evident in Charlesworth as noted above for start). In broad rural dialect in the 1950s, however, the process towards a fully smoothed vowel for force was apparently not complete as a variety of centring diphthongs such as [ʊə ~ uˑə ~ ɔə] are recorded in all three counties at e.g. DOOR (V.1.8). This distinction, still maintained in dialects further north, is not evident in our present-day recordings from the East Midlands, although it is possible it survives among older speakers, perhaps especially in the north of the region. On the other hand dialectal diphthongs for words within the thought set that contain morpheme final (i.e. historically a velar fricative) such as daughter and thought, although increasingly rare, do persist. SED Basic Material records BROUGHT (VIII.1.11) with [ɒʊ ~ ɛʊ] in Derbyshire, with [ɒʊ ~ ɔː] in Nottinghamshire but consistently with [ɔː] throughout Leicestershire. Docherty and Foulkes (1999: 49) note evidence of [ou] ‘rarely […] in e.g. thought’ in Derby and there are a handful of examples in our present-day sound recordings – e.g. bought [bɛʊt] in Heanor (C1190/12/04) and thought [θəʊt] in Mansfield (C1190/26/04). More significantly, the local dialect variants owt [= ‘anything’] and nowt [= ‘nothing’] are still common among speakers of all ages in the East Midlands, especially perhaps in Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire, and are locally assigned to the thought set,

2.2 Vowels 

 35

reflecting the historic underlying forms aught and naught respectively, but realised with a range of diphthongs more closely associated with a goat-type vowel. This well-known dialect form is popularly assumed to belong to the mouth set, but although this is true for some dialects, owt and nowt occur far more frequently with a GOAT-type vowel in the East Midlands and indeed in neighbouring dialects in South and West Yorkshire. SED Basic Material shows ANYTHING (V.8.16) as owt [ɒʊt > ɛʊt] in Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire and [ɔʊt] in most sites in Leicestershire and there are spontaneous tokens in present-day recordings in Coplow Dale (C1190/14635  –  nowt [nəʊt]), Heanor (C1190/12/04  –  nowt [nɛʊt]), Swadlincote (C1190/12/05 – nowt [nəʊt]), Mansfield (C1190/26/04 – owt [əʊt] and nowt [nəʊt]) and Leicester (C1190/20/02 – owt [əʊt]). Docherty and Foulkes (1999: 49) suggest unrounded vowels are possible in Derby after /w/, as confirmed by SED Basic Material entries at WATER (III.3.2) in all localities in Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire and very occasionally in our present-day sound recordings, including in Belper (C1190/12/01 – water [watə] and warm [waːm]), Heanor (C1190/12/04 – water [watə]), Swadlincote (C1190/12/05 – water [wɛɪtə] and warm [wam]), Kirkby-in-Ashfield (C1190/26/03  –  warm [waːm]) and Mansfield (C1190/26/04 – water [watə] and Warsop [waːsəp). However, we consider such realisations to be increasingly rare as are dialectal pronunciations with [ɒ] captured in SED sound recordings and confirmed by several entries at e.g. HORSES (I.6.5), although there are a handful of examples from older speakers in Coplow Dale (C1190/14635 – swarth [swɒθ]), Heanor (C1190/12/04 – horses [ɒsəz]), Swadlincote (C1190/12/05 – horse [ɒs]) and Mansfield (C1190/26/04 – for [fɒ]). On the other hand, words like false and fault – historically in the thought set – are now much more likely to be realised with [ɒ]. SED Basic Material suggests this process was already well underway as entries for FAULT (VIII.9.6) show a preference for [ɔː > ɒ] in Derbyshire, [ɒ] in Nottinghamshire and [ɒ > ɔː] in Leicestershire. There are no examples with [ɔː] in our present-day recordings, but numerous examples with [ɒ] e.g. salt [sɒɫt] in Two Dales (C1190/12/03), alter [ɒɫtə] in Swadlincote (C1190/12/05), and fault [fɒɫt] in Nottingham (C1190/26/05). One interesting footnote to this trend is that the reverse is probably true for the word auction, which is pronounced [ɒkʃən] in SED sound recordings in Oxton (C908/52 C5) and Goadby (C908/57 C1) and by an older speaker in Kimberley (C900/12604), but impressionistically we consider [ɔːkʃən] to be more likely among younger East Midlanders. fleece [iː > ɪi ~ iːɪ]  The dominant realisation for words in the fleece set is [iː], although the narrow diphthong, [ɪi], reported by Docherty and Foulkes (1999: 48) for Derby also occurs frequently in several BL recordings in Nottingham (e.g. C900/12616, C900/12530 & C900/12606) and is, presumably, the same variant transcribed by SED

36 

 2 Phonetics and phonology

fieldworkers in Nottinghamshire as [ɪiː] at CHEESE (V.5.4). The reverse of this – a glide of the type, [iːɪ], – also occurs quite frequently in an area roughly centred on the Amber Valley, as evidenced by speakers in Kimberley (C900/12604) and Heanor (C1190/12/04). Although these examples are from older speakers we have anecdotal evidence of a similar vowel occurring frequently on e.g. please [pliːəz] among younger speakers in Ashbourne, although more data would be required to establish exact lexical and/or geographic distribution of all three variants. In common with most varieties of English unstressed been frequently surfaces in the East Midlands as [bɪn]. This short vowel used to be applied more widely as shown by SED entries at e.g. SHEEP (III.6.1) but we consider such pronunciations increasingly rare, other than perhaps with seen [sɪn] and week [wɪk], the latter captured in a recording in Swadlincote (C1190/12/05). The retention in a handful of SED localities in Derbyshire of a Middle English long 3 vowel at e.g. MEAT (V.8.3) we also consider recessive in the East Midlands, although a small number of tokens occur in our data in Belper (C1190/12/01 – e.g. freezing [fɹɛɪzɪn]), Heanor (C1190/12/04 – e.g. three [θɹɛɪ]). There are several tokens in the recording from Swadlincote (C1190/12/05), as it not only occurs on full lexical words such as keep, see and field, but occurs particularly frequently with stressed pronouns, he and we, giving [ɛɪ] and [wɛɪ] respectively (the absence of she, here, is due to speaker preference for her and/or hoo in stressed position for the feminine third person pronoun – see chapter 3 below for more detailed discussion). nurse [əː ~ ɪː]  An absence of ‘r-coloured’ vowels has led to widespread use of a central vowel, roughly [əː], in many accents in England including RP for words in the nurse set. This is certainly a common realisation across the East Midlands, favoured especially by middle-class speakers, but one also frequently hears pronunciations with a closer and more advanced vowel, somewhere in the region of [ɪː] from speakers with broader local accents. It is difficult to define the exact geographic extent of this variant, although BL sound recordings suggest an isogloss stretching from Stoke-on-Trent in the north west to Leicester in the south east, taking in the cities of Nottingham, Derby and immediately adjacent areas – i.e. most of the East Midlands. Phonetically realisations can vary from a close central, [ɨː], to a frontish, centralised, [ëː ~ ɛ̈ː], hence our use here of [ɪː] as a convenient reference point. Docherty and Foulkes (1999: 48) attribute [ɨː] to older working-class speakers in Derby alongside a “(probably) lexically restricted [ɛː] on e.g. her, were, stir”. It is interesting to note their hesitation regarding the distribution of the latter variant and certainly our data suggests it is certainly not so lexically restricted for all speakers in all locations. We have speakers in our present-day recordings who either categorically favour [ɪː] or vary between [ɪː ~ əː] in numerous locations,

2.2 Vowels 

 37

including West Stockwith (C900/12620), Kirkby-in-Ashfield (C1190/26/03) and Mansfield (C1190/26/04) in the north, through Crich (C900/03010), Kimberley (C900/12604) and Heanor (C1190/12/04) to Swadlincote (C1190/12/05), Leicester (C900/09073) and Coalville (C1190/20/05) in the south. There are only sporadic glimpses of a similar articulation in SED data at e.g. BIRCH (IV.10.1), where [ɛː] is recorded for Stonebroom and Oxton and [ɛə] for Harby, Great Dalby and Ullesthorpe, but [əː] for every other locality. The two different IPA symbols used may well represent distinct realisations, but it is also possible they reflect a difference in transcription between fieldworkers (Stanley Ellis visited Stonebroom and Oxton; Averil Playford the three sites in Leicestershire) as the SED audio recordings in Stonebroom (C908/51 C6), Oxton (C908/52  C5) and Ullesthorpe (C908/57  C2) all contain tokens we consider to be closer to [ɪː]. It is difficult to know the precise origin of this variant, but as it has such a widespread distribution within (but not much beyond) the East Midlands and was present in SED localities clustered towards the centre of the region it is possible to speculate that this is an example of a feature diffusing from local urban centres and hence representative of change in progress towards a supra-local norm rather than an example of external influence or pressure towards a nationally prestigious standard. Either way it is certainly a striking feature of accents in much of the East Midlands. Broader dialectal variants with a checked vowel survive among older speakers as confirmed by Docherty and Foulkes (1999: 48) for Derby. SED data at WORSE (VI.12.3), for instance, records both [wɒs] and [wəs] in Derbyshire, [wɒs] and [wɔs] in Nottinghamshire and several examples of [wʊs] in Leicestershire. There are several tokens in our present-day recordings, albeit all from older speakers in e.g. Kirkby-in-Ashfield (C1190/26/03), Mansfield (C1190/26/04), Heanor (C1190/12/04) and Swadlincote (C1190/12/05). Although we have no evidence in our sound recordings, anecdotally we would suggest this can still occur occasionally among younger speakers in some areas, perhaps especially on high-frequency words like first [fɒst]. A related phenomenon is evident on local forms of past ‘be’ and its corresponding enclitic negative. In most dialects, including Standard English, these surface as were and weren’t respectively and hence are generally assigned to the nurse set, but as with can’t and shan’t (see palm above) there are dialect variants available in some parts of the East Midlands that differ strikingly from this. The recording, for instance, in Swadlincote (C1190/12/05) includes several examples of stressed were as [wɔː] and the negative forms wunna [wʊnə] and wonna [wɒnə] – this is dealt with in more detail in chapter 3 below. There is considerable consensus among speakers in both BBC Voices Recordings in Heanor and Swadlincote that girl, realised locally as [gɛl], is the lexicalised dialect form, gel, which was used particularly frequently in the past in the verbal phrase, gelling [gɛlɪn] meaning ‘courting, going out with’ – a usage recorded by

38 

 2 Phonetics and phonology

Scollins and Titford (2000) as gellin. As FEMALE PARTNER is a prompt word in the Voices survey girl occurs quite frequently in the recordings and is pronounced [gɛl] in a number of locations and indeed [gɛʊ] by a young speaker in Leicester (C1190/20/04) – showing the L-vocalisation that is characteristic of many speakers in the East Midlands (more under consonants below) but, crucially, also confirming an underlying dress vowel. Elsewhere a distinctly Caribbean pronunciation as gyal [gjal] is captured in two recordings in Nottingham (C1190/26/04 & C1190/26/06)  –  both from speakers of Caribbean descent. Data from the BBC Voices Recordings more generally shows this has been adopted by some young speakers regardless of ethnicity in some urban areas, albeit potentially with a meaning distinct from girl (it can imply attractiveness for some speakers, promiscuity to others) so it is possibly available to young speakers in areas of the East Midlands where there is a strong British Caribbean presence. Finally, other phenomena worthy of note include the pronunciation by some speakers of past hear as [ɪəd], and the realisation of the unstressed object pronoun, her, in Leicester as [ɒ]. As an SED prompt word HEARD (VIII.2.6) is recorded as [ɪəd] in the vast majority of sites in all three counties and is captured spontaneously in a sound recording in Markfield (C908/56 C8). Obviously we rely in our present-day data entirely on incidental tokens but the fact we can report only one example – from Mansfield (C1190/26/04) – suggests it is perhaps no longer as widespread, although clearly still available to some speakers. The use of a near-type vowel here is probably best interpreted as an example of an over-generalisation of simple past – i.e. hearPAST → heared – which we discuss more fully in chapter 3 below. On the other hand, the use of [ɒ] for her by a young female speaker from Hinckley results from the distinctive local realisation of words in the letter set, which we discuss in more detail below. Briefly, in and around Leicester a retracted, lowered vowel, [ɐ], often even fully back at [ɒ] is extremely common with letter~comma (see letter below) and thus transfers readily to other environments where a weak schwa vowel occurs in accents elsewhere. The following discussion in Leicester (C1190/20/02) of words for BABY illustrates this perfectly: (I call it ‘small’ now though it’s six years old but I call it ‘small’) you call you call it you call it ‘it’ (‘it’, yeah) and, you know, that’s what you call her [ɒ] ‘it’? (‘it’ it is an ‘it’). goose [uː ~ ʉː > ʊuː]  The realisation for most speakers in the East Midlands for goose is a close, back rounded vowel, [uː], which is present in most dialects in England, including RP. There is, however, occasional evidence of other variants, including a more fronted realisation, [ʉː] – also noted by Docherty and Foulkes (1999: 50) in Derby – and, less frequently, narrow diphthongs with either rounded or unrounded first elements of the type, [ɪuː] and [ʊuː]. Flynn (2012) also discusses fronting of goose in

2.2 Vowels 

 39

Nottingham speakers. SED Basic Material presents an equally messy picture: all four variants mentioned above also occur at TWO (VII.1.2) and MOON (VII.6.3), with [ʊuː] particularly frequent in Nottinghamshire, [uː] competing with [(ɪ)ʉː] across much of Leicestershire and all four plus a wider diphthong, [ɛʊ], occurring in Derbyshire. We would require more data to propose precise geographic and/or phonological distribution of each variant, but there are observable tendencies in our present-day data. A diphthong of the type [ʊuː] is much the preferred variant in the far north of our area, with examples in West Stockwith (C900/12620), New Houghton (C900/12543) and Meden Vale (C900/12505). Not surprisingly, this is also typical of speakers in adjacent areas in South Yorkshire  –  Stoddart et al. (1999: 75) confirm this as a typical goose vowel in Sheffield, for instance. Elsewhere [uː] is the most common realisation in our present-day recordings, although older speakers in e.g. Heanor (C1190/12/04), Kimberley (C900/12604) and Swadlincote (C1190/12/05) show occasional evidence of [ɪuː] and [ʊuː], but with insufficient tokens for us to determine whether phonological environment is the prompt for either variant. There is, however, an apparent tendency among some speakers in the East Midlands to distinguish between goose and ghoul words as a following /l/ frequently prompts a more fronted [ʉː]. There is certainly support for this hypothesis in the SED Basic Material in Leicestershire where SCHOOL (VIII.6.1) – unlike MOON and TWO – is consistently recorded with [ʉː]. Mathisen (1999: 109) reports an interesting reflex in Sandwell in the West Midlands, where “some items may have an additional schwa as in shoes [ʃuːəz]”, a pronunciation captured among older speakers in Heanor (C1190/12/04), with examples including shoes [ʃʊuəz], afternoons [aftənuːənz] and food [fʊuəd]. More common nowadays is the occasional insertion of a weak schwa vowel preceding /l/ giving pronunciations such as tool [tuːəɫ, tʉːəɫ] and school [skuːəɫ, skʉːəɫ] (examples of this pronunciation were also found by Davies and Braber’s (2011) project from a male speaker from Chesterfield). This process occasionally prompts triphthongs in other lexical sets (e.g. towel [taʊəɫ], mile [maɪəɫ] etc. – see mouth and price below) and although we only have tokens in our data from older speakers in e.g. Mansfield (C1190/26/04), Two Dales (C1190/12/03) and Heanor (C1190/12/04) we have heard it among younger speakers locally in, for instance, Ashbourne, and suspect it is not unusual in Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire at least. An interesting aspect of the goose set is the potential for variation in vowel quality and/or relative stress assigned to high-frequency function words like you and too, and the verb do. Speakers of most varieties of British English only occasionally articulate a fully stressed you (“oi, you” /ɔɪ juː/), favouring a comparatively weak form in connected speech (“have you seen it?” / hav ju siːn ɪt/). For some speakers in the East Midlands weakly stressed you preceding a vowel (or a word with a deleted initial /h/  –  see H-dropping below) can be even further

40 

 2 Phonetics and phonology

reduced, surfacing as a simple glide /j/ attached to the following word. Typical examples from our present-day recordings occur in Mansfield (C1190/26/04 – e.g. you asked [jast] earlier), Two Dales (C1190/12/03 – e.g. you all [jɔːɫ] went and hid), Heanor (C1190/12/04 – e.g. you had lovely friends [jad lʊvlɪ fɹɛndz]) and Swadlincote (C900/03055  –  e.g. you only [jəʊnɪ] wanted know). In common with some varieties of northern English it is also possible to hear too (and, in the far north of the region, do) articulated with a comparatively weak vowel by some speakers, as illustrated by examples in Crich (C900/03010 – too big [tə bɪg]), Heanor (C1190/12/04 – e.g. too old [tə ɔʊɫd]) and Mansfield (C1190/26/04 – they wouldn’t let you do [dʊ] that on the on the BBC). This preference for a comparatively weak realisation of forms generally assigned more prominent stress in other dialects has particular consequences in Leicester, where the local realisation of letter~comma with [ɐ ~ ɒ] (see letter below) means you can surface as [jɒ], especially phrase finally. There are several examples of this phenomenon in our Leicester recordings including from speakers in Groby (C1190/20/03 – they said, “what’s up with you?” [wɒts ʊp wɪ jɒ]) and Leicester (C1190/20/02 – you [jə] can’t stand up without a steward coming up to you [jɒ] and saying, “sit down”). Elsewhere stressed you is occasionally realised as you [jəʊ]  –  a pronunciation that often occurs in parodies and caricatures of speech in the West Midlands, but is also present in our data in Mansfield (C1190/26/04 – e.g. if you [jəʊ] lived with us) and Swadlincote (C900/03055 – e.g. you had [jəʊ ɛd] a loaf of bread and […] you had [jəʊ ɛd] the end pieces the crusts). The orthographically marked use of ‘yo’ throughout Alan Sillitoe’s Saturday Night and Sunday Morning is, presumably, the author’s way of indicating a similar pronunciation in Nottingham: can’t tek the drink, that’s what’s the matter wi’ yo’ young ‘uns (Sillitoe 1958: 13). goat [ɔʊ ~ əʊ ~ əʉ]  The pattern of variants within the East Midlands for words in the goat set is less homogeneous perhaps than in areas further north, where the predominant realisation is a monophthongal vowel, albeit of differing phonetic quality. SED Basic Material entries at MOW (II.9.3) and ROAD (IV.3.12) suggest that until relatively recently monophthongal [oː > ɔː] extended well into the East Midlands with several examples in north Derbyshire and in most of Nottinghamshire, giving way further south and throughout Leicestershire to diphthongs of the type [oʊ, ɔʊ]. Docherty and Foulkes (1999: 49) report a preference among older speakers in Derby for diphthongs of this type, alongside increasing evidence among younger speakers of diphthongs with a central, unrounded onset of the type [əʊ, əʉ], reflecting fronting processes. Hughes et al. (2005: 91) also record [əʉ] in Leicester – a diphthong entirely absent from SED data in the East Midlands and much more closely aligned with southern varieties and RP. Our present-day sound recordings

2.2 Vowels 

 41

confirm diphthongs are now more likely to be found across the whole of the East Midlands with very few monophthongal tokens at all, except very occasionally in the far north – e.g. in Mansfield (C1190/26/04). Impressionistically it appears the fully rounded variants, [oʊ, ɔʊ], dominate in the north of the region, while the more centralised upglides, [əʊ, əʉ], increase in frequency as one moves south and are particularly common in our data from the cities of Derby, Nottingham and Leicester and the immediate surrounding areas. The former occur in e.g. Coplow Dale (C1190/14635), Crich (C900/03010), Swadlincote (C1190/12/05), Kirkby-in-Ashfield (C1190/26/03) and Kimberley (C900/12604), while the latter are recorded in e.g. Derby (C900/03118), Swadlincote (C1190/12/05), Arnold (C900/12562), Nottingham (C900/12616), Barlestone (C900/09131) and Lutterworth (C900/09070). However, given Docherty and Foulkes’ observation (1999: 49) regarding the generational shift in Derby from [oʊ, ɔʊ] to [əʊ, əʉ] and the disproportionate bias towards older speakers in our data from the north of the region it is possible [əʊ, əʉ] has a wider presence across the East Midlands as a whole. Furthermore, according to our data, speakers in the East Midlands whose GOAT vowel is of the type [əʊ, əʉ] invariably use a fully-rounded variant, generally [ɔʊ], in environments preceding /l/. This phenomenon, noted by Wells for “London and elsewhere” (1982: 147), occurs consistently in numerous recordings including in e.g. Nottingham (C1190/26/05) and Leicester (C1190/20/04). As is the case with goose (see above) goal words occasionally surface as triphthongs for some speakers in the East Midlands as confirmed by tokens such as cold [kɔʊəɫd] in Belper (C1190/12/01) and earhole [ɪːɹɔʊəɫ] in Heanor (C1190/12/04), while for some speakers allophonic variants for goal co-exist with historic local forms with [ɛʊ] for words ending orthographically in (more below). Examples of go as [guː] occur in Wirksworth (C1190/03012), Heanor (C1190/12/04), Swadlincote (C1190/12/05), Mansfield (C1190/26/04), Arnold (C900/12562), Nottingham (C900/12606) and from a Hinckley female recorded in Leicester (C1190/20/02), while the derivative going [gʊɪn] is even more widespread, with examples in addition to these in Derby (C900/03118), Meden Vale (C900/12505), Kimberley (C900/12604), Nottingham (C1190/26/02) and Leicester (C900/09073). Such realisations are also closely associated with speech in the West Midlands and East Anglia, although in the East Midlands go as [guː] possibly occurs less frequently among younger speakers, as noted by Docherty and Foulkes in Derby (1999: 49). Unlike their counterparts in the West Midlands and East Anglia, however, some East Midlanders also occasionally use a reduced vowel for go [gʊ] and its derivative goes [gʊz], an example of an apparently ‘northern’ feature extending into the East Midland dialect region. This checked vowel is widely recorded in the SED Basic Material in the East Midlands at THEY GO TO CHURCH (VIII.5.1) and at GO TO SCHOOL (VIII.6.1) and is too frequent in our

42 

 2 Phonetics and phonology

data to list all occurrences, but includes speakers from the north of the region in e.g. New Houghton (C900/12543), Mansfield (C1190/26/04) and Kirkby-in-Ashfield (C1190/26/03), through Wirksworth (C1190/03012), Kimberley (C900/12604), Derby (C900/03118) and Nottingham (C900/12606) and as far south as Swadlincote (C1190/12/05), Leicester (C900/09073 & C1990/20/02) and Barlestone (C900/09131). As with most dialects going to also frequently surfaces as [gʊnə] and/or [gənə]. The presence of variants for go that occur with different distributions in neighbouring dialects to the north, west and east presents a convincing picture of the East Midlands as a transition zone, but the local realisation of words ending orthographically in , such as old and told, although not unique to the East Midlands is much more geographically focused and, crucially, distinguishes speakers here from those in the neighbouring West Midlands and East Anglia. In most of the East Midlands and extending into South Yorkshire and East Lancashire these words often surface in broad dialect with a distinctive diphthong [ɛʊ] and with the deleted. The SED Basic Material (VI.13.17) records COLD as [kɒʊd, kɛʊd] for Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire, and has one locality with [kɛʊɫd] in Leicestershire. As a BBC Voices prompt word we have numerous examples of continued use across the region, including in Belper (C1190/12/01), Swadlincote (C900/03055  & C1190/12/05), Mansfield (C1190/26/04), Arnold (C900/12562) and Coalville (C1190/20/05). The realisation of sellPAST as [sɛʊd] in Youlgreave (C908/51 C2) and tellPAST as [tɛʊd] in Arnold (C900/12562) are particularly interesting as they offer two possible interpretations – either they are subject to the same phonological process that produces cold [kɛʊd] or they reflect the regularised past tense forms telled and selled with L-vocalisation (see consonants below). Although COLT (III.4.3) is recorded as [kɛʊt] in the SED sound recording in Oxton (C908/52 C5) and occasionally in the Basic Material and we have one example of bolt as [bɒʊt] from an older speaker in Arnold (C900/12562), we suspect these are now more likely to be assigned to the LOT set for most younger speakers in the East Midlands. Historic dialectal forms with [ɒ] on words such as over, open, home, broke(n), froze(n) etc. were characteristic of rural speech in Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire until well into the twentieth century as shown by SED entries at BROKE(N) (IX.3.5). Contemporary evidence suggests this is now restricted to older speakers with one example of broke [bɹɒk] in West Stockwith (C900/12620); frozen cold to the marrow [fɹɒzən kɔʊɫd tə ðə maɹə] in Heanor (C1190/12/04); home [ɒm] (also with onglide, i.e. [wɒm]) in Heanor (C1190/12/04), Mansfield (C1190/26/04) and Coalville (C1190/20/05); and several examples of over as [ɒvə] in Heanor (C1190/12/04), Kirkby-in-Ashfield (C1190/26/03), Eastwood (C1190/26/01), Arnold (C900/12562) and Kimberley (C900/12604). Although such pronunciations must now be considered strongly recessive, we would suggest that only is heard quite frequently as [ɒni] across a broader

2.2 Vowels 

 43

social cross-section with recorded examples in Heanor (C1190/12/04), Mansfield (C1190/26/04) and Meden Vale (C900/12505). As in many dialects the final element of polysyllabic words ending orthographically in , such as yellow and piano are frequently weakened to a schwa, giving [jɛlə] and [pianə] respectively. Examples from our present-day data include tokens from Heanor (C1190/12/04 – frozen cold to the marrow [fɹɒzən kɔʊɫd tə ðə maɹə]), Swadlincote (C1190/12/05 – potatoes [pətɛɪtəz]), West Stockwith (C900/12620  –  widows [wɪdəz]), and several instances in Nottingham (C900/12530  –  ’bacco [bakə]; C900/12616  –  bellowing [bɛləɹɪn]; C1190/26/02 – Meadows [mɛdəz]; and C1190/26/05 – followed [fɒləd]). By extension, a similarly weak vowel also appears to be used by many speakers in the East Midlands on an unstressed so or no preceding an adjective. The following is a brief selection of examples by way of illustration: ever so delicate [ɛvə sə dɛlɪkət] in Heanor C1190/12/04); he’s getting no more [iːz gɛɹɪn nə mɔː] in Mansfield (C1190/12/04); ever so sorry, [ɛvə sə sɒɹɪ] in Nottingham (C1190/26/05); and, in Leicester, not so bad [nɒt sə bad] (C1190/20/02) and it’s not used so much [sə mʊʧ] (C1190/20/04). Finally it is worth noting that the enclitic negative constructions don’t and won’t are assigned to this set by speakers of most dialects, including RP, but there are also vernacular variants available in the East Midlands, including doPRESNEG as [dʊnə] and [dʊnt] (the latter possibly a generalisation of doesn’t with secondary contraction) and willPRESNEG as [wʊnə] or [wɛɪnt]. These are dealt with more fully in chapter 3 below. face [ɛɪ ~ ɛi > ɛɪː]  The process of diphthongisation noted above for goat is mirrored in the face set: monophthongal realisations with [eː, ɛː] reported in Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire by SED fieldworkers at GATE (IV.3.1) are almost entirely absent from our present-day data. Instead there is almost universal use of a diphthong of the type /ɛɪ/, the realisation recorded in all SED sites in Leicestershire at GATE (IV.3.1) and reported by Docherty and Foulkes (1999: 49) for Derby. Hughes et al. (2005: 91) suggest the quality of the diphthong in Leicester is discernibly wider, viz [ɛi]. This broader diphthong occurs in many of our present-day recordings across the East Midlands more generally and although not substantially different from RP, the closeness (and occasionally additional length) of the final element makes it distinctive. There are also occasional examples of diphthongs with a slight offglide, [ɛiɪ] or [ɛɪə], such as in Two Dales (C1190/12/03), Kimberley (C900/12604), Heanor (C1190/12/04) and Leicester (C1190/20/04). The variant, [ɛiə], seems to occur mainly, but not exclusively, preceding /l/ – e.g. sale [sɛɪəɫ] in Two Dales (C1190/12/03)  –  echoing the pre-lateral breaking noted above for ghoul and goal. There were a small number of tokens from older speakers in Heanor (C1190/12/04 – e.g. rain [ɹiːɪn]) and Swadlincote (C1190/12/05 – e.g. pay

44 

 2 Phonetics and phonology

day [piːdiː]) – of a broader dialectal variant with [iː] but such realisations are considered extremely recessive. At the southern end of the region, speakers recorded in Lutterworth (C900/09070) and Groby (C1190/20/03) varied between [ɛɪ] and a diphthong with a lowered onset, [æɪ]. This latter realisation, common in the West Midlands (Mathisen 1999:109) and south east England (Williams and Kerswill 1999:143), demonstrates the inevitable presence here of features also found in neighbouring dialects to the west and south. The words make and take and their derivatives makes, making, takes, taking and taken fall into this set for most speakers, but some speakers in the East Midlands frequently use a reduced vowel, [ɛ], in connected speech. Individual examples are too numerous to list individually here, but there are tokens from speakers of all ages and in locations across the whole region, from Mansfield (C1190/26/04) in the north to Coalville (C1190/20/05) in the south. Although there are fewer examples in our data, other words in the face set that occasionally also surface with a dress vowel include gave as [gɛv] (e.g. Quorn  –  C900/09097A), break as [bɹɛk] (e.g. Heanor – C1190/12/04) and say as [sɛ] (e.g. Nottingham – C1190/26/05), while says [sɛz] and again [əgɛn] occur consistently, with only one exception – says [sɛɪz] from a young female speaker in Leicester (C1190/20/04). The final syllable of days of the week and the word holiday is often reduced to [dɪ, di], giving realisations such as Saturday [satdɪ] in e.g. Swadlincote (C1190/12/05), Sunday [sʊndɪ] in e.g. Nottingham (C1190/26/05) and Tuesday [tuːzdɪ] in e.g. Groby (C1190/12/03), with the quality of the vowel dictated by individual speaker preference regarding words in the happy set (see happy below), as demonstrated by an example of holiday as [ɒlədɛ] in Leicester (C1190/20/02). Many speakers in the East Midlands also assign a comparatively weak vowel to the unstressed third person plural pronoun, they. Given the relatively high frequency of pronouns in spontaneous discourse, this is a highly distinctive feature and is particularly common in tags – e.g. wouldn’t they [wʊnt ði] in Swadlincote (C1190/12/05) and do they [duː ði] in Nottingham (C1190/26/02), but also occurs in declarative clauses e.g. they never had a doctor [ðɪ nɛvəɹ ad ə dɒktə] in Heanor (C1190/12/04); they were all Poles [ðɪ wəɹ ɔːɫ pɔʊɫz] and Geordies down there weren’t they [wɒnʔ ðə] in Mansfield (C1190/26/04); and the way they speak [ðə wɛɪ ðə spiːk] in Groby (C1190/20/03). Finally a weak vowel is also extremely common for the final syllable of always with several examples in our present-day data of always [ɔːwɪz, ɔːwəz] and a handful of examples of [ɔːlɪs, ɔːləs]. mouth [aʊ ~ aː]  The use of a front, open, unrounded monophthong, [a:], is extremely common alongside a more mainstream diphthong, [aʊ], which is particularly characteristic of middle-class speech. Monophthongal realisations occur in most SED sound

2.2 Vowels 

 45

recordings, typically [æː] in Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire and [aː] (occasionally also with a brief offglide, [aːə]) in Leicestershire. SED Basic Material records HOUSE (V.1.1) as [ɛːs, ɛʊs] in Derbyshire, [aʊs, æːs] in Nottinghamshire and [æʊs, aːəs] in Leicestershire. Although the more raised monophthongs are rare in our present-day data – there are occasional examples of [æː] from older male speakers in Wirksworth (C1190/03012) and Arnold (C900/12562) – a group of speakers in Mansfield (C1190/26/04) categorise [ɛː] as typical of speech in nearby Sutton-in-Ashfield, observing that in Mansfield our house is often pronounced [aːɹ aːs] while in Sutton it is [ɛːɹ ɛːs]. Realisations with [aː], however, occur frequently and in most locations across the whole area from New Houghton (C900/12543) in the north to Leicester (C900/09073) in the south, taking in Derby (C900/03118), Nottingham (e.g. C900/12530) and all points in between. Monophthongs are, however, seldom categorical and most speakers vary to differing degrees between [aː] and [aʊ]. Although the diphthong occurs most frequently among younger speakers in our data, suggesting a possible change in progress, there is a strong tendency for the monophthong to permeate the speech even of speakers who generally favour [aʊ] with the prepositions about [əbaːt], down [daːn] and out [aːt] and high frequency function words like how [(h)aː] and now [naː]. A handful of spontaneous examples of words like flour [flaʊə] (e.g. Heanor – C1190/12/04) and shower [ʃaʊə] (e.g. Groby – C1190/20/03) suggest triphthongs are generally favoured, although the possessive pronoun our can also be realised as [aː]. Significantly, however, there is little evidence of the variant, our [ɑː], that occurs in south east England. Pronunciations such as owl [aʊəɫ] and foul [faʊəɫ] (e.g. Heanor  –  C1190/12/04) confirm the potential for pre-lateral breaking noted above for ghoul, goal and fail. Finally, the traditional dialect form FOUND (IX.3.2) as [fʊn(d)], recorded in every SED site in Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire, is increasingly rare nowadays, although there is one spontaneous example from an ex-miner in Mansfield (C1190/26/04). price [a(ː)ɪ ~ ɑɪ > ɑː]  Both Docherty and Foulkes (1999: 50) and Hughes et al. (2005: 91) report an alternation between a front rising diphthong, [aɪ], and a diphthong with a retracted onset, [ɑɪ], giving realisations such as slide [slaɪd] or [slɑɪd] for Derby and Leicester respectively. Both pronunciations are attested in SED sound recordings and in our present-day data, often with an onset of greater duration than the offset. The variant [ɑ(ː)ɪ], occurs slightly more in our audio data and there are also occasional examples of broader dialectal variants in which the offset is negligible or entirely absent, viz. [ɑː(ɪ) ~ aː(ɪ)]. There are recordings in which speakers consistently favour [a(ː)ɪ] in Derby (C900/03118), Swadlincote (C900/03055), West Stockwith (C900/12620), Meden Vale (C900/12505) and Nottingham (C900/12606);

46 

 2 Phonetics and phonology

exclusively use [ɑːɪ] in Crich (C900/03010), Wirksworth (C1190/03012), Kimberley (C900/12604), Nottingham (C900/12616), Leicester (C900/09073), Barlestone (C900/09131), Hinckley (C900/09127) and Lutterworth (C900/09070); and vary between [ɑ(ː)ɪ ~ a(ː)ɪ] in Coplow Dale (C1190/14635), Two Dales (C1190/12/03), Belper (C1190/12/01), Heanor (C1190/12/04), Swadlincote (C1190/12/05) Kirkby-in-Ashfield (C1190/26/03), Mansfield (C1190/26/04), Eastwood (C1190/26/01), Arnold (C900/12562), Nottingham (C1190/26/02), Tonge (C900/03123), Quorn (C900/09097A), Leicester (C1190/20/04) and Tilton-on-the-Hill (C900/09087). Unlike some areas of the north where the preference for a particular variant is motivated by phonetic environment  –  e.g. the distinction maintained between price and prize in Newcastle (Watt and Milroy 1999: 28–29)  –  evidence seems to suggest that individual speaker preference in the East Midlands is dictated by sociolinguistic factors. Docherty and Foulkes’ investigations in Derby (1999: 50) suggested that the back variants, [ɑɪ ~ ɑː], were characteristic of working-class male speech, while females typically used diphthongs with a very strong first element and a weak off-glide which they transcribe as [aːːɪ]. They note that this gender split is virtually absolute – i.e. hardly any females used the backed variants and very few males used [aːːɪ]. This is certainly borne out by our data in Nottingham and Leicester where we have sufficient speakers of both genders to draw conclusions and is potentially the case for other areas in the East Midlands, although the data used for the purposes of this review are insufficient to be able to draw satisfactory conclusions about gender differences in all the locations investigated. As in many dialects, the first person singular possessive pronoun, my, is frequently reduced to [mɪ], offering a possible interpretation that this is the object pronoun, me, functioning as a possessive. Although there is indeed evidence in the East Midlands of pronoun exchange of this type (see chapter 3 below), the fact that for many speakers [ma], and to a lesser extent [mə], is equally common, as illustrated by a family in Leicester (C1190/20/02) who vary between talking about my dad [ma dad], my gran [mɪ gɹan] and my nan [mə nan], suggests that this is more likely to be an example of vowel reduction in connected speech. Further support for this analysis is provided by speakers who retain the second person singular possessive pronoun, thy, (see chapter 3 below for more details), as this also frequently surfaces as [ðɪ] (e.g. haven’t thee brought thy gansey [ðɪ ganzɪ] in Heanor – C1190/12/04), and the preposition, by, is also frequently reduced to [bɪ] (e.g. by time [bɪ taɪm] I’ve sort of understood in Nottingham – C1190/26/05) and there is even one example in Heanor (C1190/12/04) of fortnight [fɔːtnɪt]. Examples of triphthongs (e.g. tyre [taɪə] in Mansfield (C1190/26/04) and tired [tɑɪəd] in Leicester (C1190/20/04) are slightly more common in our data than smoothed realisations, although tokens such as wildfire [waːɫdfaː] in Heanor (C1190/12/04) and wireless (= ‘radio set’) [wɑːləs] in Swadlincote (C1190/12/05) suggest smoothing

2.2 Vowels 

 47

does occur with speakers using a front or back vowel depending on their default price vowel. As in most dialects of English (see e.g. Wells 2008: 265), the pairs either and neither vary between price and fleece according to individual speaker preference and are also likely to show within-speaker variability. The historic pronunciations of words ending orthographically in , such as light, night, right etc. occur in Coplow Dale (C1190/14635  –  right right [ɹɛɪt ɹɑːt]), Heanor (C1190/12/04  –  right as a cart [ɹɛɪt əz ə kɑːt]), Swadlincote (C900/03055 – right lucky [ɹɛʔ lʊkɪ] & C1190/12/05 – we talk right [wɪ tɔːk ɹɛɪt] and at night [əʔ nɛɪt]) and Mansfield (C1190/26/04  –  right rough [ɹɛɪʔ ɹʊf). All these examples are from older speakers and, impressionistically at least, it appears most likely to surface with the intensifier right, as in right cold or right big, suggesting the dialectal pronunciation is closely associated with a lexical form that is in itself localised to the north of England and the East Midlands. Interestingly the speaker in Coplow Dale uses the phrase if you don’t hold that right right [ɹɛɪt ɹɑ:t], a difference in pronunciation which suggests the intriguing possibility that he distinguishes between right [ɹɛɪʔ] as an adverb of degree meaning ‘very’, and right as an adverb of manner meaning ‘correctly’, which he assigns to his default price vowel. choice [ɔɪ]  Few dialects show variation in this set from a diphthong of the type, [ɔɪ], and our present-day data confirms this is almost universally favoured in the East Midlands. We suspect one might occasionally encounter a diphthong with a slightly lowered onset, [ɒɪ], in the far north of the area as is demonstrated in Two Dales (C1190/12/03) – a realisation that is common in neighbouring South Yorkshire. A British Caribbean family recorded in Nottingham (C1190/26/05) occasionally pronounce boy as [bwaɪ], but this is an isolated example that reflects their bidialectal status and tendency to shift between local speech patterns and patwa. near [ɪə ~ ɪː] square [ɛː > eː] cure [ɔː > ʊə]  As elsewhere in the UK, the traditional centring diphthongs, /ɪə/, /ɛə]/ and /ʊə/ are  increasingly giving way to smoothed monophthongs, especially among younger East Midlanders. Loss of rhoticity in the East Midlands was apparent in all SED localities bar Charlesworth in the far north west and consequently diphthongs with a central offset appear consistently at e.g. CHAIR (V.2.9 – [ʧɛ(ˑ) ə] in Nottinghamshire and all bar one locality in Leicestershire and [ʧɪə] in Derbyshire and one site in Leicestershire), SHEARS (III.7.7 – [ʃɪəz] in all sites except one example of [ʃɛːz] in Derbyshire) and SURE (IX.7.12 – [ʃʊə] in Leicestershire and one locality in Nottinghamshire and broader diphthongs of the type [ʃuˑə, ʃɪuˑə] in

48 

 2 Phonetics and phonology

Derbyshire and elsewhere in Nottinghamshire). There is, however, evidence in a small number of sound recordings that the smoothing process was underway in the East Midlands by the mid-twentieth century as shown by examples in SED sound recordings of e.g. swear [swɛː] in Kniveton (C908/51 C9–C10), pair [pɛː] and poor [pɔː] in Hathern (C908/56 C6) and year [jɪː] in Sheepy Magna (C908/56 C10), although diphthongs are considerably more numerous. This process is, however, now well advanced and our present-day data show monophthongs categorically for square (bar the lexically restricted exceptions noted below), near-categorically for cure (and certainly so for younger speakers), and extremely frequently for near, although diphthongs of various types remain relatively common with this set. This picture much more closely resembles developments in southern English than in northern dialects, where diphthongs remain more robust. The variation between a diphthong, [ɪə], and a monophthong, [ɪː], for near correlates strongly with age rather than geographic location in our present-day data. Apart from the sixth-form students recorded in Leicester (C1190/20/02), most of whom consistently favour [ɪː], very few individuals use exclusively one variant. Rather, older speakers everywhere produce more diphthongs than monophthongs, while the reverse is true of younger speakers: a clear indication of the direction of change. For speakers who vary between the two forms, there is a tendency for [ɪə] to occur most frequently in open syllables before a pause or utterance finally, while [ɪː] is strongly favoured in closed syllables and open syllables mid-utterance or utterance initially, although this distinction is not absolute. Thus, for instance, in Two Dales (C1190/12/04) we have examples such as gear [gɪə] elicited in response to the prompt word CLOTHES and, in connected speech, engineering [ɛnʤənɪːɹɪn], years ago [jɪːz əgɔʊ] and my dad’s grown up here and [ɪːɹ ən] I’ve grown up here [ɪə]; and in Nottingham (C1190/26/05) we find weird [wɪːd], when you live here [ɪː] you get to like know what it’s all about and it’s not really [ɹɪːlɪ] that bad, and mum hasn’t been here [hɪə]. Finally, as noted elsewhere, the realisation of letter~comma with [ɐ ~ ɒ] in Leicester (more below) means the diphthong used for near with an open syllable, especially in isolation or phrase finally, occasionally has a lowered offset, [ɪɐ], as illustrated by utterances such as chuck it here [ʧʊk ɪt ɪɐ] (C1190/20/02) and I probably will stay around here [hɪɐ] (C1190/20/04). The typical realisation for square is [ɛː], although some speakers, especially in Nottingham, vary between this and a much closer variant, [eː] – e.g. Nottingham (C900/12606, C1190/26/02 & C1190/26/05), Heanor (C1190/12/04) and Mansfield (C1190/26/04). The northern tendency to assign the deictic pair there and where to the near set (i.e. analogous with here) survives in traditional dialect in Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire, as illustrated by several examples of there as [ðɪə] from older speakers in Heanor (C1190/12/04), West Stockwith (C900/12620) and Mansfield (C1190/26/04) and where [wɪə] in Swadlincote (C1190/12/05), although

2.2 Vowels 

 49

for most speakers these words are nowadays assigned the default square vowel as in southern English. Unstressed existential/presentational there, however, which generally has a weak form with a schwa in most dialects, often surfaces with a comparatively stronger vowel in broad local speech in Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire. This is particularly evident in our data in tags – e.g. isn’t there [ɪnʔði] in Two Dales (C1190/12/03), wasn’t there [wɒnʔði] in Heanor (C1190/12/04) and hasn’t there [anʔði] in Mansfield (C1190/26/04) – although there are also examples in declaratives, such as there’s cells in there [ðɪz sɛɫz ɪn ðɛː] in Swadlincote (C1190/12/05) and there isn’t no problem [ði ɪnʔ nəʊ pɹɒbləm] in Nottingham (C1190/26/02). Pronunciations such as I’m sure it were [am ʃʊəɹ ɪʔ wəː] in Two Dales (C1190/12/03), cured [kjʊəd] in Heanor (C1190/12/04) and poor air [pʊəɹ ɛː] in Swadlincote (C1190/12/05) show diphthongs still occur, albeit only among the older speakers in our data and even for these speakers [ɔː] is much more common and indeed categorical for most speakers in locations from Mansfield (C1190/26/04) in the north via Nottingham (C1190/26/02 & c1190/26/05-06) and Derby (C900/03118) to Leicester (C1190/20/02-04) in the south. One token of urinal as [juːɹaːnʊ], elicited in Heanor (C1190/12/04) in response to the prompt word TOILET, suggests a goose vowel is possible for some speakers where cure precedes the lateral /r/ word-medially in items like tourism and furious, although the scarcity of supporting examples indicates this is probably not as common as in dialects in the north of England, where it also applies to environments preceding /l/, such as purely and cruelly. As is true of most dialects the unstressed pronoun your is invariably reduced to [jə] and, among speakers at the broader end of the dialect spectrum even the schwa can be deleted where the pronoun precedes a vowel or a dropped H, as shown by numerous examples in Swadlincote, such as on back of your hand [ɒm bak ə jand] and there’d be coal dust coming out your ears [kʊmɪn aːʔ jɪːz] (C1190/26/05).

2.2.3 Unstressed vowels happy [ɪ > i > ɛ]  A front, close lax variant, [ɪ], associated with ‘conservative’ varieties of RP and dialects in the central north of England remains a distinctive feature of speech for many East Midlanders. A contemporary RP-like, tense [i], is notably absent from SED published data at e.g. HOW MANY (VII.8.11) and occurs in only one sound recording – in Seagrave, Leicestershire (C908/56 C7) – and then only occasionally. Our present-day data suggests that happY-tensing (Wells 1982: 257–258) is now relatively common among younger speakers, and Docherty and Foulkes concur,  observing that in Derby [ɪ] only appears “sporadically in older WC speech” (1999: 50). Nonetheless, [ɪ], occurs regularly in our recorded data from

50 

 2 Phonetics and phonology

Kirkby-in-Ashfield (C1190/26/03) in the north via Nottingham (C900/12616), Derby (C900/03118) and Leicester (C900/09073) to Tilton-on-the-Hill (C900/09087) in the south. In many cases speakers consistently use [ɪ], but even older speakers in Crich (C900/03010), Heanor (C1190/12/04), Wirksworth (C1190/03012) and Mansfield (C1190/26/04), offer occasional tokens with [i], confirmation, perhaps, of a gradual change in progress. Significantly, though, we have only one example where [i] markedly outnumbers [ɪ]  –  this in a recording with sixth-form students in Leicester (C1190/20/04). Seven of the students consistently use [i], while one varies between this and the lax variant, [ɪ]. It is, however, worth noting all eight – and indeed all speakers in our data who show evidence of happy-tensing – habitually use [ɪ] for the plural noun and 3rd person singular verbal morpheme , a phenomenon also noted by Docherty and Foulkes for Derby in words like happiness and countries (1999: 50). While many young RP speakers and southern accents are increasingly characterised by pronunciations such as babies [bɛɪbiːz] and carries [kaɹiːz], examples in our data such as memories [mɛmɹɪz] in Two Dales (C1190/12/03), Brummies [bɹʊmɪz] in Mansfield (C1190/26/04), aunties [ɑːntɪz] in Nottingham (C1190/26/05) and cities [sɪtɪz] in Leicester (C1190/20/02) confirm this is currently rare in the East Midlands, although an isolated example of he copies [kɒpiˑz] all the voices in Leicester (C1190/20/04) suggests it may be making inroads among younger speakers. Despite evidence that [i] is encroaching on conservative [ɪ] in some areas of the East Midlands, presumably as a result of standardising and/or external influence from southern varieties, there is also evidence of an innovative supralocal form, [ɛ], across the whole of the region, as demonstrated in e.g. Kirkby-in-Ashfield (C1190/26/03), Arnold (C900/12562), Nottingham (C1190/26/02) and Leicester (C1190/20/02). This mirrors a similar development in some northern varieties and means such speakers therefore maintain a contrast with varieties in the West Midlands, East Anglia and to the south who favour /i/. No speakers use [ɛ] exclusively, but examples in Nottingham (C1190/26/02 – very scary [vɛɹi skeːɹɛ]), Leicester (C1190/20/02  –  money [mʊnɛ]) and Groby (C1190/20/03  –  Brummy [bɹʊmɛ]) suggest it is most likely to occur in an open syllable and utterance finally. Two interesting examples from Leicester (C1190/20/04) from young speakers who otherwise use [i] offer convincing proof that this variant is extremely salient locally: one speaker only uses this pronunciation on the dialect form mardy [mɑːdɛ] (= ‘moody/sullen/spoilt’), while another offers the phrase I’m going chippy [am gəʊɪn ʧɪpɛ] (= ‘I am going to the fish and chip shop’) in imitation of broad local speech. There is some evidence that this is a salient feature for many East Midlands speakers, particularly younger speakers. Eye dialect respellings with ‘eh’ can be found in regional press, particularly for place names, such as ‘Enderbeh’ [= Enderby] and ‘Cosbeh’ [= Cosby] in stories about sounding ‘local’ (Marlow

2.2 Vowels 

 51

2003). Furthermore, in a session with local school pupils, one of the authors asked 17–18 year-old sixth formers to write a local word of their choice and illustrate it as they wished. The students picked their own words and as can be seen in Figure 2.1, happy with /ɛ/ clearly exists above the level of consciousness, particularly as subsequent discussions confirmed they know the ‘standard’ spelling is ‘mardy’.

Figure 2.1: Written representation of mardy.

letter~comma [ə > ɐ ~ ɒ]  The loss of r-coloured vowels alluded to previously led to a merger of the letter and comma sets that was complete for most of the East Midlands by the middle of the last century. Rhoticity is only noted in the SED Basic Material at e.g. BUTTER (V.5.4) in Charlesworth, although it is also occasionally audible in the sound recording in Youlgreave (C908/51 C2). For the overwhelming majority of speakers nowadays the realisation for both sets is an RP-like, [ə], except in and around the city of Leicester where a lowered variant, [ɐ], is widespread – in extreme cases this may even be retracted towards [ɒ]. Although there is no record of this in SED data, it is extremely common in present-day recordings in Quorn (C900/09097A), Barlestone (C900/09131), Tilton-on-the-Hill (C900/09087). Lutterworth (C900/09070), Groby (C1190/20/03) and Leicester (C1190/20/02 &

52 

 2 Phonetics and phonology

C1190/20/04). Clearly then this is a recent development currently localised to Leicester and the immediate surrounding area, although a handful of tokens in Nottingham (C1190/26/05) suggests it may be diffusing northwards. Its current concentration around Leicester makes it highly distinctive and provides a clear contrast with broad speech in the West Midlands where, according to Clark and Asprey (2013: 56), letter~comma is typically realised with [a] – thus better [bɛta] in Birmingham; better [bɛtɒ] in Leicester. Indeed locals are often caricatured as referring to their home town as e.g. Loughborough [lʊfbɹɒ] or Leicester [lɛstɒ]. This is demonstrated convincingly by a contributor to the Evolving English: VoiceBank (BL shelfmark: C1442), a collection of recordings created by visitors to the British Library’s ‘Evolving English’ exhibition in 2010/11. Prompted to provide detailed information about where their accent came from one contributor simply supplied the response Leicester [lɛstɒ] (C1442/931). This lowered/retracted variant tends to occur most frequently in open syllables utterance finally as demonstrated by speakers from Hinckley (C1190/20/02 – I think it’s because it’s so close to the border [bɔːdə] with Warwickshire Nuneaton and that it kind of comes across especially some of the words we pick it up from the other [ʊðə] side of the border [bɔːdɒ]), Groby (C1190/20/03 – we’re not married so I just say my ‘partner’ [pɑːʔnɒ]) and Leicester (C1190/20/04 – me neither [miː niːðɐ] and he’s a beggar [bɛgɒ]). Where most speakers in the UK assign the final syllable of county names such as Nottinghamshire /nɒtɪŋəmʃə/ to the letter set many West and East Midlanders share a preference for aligning these with near, as demonstrated by pronunciations such as Warwickshire [wɒɹɪkʃɪː] in Leicester (C1190/20/02). Historic pronunciations with [ɪ] for letter-comma are rare, although occasional tokens such as trousers [tɹaːzɪz] in Swadlincote (C1190/12/05), old-fashioned [ɔʊɫfaʃɪn] in Two Dales (C1190/12/03), waggons [wagɪnz] in Coplow Dale (C1190/14635) and Crich (C900/03010), curtains [kɪːtɪnz] in Heanor (C1190/12/04), Canada [kanɪdɐ] in Nottingham (C1190/26/05) and sofa [səʊfɪ] in Belper (C1190/12/01), Eastwood (C1190/26/01) and Kirkby-in-Ashfield (C1190/26/03) demonstrate older forms. The latter is included in the OED (online) as a spelling variation, sofy, characterised as ‘vulgar’ and is nowadays restricted to older speakers, generally in the form of ‘folk memory’ or ‘repartee’. Localised forms for kinship terms like nana, which belong to the comma set for most speakers in the UK, occur regularly with a final palm vowel in the East Midlands. Both GRANDMOTHER and MOTHER were prompt words in the BBC Voices survey, eliciting nana [ˌnaˈnɑː] in several locations from Kirkby-in-Ashfield (C1190/26/03) in the north, via Belper (C1190/12/01), Eastwood (C1190/26/01) and Radford (C1190/26/06) to Leicester (C1190/20/02) in the south and momma [ˌmɒˈmɑː] in Kirkby-in-Ashfield (C1190/26/03), Nottingham (C1190/26/02) and Radford (C1190/26/06). Finally, examples such as interests don’t conflict [kɒɱflɪkt] in Two Dales (C1190/12/03) and Tupperware containers

2.2 Vowels 

 53

[kɒntɛɪnəz] in Swadlincote (C1190/12/05) suggest that a comparatively strong vowel may be assigned by some speakers to the unstressed bound morphemes and in words like consider and computer, although this is perhaps less pervasive than in dialects further north. Although stereotypically associated with Manchester accents (Beal 2008; Ramsammy and Turton 2012), backed and lowered realisations of letter have also been observed in the speech of WC female adolescents in Nottingham (Flynn 2007, 2010) and, anecdotally, in Derby (see description of Derby-born actress Lauren Socha’s accent at 2.5 below). Davies and Braber (2011) note a similar tendency for female speakers in Nottinghamshire and Leicestershire in their study. It has been argued previously by Flynn that this laxing of letter (as well as happy) is a resource used by WC females to avoid being mistakenly classified as “posh”, a social characteristic that has negative connotations for them (Flynn 2007, 2010). A relationship between co-existence of hyper-lax happy and lax letter in the speech of speakers in the area has yet to be investigated. However, Ramsammy and Turton (2012) suggest that in Manchester it is the speakers with the laxest happy who also tend to have retracted letter realisations. A similar correlation is a possibility for speakers in the East Midlands where lax variants of happy and letter have been shown to co-occur. Further evidence of the perception of this feature can be found in local press, where a local article talks about ‘speak[ing] prop-oh Leicest-or’ (Marlow 2013) and the lead singer of the Leicester rock band Kasabian, has performed wearing a ‘Les-tah’ T-shirt which are now widely available in local shops and online. A further example of this was spotted at a market in Nottingham where a vendor was selling ‘lavenda’, see Figure 2.2.

Figure 2.2: Image of lavenda at a Nottingham market.

54 

 2 Phonetics and phonology

morning [ɪ] horses [ə > ɪ] started [ə > ɪ]  Most accents in England (including RP) assign the kit vowel to a number of environments, including unstressed word final morphological suffixes , , and in words such as running, started, catches and biggest. While the suffix is certainly realised with [ɪ] in the East Midlands  –  in contrast, therefore, with neighbouring dialects in East Anglia, where [ə ~ n̩] is common – there is a strong tendency in the other three word final environments to hear speakers use a comparatively weaker vowel giving pronunciations such as skidded [skɪdəd], wishes [wɪʃəz] and thinnest [θɪnəst], which are dialectally distinctive. The SED Basic Material records BUSHES (IV.10.5) with word final [ə] in four localities in Derbyshire, two sites in Nottinghamshire but with [ɪ] in all sites in Leicestershire; and the final syllable of RIGHT-HANDED (VI.7.13b) with [ə] in all bar one site in Derbyshire, two villages in Nottinghamshire and again with [ɪ] throughout Leicestershire. SED audio data actually suggests a wider distribution with [ə] occurring frequently in sound recordings in Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire and, in addition, one token of bosses as [bɒsəz] in Hathern, Leicestershire (C908/56 C6). Instances of [ə] in our present-day data are too frequent to list individually, but again extend across the whole of Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire from New Houghton (C900/12543 – e.g. thrushes [θɹʊʃəz]) and Mansfield (C1190/26/04  –  e.g. colleges [kɒlɪʤəz] and started [stɑːtəd]) in the north, through Two Dales (C1190/12/03 – e.g. fondest [fɒndəst] and garages [gaɹɪʤəz]), Heanor (C1190/12/04 – e.g. dresses [dɹɛsəz] and ended [ɛndəd]) and Nottingham (C1190/26/05  –  nieces [niːsəz] and repeated [ɹɪpiːtəd]) and as far south as Swadlincote (C900/03055  –  e.g. sausages [sɒsɪʤəz]). Although [ɪ] is more common in our present-day data from Leicestershire there are examples of [ə] from a young female speaker from Hinckley (C1190/20/02  –  e.g. united [jənɑɪtəd]). It would appear, then, that [ə] is very much the dominant form, especially in Derbyshire, but also across much of Nottinghamshire and possibly even diffusing southwards into Leicestershire. It should also be stressed that this is a conspicuous feature of local accents that we sense is embraced by a wide range of social groups and even extends into self-conscious speech. Docherty and Foulkes (1999: 50) agree that horses with [ɪ] ‘only appears in comparatively rare cases of style-shifting’ in Derby, with [ə] the commonest form and Hughes et al. (2005: 91) note that in Leicester ‘[i]n words like cases the second vowel is [ə] rather than the [ɪ] that is found in RP and many other accents’. As noted previously we hope to raise awareness of such distinctively East Midland features and it is worth noting here that the use of a schwa vowel in this environment is

2.3 Consonants 

 55

characteristic of the speech of TV presenter, Tess Daly. Tess Daly was born in 1969 and grew up in New Mills, Derbyshire and is well-known to British audiences as presenter of the extremely popular BBC television show, Strictly Come Dancing. The show features celebrities competing in a series of weekly dance contests in which Tess regularly seeks the opinion of a panel of four judges, each time very clearly introducing them as judges [ʤʊʤəz]. Moreover we can also report that one of the authors has a wife with a relatively middle-class Ashbourne accent who also favours [ə] here to the point that her daughter, as a young child, used to think a ‘hair tie’ (singular) was called a buncher [bʊnʧə] as her mother was in the habit of checking every morning whether she wanted her hair tied in bunches [bʊnʧəz]. Bound morphemes such as , , , , in words like wicked, packet, kitchen, village and engine generally feature the kit vowel for most speakers in the East Midlands, but one very occasionally encounters pronunciations with [ə], albeit this is certainly not as widespread as in neighbouring East Anglian dialects. The SED records the final syllable of RABBIT (III.13.14) and CHICKEN (IV.6.11) entirely with [ɪ] in the East Midlands, but has a handful of examples of TURNIP (II.4.1) with word final [ə] and there are spontaneous examples in SED sound recordings in Charlesworth (C908/11 C5) of engines as [ɪnʤənz] and in Markfield of turnips as [tənəps] and in present-day recordings of engine [ɛnʤən] in Nottingham (C900/12616) and [ɪnʤən] in Tonge (C900/03123), of chicken [ʧɪkən] in Nottingham (C1190/26/05) and kitchen [kɪʧən] in Heanor (C1190/12/04).

2.3 Consonants 2.3.1 Plosives T  Variants for /t/ which also occur in other British dialects, such as T-glottaling, T-tapping and T-voicing, are equally commonplace in the East Midlands. Despite scant evidence of T-glottaling in the SED Basic Material for the East Midlands, there are glimpses in sound recordings in several localities, including in Stonebroom (C908/51 C6 – other way about [ʊðə weː əbaːʔ]), Oxton (C908/52 C5 – nowt [nɛʊʔ]) and Seagrave (C908/56 C7 – stand up a bit [stand ʊp ə bɪʔ]). The greater presence in contemporary East Midland dialects mirrors the nationwide increase in T-glottaling and is evident in our data across the whole region. It is particularly frequent word finally and especially on function words, as demonstrated in Two

56 

 2 Phonetics and phonology

Dales (C1190/12/03 – patting it [ɪʔ] and wrapping it [ɪʔ] in greaseproof paper) and Nottingham (C1190/26/02 – pass it on [pas ɪʔ ɒn], but also common word medially between vowels, as confirmed in Derby (C900/03118 – putting [pʊʔɪn]) and Leicester (C1190/20/02 – they started [stɑːʔɪd] copying). Where /t/ occurs between vowels either an alveolar tap, [ɾ], or stop, [d], is also widespread among speakers across the region, as confirmed by examples from e.g. Swadlincote (C1190/12/05  – I hadn’t got a car [ɑɪ adnə gɒɾ ə kaː] and I’d got (a) house [ɑɪd gɒd aːs]), Nottingham (C1190/26/05 – can’t really remember what it was like [wɒɾ ɪʔ wəz laɪk] and he’s got it wrong [gɒd ɪʔ ɹɒŋ]) and Groby (C1190/20/03 – whatever [wɒɾɛvə] and well out of order [wɛl aːd əv ɔːdə]). The rise of T-glottaling across much of Great Britain is well documented and the East Midlands is typical in that younger speakers in our present-day data produce more glottalised tokens than their older counterparts, and produce more glottal stops than alveolar taps or stops, although T-tapping and T-voicing is nonetheless widespread. Docherty and Foulkes’ quantitative analysis of T-glottaling in Derby (1999: 50–51) supports this impression, and as all three variants are well-established in most British dialects they are not distinguishing features of speech in the East Midlands. More distinctive, however, is the tendency, particularly among older East Midlanders to convert a word-final /t/ followed by a word with a vowel onset to an alveolar approximant, [ɹ], in a restricted set of common verbs (e.g. get, let, put, shut) and function words (e.g. but, lot, not, that, what). Typical examples can be heard in e.g. Mansfield (C1190/26/04 – you put all your stuff in [jə pʊɹ ɔːɫ jə stʊf ɪn]) and Swadlincote (C1190/12/05 – but I got a good hiding [bʊɹ a gɒɹə gʊd ɑːdɪn] next day) and the process also occurs word internally, as illustrated by speakers in e.g. Arnold (C900/12562  –  getting [gɛɹɪn]), Two Dales (C1190/12/03 – putting [pʊɹɪn]) and Leicester (C1190/20/02 – whatever [wɒɹɛvə]. Evidence from the SED suggests the T to R rule (Wells 1982: 370) was at one time a feature of dialects across a wide area of England, but it is nowadays perhaps most closely associated with accents further north – see e.g. Stoddart et al.’s description of Sheffield English (1999: 76). Although rare (but not entirely absent) in our data among younger speakers, presumably because T-glottaling, which is possible in all environments where T to R can occur, is the dominant variant, it remains relatively common among older speakers in the East Midlands. Some commentators include the tap, [ɾ], within discussions of T to R, as [ɾ] is a possible realisation for both /r/ and /t/ in some dialects – see e.g. Newbrook (1999: 98) for tapped R in Liverpool. Such an interpretation would obviously provide more evidence for T to R in the East Midlands, especially greater frequency among younger speakers, but as there are no examples of tapped R in our data we only include examples here of T to R with [ɹ].

2.3 Consonants 

 57

2.3.2 Nasals NG  For some East Midlanders a velar nasal, /ŋ/, in nouns such as thing, adjectives like wrong, and verbs such as sing, is frequently accompanied by an additional velar stop, giving pronunciations such as thing [θɪŋg], wrong [ɹɒŋg] and sing [sɪŋg]. This is most audible intervocalically at a morpheme or word boundary such as young ‘uns [jʊŋgənz] in Swadlincote (C1190/12/05), bringing [bɹɪŋgɪn] in Kimberley (C900/12604), and minger [mɪŋgə] (= ‘unattractive person’) in Groby (C1190/20/03) or utterance finally, as in they didn’t stay long [lɒŋg] in Heanor (C1190/12/04), gangs [gaŋgz] in Arnold (C900/12562) and my mum tries to make herself young [jʌŋg] in Leicester (C1190/12/04  –  the quality of the vowel here reflects the fact this was supplied by the one young speaker for whom this was the dominant realisation as noted at STRUT above). Wells refers to this feature as velar nasal plus and locates its geographic heartland as Birmingham, Coventry, Stoke-on-Trent, Manchester and Liverpool, stressing that where it exists it often “applies almost across the social scale” (1982: 366). Our present-day data suggest it is also quite common in the East Midlands, but the comparatively small number of tokens in SED sound recordings  –  e.g. hanging [aŋgɪn] in Stonebroom (C908/ 51 C6) and young ’uns [jʊŋgənz] in Sheepy Magna (C908/56 C7) – suggest it is possibly a relatively new feature, presumably diffusing from the West Midlands, or possibly as self-conscious hypercorrection. Nowadays, then, as in Birmingham the word singer [sɪŋgə] may rhyme locally with finger [fɪŋgə] (cf. RP singer /sɪŋə/ versus finger /fɪŋgə/). Most native speakers of English vary their pronunciation of the final consonant in polysyllabic or morphologically complex words ending orthographically in , using either a velar nasal, [ŋ] or an alveolar nasal, [n]. In the UK and elsewhere the velar articulation is considered the prestige variant and research, such as Trudgill (1974: 48), has consistently shown that pronunciations with [n] increase in frequency in informal contexts for most speakers and are less common generally among higher social status groups. This alternation can apply equally to nouns such as morning [mɔ:nɪn] recorded in Groby (C1190/20/03), pronouns like nothing [nʊθɪn] supplied in Nottingham (C900/12530) and gerunds or present participles like putting [pʊʔɪn] recorded in Derby (C900/03118). The distribution of either variant meets the same social criteria noted above for the whole of the UK so that many speakers use both variants, as confirmed by the utterances when I’m pointing [pɔɪntɪŋ] at something [sʊmθɪŋ] and pushing [pʊʃɪn] and shoving [ʃʊvɪn], both supplied by the same speaker in Nottingham (C1190/26/02) and replicated in numerous locations. Although three alternatives are therefore available locally for forms such as sitting as [sɪtɪŋ, sɪtɪn, sɪtɪŋg], the

58 

 2 Phonetics and phonology

alveolar nasal is far more common in informal speech than velar nasal plus in this environment. Interestingly, speakers in Nottingham (and potentially elsewhere in the region) demonstrate all three variants in referring to their home town as illustrated by instances of Nottingham as [nɒtɪŋgʊm] (C1190/26/02), [nɒtɪŋəm] (C1190/26/06) and [nɒtɪnəm] (C1190/26/05). Finally, the set of nouns/pronouns ending orthographically in , such as anything and something frequently surface with word final [ɪŋk] throughout the region, as testified by instances of something [sʊmɪŋk] in Heanor (C1190/12/04), everything [ɛvɹɪθɪŋk] in Nottingham (C1190/26/05) and anything [ɛnɪθɪŋk] in Leicester (C1190/20/04). This, however, is also true of many British accents and not unique to the East Midlands.

2.3.3 Fricatives H  H-dropping occurs regularly in informal speech throughout the East Midlands, as is the case for most dialects in England and Wales. As elsewhere, it is a stigmatised feature and thus shows a good deal of social variation, and is generally avoided by the middle classes in all contexts. There are no tokens, for instance, from members of the prestigious Fernie Hunt recorded in Arnesby (C1190/20/01), but SED and present-day recordings offer numerous examples from locations across the whole region and from speakers of all ages. Typical examples include hot [ɒt] in Belper (C1190/12/01), hand signals [and sɪgnʊz] in Nottingham (C1190/26/02) and hit [ɪt] in Groby (C1190/20/03). Examples such as behave [biʲɛɪv] in Leicester (C1190/20/02) and outhouse [aːtaːs] in Heanor (C1190/12/04) show H-dropping can occur word medially, but it is, of course, most common word initially. Where H-dropping occurs on nouns with an indefinite article, many speakers use ‘an’ – e.g. an herbalist [ən ɪːbəlɪst] in Heanor (C1190/12/04) – suggesting the word is internalised as beginning with a vowel. There are, however, also examples where this is resisted – e.g. in a house [ɪn ə ʔaːs] in Heanor (C1190/12/04) – which suggests a speaker is subconsciously aware of an underlying deleted consonant. Though rarer, in such cases speakers invariably insert a glottal stop in place of the deleted /h/. Finally, as is often the case with a stigmatised feature it is not uncommon to hear hypercorrect forms with speakers inserting a superfluous /h/ on words with a vowel onset, as illustrated frequently in the SED sound recording in Charlesworth (C908/11 C5)  –  e.g. early [hɚːlɪ]. Examples in our present-day data only occur on the word aitch – e.g. you drop the aitches [hɛɪʧɪz] in Leicester (C1190/20/04), although we suspect it applies more widely, albeit as a low frequency feature.

2.3 Consonants 

 59

Pronunciations of aitch with initial /h/ appear to be on the increase nationally, possibly as a result of a mutual insecurity about the social implications of an inappropriately dropped /h/ (see e.g. Sillitoe 2010). TH  TH-fronting – a process whereby /θ/ is realised as [f] or /ð/ surfaces as [v] currently receives a good deal of academic interest and indeed critical comment. It is present in the speech of some younger speakers in the East Midlands, as demonstrated by e.g. underneath [ʊndəniːf] in Derby (C900/03118), thugs [fʊgz] in Nottingham (C1190/26/02) and brother [bɹʊvə] in Leicester (C1190/20/02). Its complete absence from SED data and among older speakers in our present-day cohort clearly indicates it is a relatively recent phenomenon locally with the oldest speakers in our data set who exhibit TH-fronting being two males: one born in Nottingham in 1967, the other born in Derby in 1969. TH-fronting is increasingly encountered in a number of urban areas across Great Britain and several studies show it is particularly “favoured by working-class adolescents” (Schleef & Ramsammy 2013: 3), hence its emergence in the East Midlands is, we presume, part of a nationwide trend. Alongside T-glottaling, and like H-dropping for previous generations, TH-fronting is a widely stigmatised feature. Some commentators suggest the spread of T-glottaling and TH-fronting is evidence that younger speakers’ accents are beginning to converge across the UK. This may be true for these features, but many speakers with a variety of accents in England have been united for generations by a shared tendency to drop initial /h/ in words such as house and happy, and yet this has not prevented us from distinguishing between speakers from different places. If T-glottaling and TH-fronting do indeed become more established in the East Midlands, then this merely illustrates how some features of popular speech may eventually become national rather than local characteristics, while other aspects of a speaker’s accent remain more localised.

2.3.4 Laterals R  There is very little deviation in our data from an alveolar approximant, [ɹ], such that East Midlands English is firmly aligned with southern varieties and RP in this respect. This realisation dominates across the entire region and in all phonetic environments: word initially in e.g. wrong [ɹɒŋ] in Derby (C900/03118); postconsonantally in e.g. cross [kɹɒs] in Nottingham (C900/12606); and intervocalically in e.g. America [əmɛɹɪkə] in Leicester (C1190/20/02). Perhaps

60 

 2 Phonetics and phonology

surprisingly, even in this latter environment we have found no evidence of a tap or flap, [ɾ], that characterises speech in neighbouring dialects in places like Sheffield and Manchester. Even in our most northern locations speakers consistently use [ɹ], as confirmed by e.g. ferret [fɛɹɪt] in Mansfield (C1190/26/04) and very [vɛɹɪ] in Two Dales (C1190/12/03), although we suspect it is possible that [ɾ] exists for some speakers in some areas in the very far north. The only variation we encounter in our data is an occasional labiodental approximant, [ʋ] – e.g. bring [bʋɪŋ] in Nottingham (C1190/26/05) and married [maʋɪd] in Groby (C1190/20/03). Docherty and Foulkes report very occasional use of [ɾ] by older speakers in Derby, but note that [ʋ] is “increasingly used by the young, sometimes variably rather than categorically” (1999: 51). Although all the labiodental tokens are supplied by just two individuals, both also use [ɹ], so this corresponds with our admittedly limited data. L  Most speakers in the East Midlands generally differentiate between syllable initial and syllable final /l/. Thus words like laugh [laf] in Wirksworth (C900/03012), telly [tɛlɪ] in Mansfield (C1190/26/04) and class [klas] in Leicester (C900/09073) are pronounced with a clear ‘l’ – i.e. the tip of the tongue is raised to make contact with the roof of the mouth. In contrast words such as ginnel [gɪnəɫ] in Belper (C1190/12/01), child [ʧaɪɫd] in Nottingham (C1190/26/05) and rattle [ɹaʔɫ̩] in Leicester (C1190/20/04) are articulated with a dark ‘l’ – i.e. the tip of the tongue makes contact with the alveolar ridge, while the back of the tongue is simultaneously raised towards the soft palate. SED fieldworkers consistently record clear /l/ in all environments for Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire and in localities in northern Leicestershire at LAST (VII.2.2) and QUILT (V.2.11), with dark /l/ only recorded at QUILT (V.2.11) for the southern half of Leicestershire, although we consider dark /l/ to occur regularly in SED sound recordings throughout Leicestershire as demonstrated by e.g. fowls [faʊɫz] in Hathern (C908/56 C6) and wool [wʊɫ] in Goadby (C908/57 C1), but not in Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire. As our assessment is based on a purely auditory analysis it is sometimes difficult to distinguish between the two allophones with absolute confidence, but our data suggests clear and dark /l/ are now predictable by phonetic environment for most speakers in the region. This assertion is supported by Docherty and Foulkes’ conclusion that “Derby has the usual clear-dark dichotomy according to syllable position” and, moreover, that “the auditory difference is often less clear than in the south” (1999: 51). The fact that L-vocalisation – a process that can only apply to dark /l/ – is common in the East Midlands is further support to this allophonic distribution. Although much more widely associated with accents in the south-east of

2.3 Consonants 

 61

England, L-vocalisation occurs regularly in our present-day data, particularly in the area surrounding Derby, Nottingham and Leicester and is described by Docherty and Foulkes as “frequent, but socially, stylistically, phonetically and phonologically complex” in Derby (1999: 52), while Hughes et al. note that “/l/ is frequently vocalised” in Leicester (2005: 92). Apart from the special case with words ending orthographically with noted earlier (see goat above), L-vocalisation occurs in open and closed syllables – e.g. signal [sɪgnʊ] in Nottingham (C1190/26/02) and building [bɪʊdɪn] in Leicester (C1190/20/02) and is frequently triggered as a substitute for a syllabic consonant – e.g. little [lɪtʊ] in Nottingham (C1190/26/05) and hospital [hɒspɪtʊ] in Leicester (C1190/20/04). In this environment L-vocalisation alternates with syllabic /l/, which is invariably dark and articulated with lateral release as demonstrated by e.g. cattle [katɫ ̩] in Two Dales (C1190/12/03), little [lɪtɫ ̩] in Mansfield (C1190/26/04) and bottle [bɒtɫ ̩] in Groby (C1190/20/05). This feature is also found in Davies and Braber (2011) across ages and regions.

2.3.5 Glides J  Dialects differ regarding the presence or absence of a palatal glide, /j/, after a consonant and preceding the vowel in goose words such as new, beautiful and tune. The pronunciation of new is often considered a key difference between British and American English, for instance, with the typical British pronunciation [njuː] contrasted with American [nuː]. Nonetheless the retention or otherwise of this glide, known as a yod, varies considerably among British English accents, depending on the preceding consonant. In RP yod is generally present following an alveolar nasal, as in newt [njuːt] and mute [mjuːt], after bilabial stops, as in pewter [pjuːtə] and beauty [bjuːti], after a labiodental fricative, as in few [fjuː] and view [vjuː], following palatal stops, as in cube [kjuːb] and argue [ɑːgjuː], and after a voiceless dental fricative and a voiceless glottal fricative, as in enthuse [ɪnθjuːz] and huge [hjuːʤ]. It is also retained by some RP speakers after alveolar stops, giving tune [tjuːn] and dune [djuːn], although increasingly in this environment, modern RP is characterised by a process known as yod-coalescence, whereby the combination of an alveolar stop plus palatal glide produces an affricate, giving [ʧuːn] and [ʤuːn] respectively. Following the alveolar fricatives, /s, z/, and the lateral, /l/, the picture is a little more complex. Many RP speakers retain the glide in words like assume [əsjuːm] and presume [pɹɪzjuːm], although coalescence here too, might permit assume [əʃʲuːm] and presume [pɹɪʒʲuːm]. However, the presence of a yod in words such as suit [sjuːt] (modern RP [suːt]), tissue [tɪsjuː] (modern RP

62 

 2 Phonetics and phonology

[tɪʃuː]), visual [vɪzjuəɫ] (modern RP [vɪʒuəɫ]) and revolution [ɹɛvəljuːʃən] (modern RP [ɹɛvəluːʃən]) is perhaps nowadays only a feature of extremely conservative RP. Nonetheless one can expect to hear salutation most commonly as [saljuːtɛɪʃən], albeit seldom salute as [səljuːt]. Most speakers across the East Midlands mirror RP usage except in the case of the alveolar stops, /n, t, d/. In common with adjacent accent areas such as the West Midlands, Greater Manchester and South Yorkshire, yod is frequently absent following an alveolar nasal, so pronunciations such as knew [nuː] in New Houghton (C900/12543), nuisance [nuːsəns] in Nottingham (C1190/26/02) and newspaper [nuːzpɛɪpə] in Tilton-on-the-Hill (C900/09087) are common. Furthermore, yod-dropping often occurs after the plosives /t/ and /d/, with pronunciations such as Tuesday [tuːzdɪ] in Nottingham (C900/12530), tuition [tuːɪʃən] in Groby (C1190/20/03) and duty [duːtɪ] in Tonge (C900/03123). This is also extended to the cluster /st/ as in stupid [stuːpɪd] in Mansfield (C1190/26/04) or stew [stuː] in Swadlincote (C900/03055). It is widely known that speakers with a broad East Anglian accent are characterised by a total absence of yod in all environments in the goose set (see e.g. Trudgill, 1999a: 133), giving pronunciations such as beauty [buːtɪ], huge [huːʤ], few [fuː] and cube [kuːb]. Speakers in the East Midlands include a palatal glide before the initial consonant in such cases. There are examples in SED sound recordings of yod deletion with beautiful [bʊuːtɪfʊl] in North Wheatley (C908/52 C3) and few [fuː] in Seagrave (C908/56 C3) and Markfield (C908/56 C8), but we have none in our present-day data. Also worthy of mention here, however, is the absence of yod in polysyllabic words where a goose vowel follows a stressed syllable before /l/ in words, as demonstrated by regular [ɹɛglə̩ ] in Heanor (C1190/12/04), fabulous [fabl ̩əs] in Nottingham (C900/12616) and particular [pətɪklə̩ ] in Tonge (C900/03123). These are specific instances where an unstressed goose vowel follows a stressed syllable: one would, for instance, expect to encounter popular as [pɒpələ] in the East Midlands, but the yod is likely to be retained in words like peculiar [pəkjuːliə]. Finally, we have one example of presume [pɹɪzuːm] in Tonge (C900/03123) and anecdotal evidence that pronunciations such as enthusiastic [ɛnθuːziastɪk] occur in the East Midlands, too. Research by Braber and Flynn (2015, 2016) which looked at yod in older and younger speakers throughout Nottingham, Derby and Leicester suggested that high levels of yod-coalescence and low levels of yod-dropping occurred following /t/, with the highest levels of yod-dropping following /n/. Furthermore, this research also suggested that there was an increase in yod-coalescence following /st, d/ for young speakers and decreased yod-dropping overall, but especially following /st/. This feature will be examined in more detail in future work.

2.4 Connected speech processes 

 63

2.4 Connected speech processes 2.4.1 Elision We now turn to a discussion of phenomena that occur in connected speech in the East Midlands, focusing initially on aspects of elision, such as definite article reduction, secondary contraction and preposition reduction. Definite article reduction  In common with dialects to the immediate north in Yorkshire and Lancashire, some speakers in the East Midlands exhibit definite article reduction (DAR). DAR describes a process whereby the definite article, the, is articulated simply as a consonant – most frequently an alveolar or glottal stop, [t, ʔ], very occasionally a voiced or voiceless dental fricative, [ð, θ], but seldom the ejective [t̕] often used by outsiders when trying to mimic the feature. Jones (1999) provides a detailed description of the phonology of DAR and where it occurs in our present-day data, it is nearly always represented as a glottal stop, as demonstrated by in the kitchen [ɪnʔ kɪʧɪn] in Heanor (C1190/12/04) and over the moon [ɒvəʔ muːn] in Kirkby-in-Ashfield (C1190/26/03). There are a handful of examples of DAR with a voiced fricative, primarily where the article precedes a noun with a vowel onset (or deleted /h/), as demonstrated by the only way [ðəʊnɪ wɛɪ] in Nottingham (C1190/26/05) and on the hill [ɒn ðɪɫ] in Two Dales (C1190/12/03), but also very occasionally before a noun with a consonant onset, as demonstrated by she went into the pantry [ɪntəð pantɹɪ] in Swadlincote (C1190/12/05). DAR can occur where the article functions as a subject, as in when the school bell rang [wɛnt skuːɫ bɛɫ ɹaŋ] in Two Dales (C1190/12/03); as an object, as in reading the news [ɹiːdɪnʔ nuːz] in Mansfield (C1190/26/04); but surfaces most frequently in prepositional phrases, such as weak in the head [wiːk ɪnʔ ɛd] in Nottingham (C1190/26/02). SED evidence at TO THE GROUND (IV.4.1) shows the as [t] in all sites in Derbyshire and all bar one in Nottinghamshire, but consistently as [ðə] in Leicestershire. There are frequent examples of DAR in SED sound recordings in Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire and occasional instances in Leicestershire, albeit less frequently and always as [ð], as confirmed by e.g. one atop the other [wɒn ətɒp ə ðʊðə] in Great Dalby (C908/56 C9) and we used to work the horses single [wɪ jusːt tə wəːk ðɒsɪz sɪŋgɫ ̩] in Sheepy Magna (C908/56 C10) and in the Incidental Material in Hathern – them’s the handles [ðɛmz ðandɫ̩z] and Ullesthorpe – the doors want the hinges putting on [ðə dɔːz wɒnt ðɪnʤɪz pʊtɪn ɒn] (Playford 1956). Although absent from our present-day data in Leicestershire, it remains relatively common in parts of Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire. Even here speakers seldom favour DAR exclusively; rather they are ranged along a continuum from frequent users

64 

 2 Phonetics and phonology

to those who only occasionally exhibit DAR, with frequency of use correlating to social factors such as age, gender, social class and context: DAR is avoided entirely, for instance, by middle-class speakers and – in our data at least – most common among older working-class speakers. The presence of DAR is, nonetheless, further evidence that East Midlands English bears greater comparison with northern dialects than West Midlands English where Clark and Asprey report very occasional use of ‘the definite determiner [ð] before vowels’, but only this variant and, moreover, only among elderly informants from the Black Country (2013: 75). Secondary contraction  Chapter 3 (see chapter 3 below) contains a more detailed description of constructions used by speakers in the East Midlands to form negative statements but one particular variant – secondary contraction – is worth discussing here as another example of a common elision process. Secondary contraction refers to the simplification of the word final consonant cluster in enclitic negatives, so that speakers produce forms such as didn’t [dɪnt], haven’t [ant] and isn’t [ɪnt] by deleting the final /s/, /v/ or /z/ when attaching the suffix /nt/ that represents a contraction of the negative particle, not. Although not unique to East Midland dialects secondary contraction is by far the most common vernacular negative form in our present-day data and unites speakers of all ages across the whole region. Individual examples are too numerous to mention, but Table  2.1 below offers a comprehensive set of environments where this can occur and confirms the broad geographic spread from Mansfield in the north to Leicester in the south. In common with many dialects of English, some East Midlanders also exhibit word final consonant cluster reduction, so that the final /t/ of the negative particle can also be deleted, producing forms such as isn’t [ɪn] in Swadlincote (C1190/12/05), doesn’t [dʊn] in Mansfield (C1190/26/04) and didn’t [dɪn] in Leicester (C1190/20/02). Secondary contraction can occur in ‘normal’ declarative statements, such as I wouldn’t [wʊnʔ] get a mortgage in Nottingham (C1190/26/02) and we haven’t got a [aŋk gɒdə] front room no more in Groby (C1190/20/03), but is particularly common in tag questions, with numerous examples of isn’t it [ɪntɪt, ɪnɪt], doesn’t it [dʊntɪt, dʊnɪt], haven’t I [anta], didn’t she [dɪnt ʃɪ], wouldn’t they [wʊnt ði] etc. Preposition reduction  A regular feature of spoken English is the deletion of word final /v/ in the preposition, of, as illustrated by e.g. one or two of [ə] the older guys in Nottingham (C1190/26/02). This is a widespread phenomenon and thus does not distinguish between dialects, but the extent to which similar contraction extends to other prepositions varies. In many British dialects, for instance, with surfaces as [wɪ, wi, wə],

2.4 Connected speech processes 

 65

Table 2.1: Examples of secondary contraction in present-day East Midlands English. Construction

Underlying form

Realisation

Location (shelfmark)

bePRESNEG bePASTNEG canPASTNEG doPRESNEG doPASTNEG havePRESNEG havePRESNEG havePASTNEG shallPASTNEG willPASTNEG

isn’t wasn’t couldn’t doesn’t didn’t hasn’t haven’t hadn’t shouldn’t wouldn’t

[ɪnt] [wɒnt] [kʊnt] [dʊnt] [dɪnt] [ant] [ant] [ant] [ʃʊnt] [wʊnʔ]

Groby (C1190/20/03) Arnold (C900/12562) Kirkby-in-Ashfield (C1190/26/03) Nottingham (C1190/26/02) Crich (C900/03010) Two Dales (C1190/12/03) Swadlincote (C1190/12/05) Heanor (C1190/12/04) Mansfield (C1190/26/04) Leicester (C1190/20/02)

while prepositions such as in, on, from and over also have contracted forms, albeit these are much less common. With reduction is extremely prevalent in the East Midlands, and there are numerous examples in our present-day data across the whole of the region from speakers of all ages – e.g. we’re working with [wɪ] men in Leicester (C1190/20/03). There are also a handful of examples of over reduction – e.g. all over the place [ɔːl ɔʊəʔ plɛɪs] in Mansfield (C1190/26/04) and in reduction – e.g. bun in the oven [bʊn ɪ ðʊvən] in Swadlincote (C1190/12/05), but we suspect these are now restricted to older speakers and much less common than in the past. A contracted form of to on the other hand is a highly distinctive feature of speech across the whole of the East Midlands and remains extremely productive. This manifests itself where to functions as a ‘normal’ preposition preceding a noun phrase, but perhaps even more frequently where ‘to’ forms part of an infinitive construction. Examples of the former occur in SED sound recordings in e.g. Kniveton (C908/51 C9 – let’s go to bed [lɛts guːʔ bɛd]) and in several present-day recordings including in Swadlincote (C1190/12/05 – they’ve gone to snooker [gɒn tsnuːkə), Nottingham (C1190/26/05  –  I go to Amelia’s [təmiːliəz] for dinner) and Leicester (C1190/20/02 – I’ve been to every game [tɛvɹɪ gɛɪm]). Infinitives are discussed in more detail in chapter 3 below, as local variants in the East Midlands include bare infinitives (i.e. zero ‘to’), for to infinitives and more conventional to infinitives. Of interest here are for to and to infinitives as they are frequently realised with a contracted form of to. Like other vernacular features these are avoided by middle-class speakers, but are well established in our data across the whole region, as confirmed by examples in SED sound recordings from Charlesworth in the north (C908/11 C5 – I’ve come for to draw my wage [fəʔ dɹɔː mɪ wɛːɪʤ] to Sheepy Magna in the south (C908/56 C10 – there’d be a couple or three labourers to help him [tɛɫp ɪm]. There is, moreover, an equally wide distribution in our present-day data with examples in e.g. Wirksworth (C1190/03012 – a good idea

66 

 2 Phonetics and phonology

to get some money [ə gʊd ɑɪdiə ʔ gɛt sʊm mʊnɪ]), Swadlincote (C1190/12/05 – he were too big for to pedal it [fəʔ pɛdɫ ɪt]) and Mansfield – (C1190/26/04 – pit props to hold the roof up [tɔʊɫd ʔɹuːf ʊp]). Clearly, as with all vernacular features, to reduction is not present in middle-class speech, but as ‘to’ is a relatively high frequency preposition it occurs repeatedly in our data and should be considered a salient feature of speech in the East Midlands. Miscellaneous  There are a number of elision processes that apply in the East Midlands, none of which we suspect are unique to the area, but are nonetheless worthy of comment. As in most varieties of British English, weak forms of the pronoun them often surface as [əm, ʊm], although strictly speaking this does not necessarily result from deleting initial /ð/, rather it may represent a reflex of the historic Old English pronoun hem with initial H-dropping (as occurs with unstressed articulations of the pronouns, he, him, his and her). As noted elsewhere the verbs give and have occasionally surface without /v/. This is extremely common in SED sound recordings, as in e.g. gonna have my breakfast [gənə ɛ mɪ bɹɛkfəst] in Kniveton (C908/51 C10), we’ll have a drink [wɪl ɛɪ ə dɹɪŋk] in Oxton (C908/52 C5) and we can’t all have them on [wɪ kɒːnt ɔːl ɛɪ ðɛm ɒn] in Sheepy Magna (C908/56 C7). There are only a handful of tokens in our present-day data where have functions as a full verb – e.g. have you got your jamas [= ‘pyjamas’] on [ɛɪ jə gɒʔ jə ʤaməz ɒn] in Heanor (C1190/12/04) and you can’t have somebody doing the national news [jə kɑːnt ɛ sʊmbɒdɪ duːɪnʔ naʃnəɫ nuːz] speaking like us in Mansfield (C1190/26/04), but it occurs more frequently among older speakers with obligatory have to  –  e.g. we used have to go and pay us rent [wɪ juːst atə gəʊ əm pɛɪ ʊz ɹɛnt] in Leicester (C900/09073) – and with speakers of all ages on auxiliary have  –  e.g. must’ve been agony [mʊstə bɪn agənɪ] in Swadlincote (C1190/12/05), they would’ve guessed [ðɪ wʊdə gɛst] in Nottingham (C1190/26/02) and we should’ve won [wɪ ʃʊdə wʊn] in Leicester (C1190/20/02). In all cases, this could be interpreted as the dialect form hae, rather than a phonologically motivated process. As was historically true in many varieties of English some speakers realise the word it in both subject and object position simply as /t/ (or zero in the form it’s), as illustrated by e.g. it is and it isn’t [tɪz ən ɪt ɪzənt] in Two Dales (C1190/12/02), bang it in [baŋtɪn] in Mansfield (C1190/26/04) and it is [tɪz] a man’s world isn’t it in Groby (C1190/20/03). A similar process of word initial syllable deletion occurs with some speakers on words beginning with a schwa or unstressed weak vowel, such as about  –  see Table 2.2 below for examples from our present-day data. Table  2.2 also includes examples where a word medial schwa or unstressed weak vowel is omitted in polysyllabic words like family and suppose. As noted above, word

2.4 Connected speech processes 

 67

Table 2.2: Examples of dialectically noteworthy elision processes in present-day East Midlands English. Process word initial syllable deletion

word medial syllable deletion

word medial consonant cluster reduction

word final consonant cluster reduction

Lexeme

Realisation

Location (shelfmark)

about

[baʊʔ]

Leicester (C1190?20/02)

across

[kɹɒs]

Swadlincote (C900/03055)

apart from

[pɑːʔ fɹɒm]

Nottingham (C1190/26/05)

attractive

[tɹaktɪv]

Heanor (C1190/12/04)

avoid

[vɔɪd]

Nottingham (C1190/26/02)

enough

[nʊf]

Mansfield (C1190/26/04)

estate

[stɛɪt]

Nottingham (C1190/26/02)

company

[kʊmpnɪ]

Leicester (C1190/20/02)

marvellous

[mɑːvləs]

Swadlincote (C1190/12/05)

normally

[nɔːmlɛ]

Leicester (C1190/20/02)

perhaps

[pɹaps]

Tonge (C900/03123)

properly

[pɹɒplɪ]

Swadlincote (C1190/12/05)

Saturday

[saʔdɪ]

Nottingham (C1190/26/02)

similar

[sɪmlə]

Two Dales (C1190/12/03)

always

[ɔːləs]

Crich (C900/03010)

[ɔːwɪz]

Mansfield (C1190/26/04)

backwards

[bakədz]

Swadlincote (C900/12/05)

exactly

[ɛzaklɪ]

Mansfield (C1190/26/04)

only

[əʊnɪ]

Wirksworth (C900/03012)

recognised

[ɹɛkənɑɪzd]

Nottingham (C1190/26/05)

something

[sʊmɪn]

Leicester (C1190/20/02)

asked

[ast]

Nottingham (C1190/26/02)

clothes

[klɔʊz]

Leicester (C1190/20/02)

found

[fʊn]

Mansfield (C1190/26/04)

final /t/ is frequently absent from negative constructions, with examples such as weren’t it [wənɪʔ] in Heanor (C1190/12/04), wasn’t it [wɒzənɪʔ] in Nottingham (C1190/26/05) and doesn’t it [dʊnɪʔ] in Groby (C1190/20/03). This is prompted by a more widely applicable tendency to reduce word final consonant clusters; other examples are also listed in Table 2.2 below along with a handful of examples of a comparable process: word medial consonant cluster reduction. Table 2.2 then is a

68 

 2 Phonetics and phonology

selection of noteworthy examples with a reference to a relevant sound recording. In many cases the feature occurs in more than one location, but the example is supplied by way of illustration.

2.4.2 Liaison Sandhi R  As noted previously, postvocalic /r/ has not been pronounced in the East Midlands for generations. A consequence of loss of rhoticity is the tendency for speakers to pronounce word final /r/ where it occurs at a word boundary between vowels – hence speakers say, for instance, better not [bɛtə nɒt] but better off [bɛtəɹɒf] – a process known as linking R. This unites speakers of all ages and social groups and there are examples both in numerous SED sound recordings and in all our present-day data across all three counties. Linking R can occur where /r/ follows a non-high vowel (Wells 1986: 226), as confirmed by examples in e.g. Swadlincote (C1190/12/05 – our house [aːɹ aʊs]); Mansfield (C1190/26/04 – better education [bɛtəɹ ɛʤəkɛɪʃən]); and Leicester (C1190/20/02 – fair enough [fɛːɹ ɪnʊf]). By extension, speakers also frequently insert a so-called intrusive R (Wells 1986: 323) at a word boundary where a word final schwa or low back vowel precedes a word with a vowel onset, even where there is no in the spelling – thus, for instance, pasta [pastə] but pasta and salad [pastəɹən saləd]. There are examples in several SED sound recordings and, again, numerous examples in our present-day data including in e.g. Two Dales (C1190/12/03 – nana and grandma [nanɑːɹ əŋ granmɑː]); Nottingham (C1190/26/05 – she’d lived in Canada a long time [ʃɪd lɪvd ɪŋ kanədəʋ ə lɒŋ taɪm]); and Leicester (C1190/20/04 – cinema is [pronounced] cinema [sɪnɪməɹ ɪz sɪnɪmɑː]. Neither linking nor intrusive R is unique to the East Midlands as both occur in most non-rhotic varieties of British English, including RP. However, there are a number of unusual examples of intrusive R that certainly do not apply to RP and are, therefore, worthy of additional comment here. Intrusive R can also occur in the East Midlands following weak forms of the pronouns you and my, polysyllabic words with orthographic either word finally or at a morpheme boundary and reduced forms of the prepositions of, to and with. In each case this is a two-stage process, in that the underlying coda surfaces as a schwa or comparatively weak vowel – you [jə], my [mə], follow [fɒlə], of [ə], to [tə] and with [wɪ]  –  thereby creating an environment that can trigger intrusive R. By way of illustration, the following instances occur in e.g. Wirksworth (C900/03012 – I’ll make you a coffee [aɫ mɛɪk jəɹ ə kɒfiː]), Leicester (C1190/20/02 – I cried my eyes out [a kɹɑɪd məɹ ɑɪz aːʔ], Swadlincote (C1190/12/05  –  following [fɒləɹɪn]), Mansfield (C1190/26/04 – old miner’ll never swear in front of a woman [ɪɱ fɹʊnt əɹ ə wʊmən]),

2.4 Connected speech processes 

 69

Crich (C900/03010  –  on to another job [ɒn təɹ ənʊðə ʤɒb], and Nottingham (C1190/26/02  –  they’re getting away with it [wɪɹ ɪʔ]). These and other examples occur in several locations and are thus not typical of one dialect area within the East Midlands, but are very much restricted to speakers with recognisably local accents.

2.4.3 Substitution Negation  One of the most distinctive features of broad dialect in some parts of Derbyshire is the morphological process applied to form negative constructions. Where most varieties of English add the suffix /nt/ to negate an auxiliary or modal verb, in some cases in combination with vowel mutation – e.g. havePASTNEG becomes hadn’t and willPRESNEG becomes won’t  –  variants with /nə/ exist in Derbyshire – e.g. havePASTNEG as [adnə] and willPRESNEG as [wʊnə]. SED fieldwork recorded these forms in several localities in an area centred on the Peak District and the Potteries at e.g. WON’T (IX.4.5) and the sound recording in Kniveton (C908/57 C7–C10) contains several tokens, including thou canPRESNEG do nowt [ða kɒstnə dʊ nɛʊt] and I says thou doPASTNEG [a sɛz ða dɪdstnə]. Restricted to older speakers in our present-day data we sense this is an increasingly rare feature, but survives nonetheless in very broad local speech and, anecdotally, can be used knowingly by speakers for whom mainstream negation markers are the norm, as a humorous local identity marker in phrases such as doPRESNEG be daft [dʊnə bɪ daft]. Table 2.3 below lists several naturally occurring examples from our present-day data: DL, TL  A historic tendency to convert a combination of velar stop plus lateral to alveolar stop plus lateral remains a distinctive feature of local speech in Derbyshire. Noted in all sites in Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire and indeed across much of the West Midlands (but, interestingly, not in Leicestershire) during SED fieldwork at e.g. GLOVES (VI.14.7), we suspect this is now rare in word initial position but remains relatively common word medially, especially in Derbyshire, with present-day examples in e.g. Coplow Dale (C900/14635 – struggle [stɹʊdɫ̩]), Two Dales (C900/12/03 – local [lɔʊtɫ̩̩]), Heanor (C1190/12/04 – mangle [mandɫ̩]) and Swadlincote (C1190/12/05 – knuckle [nʊtɫ̩]). The reverse process can also occur, but this is a much more widespread phenomenon, closely associated with very young speakers and with Caribbean varieties. Our only tokens – little as [lɪkɫ̩, lɪkə] – are supplied by British Kittitians in Nottingham (C1190/26/05).

70 

 2 Phonetics and phonology

Table 2.3: Localised negative constructions in present-day Derbyshire English. Verb

Form

Example

Location (shelfmark)

be

bePRESNEG

I arena [ɑːnə] going on my bike

Swadlincote (C1190/12/05)

bus inna [ɪnə] coming

Swadlincote (C1190/12/05)

bePASTNEG

them days werena [wʊnə] like they are now

Swadlincote (C1190/20/05)

can

canPRESNEG

I canna [kanə] find it

Two Dales (C1190/20/02)

canPASTNEG

I cudna [kʊdnə] spell

Swadlincote (C1190/20/05)

do

doPRESNEG

you dunna [dʊnə] think about it

Two Dales (C1190/20/02)

doPASTNEG

your parents didna [dɪdnə] like him

Heanor (C1190/12/04)

havePRESNEG

I hanna [anə] put owt

Swadlincote (C1190/12/05)

havePASTNEG

they hadna [ɛdnə] got houses

Swadlincote (C1190/20/05)

have will

willPRESNEG

this wunna [wʊnə] last long

Swadlincote (C1190/12/05)

willPASTNEG

[I] wudna [wʊdnə] go out with her

Swadlincote (C1190/12/05)

2.4.4 Miscellaneous +/− Voice  Voicing contrast is not a distinguishing feature in East Midland dialects generally, but there are a couple of noteworthy lexical items worthy of comment here. The word us is realised with final /z/ – this in line with most northern varieties in contrast to southern English and RP. This high frequency word occurs consistently as [ʊz] in our present-day data from e.g. Mansfield (C1190/26/04) in the north via Wirksworth (C900/03012) to Leicester (C1190/20/02) in the south, where we also have a handful of examples of [ʌz] (C1190/20/04). Voicing of the final consonant in bus [bʊz] also occurs for some speakers and crops up spontaneously in our data in Sheepy Magna (C908/56 C10), Swadlincote (C900/03055) and Leicester (C1190/20/02), where a speaker from Hinckley comments that this is something she is extremely conscious of as other speakers often draw attention to it. We suspect the two pronunciations are, however, unrelated and that bus [bʊz] is a lexically restricted form not extended to all such environments – we consider pus [pʊz], for instance, extremely unlikely. Epenthesis  Historically some words with a vowel onset (either orthographically or as a result of initial H-dropping) acquired an onglide in broad local dialect in Derbyshire. Although SED records HOME (VIII.5.2) as [wɒm] and HEAD (VI.1.1) as

2.4 Connected speech processes 

 71

[jɛd] in all localities in Derbyshire such pronunciations are considered recessive, although they may survive in broad dialect among older speakers, as demonstrated by tokens in Swadlincote (C1190/12/05 – we’d run down the hill and come home [wɒm] and we’re weighing us heads [jɛdz]). A rare, but intriguing traditional feature occurs occasionally on the word final consonant cluster /sts/. Where a noun or verb ends in and acquires the morphological suffix it is not unusual in rapid speech for speakers everywhere to simplify the resulting consonant cluster producing forms such as guests [gɛsː] and costs [kɒsː]. For some speakers in the whole of the Midlands this prompts an epenthetic vowel – e.g. guests [gɛsɪz] or costs [kɒsɪz] as confirmed by several entries in the SED Basic Material at GATE-POSTS (IV.3.2). As noted above (see 2.2.3 ‘unstressed vowels’) horses frequently surfaces with a weak schwa vowel in the East Midlands, thus a speaker in Heanor (C1190/12/04) observes he twists them [ɪ twɪsəz əm]. Although this is an extremely rare feature nowadays, we have heard some younger speakers pronounce the word texts (in the context of mobile phones) as [tɛksɪz]. Weak-strong contrast  An interesting phenomenon in our data is the tendency for speakers to assign a comparatively strong vowel, [ɛ], to bound morphemes like , and in a small set of words such as engage, employ and extend. This is equally true of accents in the north of England and thus, not surprisingly, more common in our data from Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire. Examples are too numerous to list in full, but include entitled [ɛntaɛtɫ̟d] in Mansfield (C1190/26/04), expecting [ɛkspɛktɪn] in Two Dales (C1190/12/03), entirely [ɛntaːlɪ] in Heanor (C1190/12/04), embarrassing [ɛmbaɹəsɪŋ] in Nottingham (C1190/26/05) and excuse [ɛkskjuːs] in Swadlincote (C1190/12/05). The picture in Leicestershire is more variable with examples of [ɛ] competing with [ɪ]  –  as occurs in RP and southern varieties – thus exist [ɛgzɪst] but also family enclosure [famli ɪŋkləʊʒə] in Leicester (C1190/20/02), expression [ɛkspɹɛʃən] in Groby (C1190/20/03) and to an extent [ɪkstɛnʔ] and express [ɪkspɹɛs] myself in Leicester (C1190/20/04). Similarly, the word initial bound morphemes and often feature a stronger vowel, [ɒ], where southern and West Midland varieties and RP are characterised by schwa – hence contend [kɒntɛnd] in West Stockwith (C900/12620), completely [kɒmpliɪtlɪ] in Kimberley (C900/12604), interests don’t conflict [kɒnflɪkt] in Two Dales (C1190/12/03), and computers [kɒmpjuːtəz] in Swadlincote (C1190/12/05). Some older speakers retain the historically stronger word final vowel, [ɪ], on words like waggons [wagɪnz] in Crich (C900/03010), old-fashioned [ɔʊɫfaʃɪn] in Two Dales (C1190/12/03), curtains [kɪːtɪnz] in Heanor (C1190/12/04) where younger

72 

 2 Phonetics and phonology

speakers favour [ə]. Many speakers of all ages in the Nottingham-Derby-Leicester axis frequently use a strong [ʊ] vowel for polysyllabic words with unstressed /əm/ as illustrated by e.g. Nottingham [nɒtɪngʊm] in Nottingham (C1190/26/02), they make you feel welcome [wɛɫkʊm] in Leicester (C1190/20/02) and circumstances [səːkʊmstansɪz] in Groby (C1190/20/03). This process also applies to weak forms of the third person plural object pronoun, giving pronunciations such as they’d not seen them [ʊm] for a long while in Two Dales (C1190/12/03), their mam heard them [ʊm] in Swadlincote (C1190/12/05), you haven’t got anything to sing to them [ðʊm] in Leicester (C1190/20/02) and if I ever heard one of them [ʊm] saying it in Groby (C1190/20/02). As them is such a high frequency item this is a highly distinctive feature of speech in the area.

2.5 Conclusion It is extremely rare to find absolutely unique features in any dialect; rather it is the unique combination of features that makes a dialect zone distinctive. In this regard the East Midlands is particularly interesting as speech in the area reveals a blend of ‘northern’ and ‘southern’ elements with a number of localised phenomena and, crucially, exhibits sufficient features that unite speakers across the whole region to support reasonable claims to its status as a legitimate dialect area. The quality of bath and strut is clearly closely aligned with speech in the north of England, while diphthongal realisations for goat and face are more typical of southern varieties, albeit the quality of the diphthongs varies across the region. Although this is also true for many speakers in, say, the West Midlands, the quality of price, palm-start and mouth and the noticeably weak vowel in started and horses, all of which occur across much of the region, can justifiably be considered salient markers of East Midland accents and are distinct from speech to the immediate north, south, east and west. On the other hand, there is a gradual transition from north to south within the area and examples of locally focused variants, such as the negative marking noted in Derbyshire and the characteristic Leicester letter vowel. Despite the presence of this substantial common core and ample local variation, East Midland accents are neither widely acknowledged nor well recognised even within the UK. In order to help raise awareness we close with a brief reference to the speech of celebrities from each of the three cities at the heart of the East Midlands and a few observations on commercial products celebrating local speech, in the hope that this offers the opportunity for greater public recognition of the three respective accents. The actor, Jack O’Connell,

2.5 Conclusion 

 73

was born in Derby in 1990 and has appeared in a number of television and film roles. Following the release of the feature film Unbroken he was interviewed on the red carpet at the Hollywood Film Awards (Hollywood Awards 2014). His responses demonstrate several typical Derby pronunciations – example as [ɛgzampʊ] (thereby revealing not just his bath vowel, but also L-vocalisation and a comparatively strong initial vowel), stunts [stʊnts], priceless [pɹɑɪsləs] and around [əɹaːnd]. At those same awards US actor and director, Angelina Jolie, presented Jack with the New Hollywood Award, inviting him on to the stage with the phrase “ey up me duck” (tootonica 2015). In a promotional interview for E4’s comedy-drama TV series, Misfits (Matt Daaaamon 2010), fellow Derby-born actress, Lauren Socha (born 1990) comments that filming for the second series was great [gɹɛɪːʔ] and didn’t [dɪnʔ] feel as like awkward or anything because, although the cast occasionally fight [faːɪʔ], the atmosphere is generally nice [naːɪs] and her relationship with the director pretty sound [pɹɪʔɪ saːnd]. She expresses admiration for her character, Kelly, describing her as mint [mɪnʔ] and funny [fʊnɪ] and reveals her aunt’s fondness for reality TV shows, especially I’m a Celebrity Get Me Out Of Here! [gɛʔ mi aːʔ əv iɐ] and Big Brother [bɪg bɹʊvɐ]. Actress, Vicky McClure, was born in Nottingham in 1983 and has appeared in numerous television dramas, and is perhaps currently best known for co-starring in the BBC police series, Line of Duty. Interviewed in April 2017 on the The Graham Norton Show (The Graham Norton Show 2017) she reflects on the potential to be overwhelmed [əʊvəwɛʊmd] by the challenging nature of the script, describes her on-screen colleagues as such a good laugh [sʊʧ ə gʊd laf], tells an anecdote about how, after securing her first film role, she wrapped up five-hundred quid in different sized boxes for my sister [ɹapt ʊp faɛvʊndɹəd kwɪd ɪn dɪfɹənʔ saɛz bɒksəz fə ma sɪstə] and reacts to a humorous set of promotional photo shoots in which she consistently appears with her arms folded by saying, now I’m absolutely buggered [bɒgəd] because what am I gonna do [next time]. Finally, Tom Meighan, lead singer of British rock band Kasabian, was born in Leicester in 1981. Interviewed by NME in October 2012 he supplies brief answers to a set of prompts in the magazine’s 66-second interview series (NME 2012). Although this is only a brief interview his responses offer several glimpses of key features of a Leicester accent: Chinese Democracy [ʧɑɪniːz dɪmɒkɹəsɪ], Elvis Presley [ɛʊvɪs pɹɛzlɛ] and Metallica [mətalɪkɐ]. Finally, Figure 2.3 shows a set of novelty coasters on sale at a shop in St. James’s Street, Nottingham. The printed designs follow an extremely simple formula, based on repetition of the notion, ‘Am from …’ (i.e. ‘I am from …’) followed by a local place name re-spelt in an attempt to capture the local pronunciation. Similar merchandise is popular at souvenir shops in many

74 

 2 Phonetics and phonology

Figure 2.3: Nottingham accent and commercial products, photo by Dukki.

tourist destinations in the UK and generally exploits (inter)nationally recognised stereotypes (e.g. T-shirts featuring examples of Cockney Rhyming Slang on sale in London or mugs inscribed with phrases like ‘let’s have a proper brew’ in Yorkshire etc.). Most of the places included on the coasters on display here, however, are extremely local to Nottingham and, we imagine, not necessarily well-known outside the area, so are, presumably, therefore targeted at a very local audience and market. Not only is this interesting evidence, perhaps, of a previously less overtly visible sense of local pride, but of a pride expressed by celebrating local speech. It is not necessary to deconstruct each coaster, but a brief examination of a selection reveals several important aspects of a Nottingham accent: Aspleh and Strelleh (i.e. Aspley, a council estate in Nottingham, and Strelley, a village to the west) presumably implies a happy vowel with [ɛ]; Arnuwd, Biwbra, Buwul and Chiwul (i.e. Arnold, Bilborough, Bulwell and Chilwell, all suburbs of Nottingham) represent the typical local manifestation of L-vocalisation; Eena (i.e. Heanor, a Derbyshire town to the north west of Nottingham) is indicative of H-dropping; Shairwud (i.e. Sherwood, a suburb of

2.5 Conclusion 

 75

Nottingham) is, we suspect, an attempt to convey a nurse vowel with [ɪː]; and Noowuck (i.e. Newark, a market town to the north east of Nottingham) captures yod dropping with /n/. Such commodification of dialect gives us real insight into the specific accent features that are considered salient for, and to, locals (for more examples, see section 4.5).

3 Morphology and syntax 3.1 Introduction While any voice recording of sufficient duration offers ample opportunity for phonetic or phonological analysis, observing grammatical variation is much more challenging. Even with access to substantial amounts of spontaneous speech data, one is unlikely to encounter all the possible grammatical variants available to a given speech community in the same way as one might expect to capture a comprehensive set of vowel phonemes in a sound recording of relatively modest length. Elicitation tasks, such as the questionnaire employed in SED fieldwork can be effective in targeting specific lexical items and grammatical constructions, but are open to criticism in that they do not always generate the most natural response or allow informants to explore a range of possible variants. The BBC Voices survey successfully applied modern sociolinguistic methodologies to document lexical variation, but few attempts post-SED have been made to capture grammatical variation on a regional or national scale: Milroy and Milroy (1993), for instance, only includes for England chapters on Tyneside and southern English. Not surprisingly, then, academic descriptions of contemporary East Midlands grammar are equally rare: Kortmann and Upton (2008) includes a chapter on the morphology and syntax of every other region of England, but completely overlooks the Midlands  –  the corresponding section on phonology at least acknowledges the West Midlands. Evans (1881) offers a useful guide, but is now 125 years out of date and Scollins and Titford (2000) is instructive, but focuses on a very narrow geographic area, specifically Ilkeston and the Erewash Valley. The glossaries provided in Smith (2013), Braber (2015b), and Davies (2015), while ostensibly presented as inventories of lexical variation, do offer some insight as a handful of entries actually constitute vernacular grammatical forms presented in standard orthography. As with the previous chapter on phonology, we refer to these sources and to data from the SED Basic Material (Orton et al. 1962–1971), but draw primarily on SED, MMB and BBC Voices sound recordings held at the British Library. This audio archive, freely available worldwide at BL Sounds (sounds.bl.uk 2017), constitutes a large dataset of spontaneous speech recorded across all three East Midlands counties over the last sixty-five years. In relying principally on spontaneous speech we are inevitably restricted to features that occur serendipitously. As such we are conscious we cannot examine all aspects of East Midlands morphology and syntax here, but the features discussed are, on the other hand, all naturally occurring phenomena and thus entirely authentic. We begin with a description of determiners in East Midlands dialect, before considering aspects of East https://doi.org/10.1515/9781501502354-003

3.2 Determiners 

 77

Midlands nouns and pronouns and verbal morphology, then we examine prepositions, adjectives and adverbs and finally we discuss East Midlands discourse markers. Many vernacular forms occur in most regional varieties, such as the lack of distinction between those and them (e.g. in them days) or the absence of plural marking on a restricted set of count nouns (e.g. ten pound, six mile). These we include only briefly where appropriate, focusing in greater depth on features that are particularly salient for the East Midlands – either for the region as a whole, localised to a particular speech community or uniting the East Midlands with neighbouring dialects. We avoid listing endless examples of particularly widespread phenomena, but give sufficient examples to indicate the geographic distribution of each feature by citing, for example, a token from the northernmost and southernmost location or from one location in each county to indicate a feature is considered to be East Midlands wide. Details of every single token of any given grammatical feature are indexed in the grammatical section of linguistic descriptions published alongside the corresponding recording at sounds.bl.uk (Robinson 2005, Robinson et al. 2013).

3.2 Determiners 3.2.1 Demonstratives SED sound recordings offer considerable evidence that East Midlands dialects historically allowed determiners with overt here and there as reinforcers. There are numerous examples in all three counties extending from Charlesworth in the north (C908/11 C5 – these here cotton ropes for driving these here mills) to Goadby in the south (C908/57 C1 – this here wool-stapler told me). Although extremely rare in our present-day data, a single token in Swadlincote (C1190/12/05  –  this here plastic stuff Tupperware wasn’t it) confirms it remains available in broad dialect, albeit most likely restricted to older speakers. Responses to the SED prompt for THAT OVER THERE (IX.10.3) suggest that the remote demonstrative yon occurred naturally in mid-20th century dialects in Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire, but was only elicited in Harby, the northernmost locality in Leicestershire. There is only one spontaneous example in an SED sound recording  –  in North Wheatley (C908/52 C3 – yon side you hardly ever get because of the Trent) – but as we encountered none in our present-day data we suspect this is no longer common, although probably familiar to older speakers, perhaps particularly in parts of Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire. Most speakers of East Midlands English are now far more likely to use standard determiners apart from the widespread tendency, in common with many dialects

78 

 3 Morphology and syntax

in England, to alternate between those and them with a plural noun. Examples of the non-standard variant in SED sound recordings in Stonebroom (C908/51 C6  –  very often them coals would bump), North Wheatley (C908/52 C3  – they’re mostly gone now them cherry orchards) and Sheepy Magna (C908/56 C10 – them old penny farthings was the start) confirm this is well established in East Midlands dialects and numerous examples in our present-day data suggest it is a high-frequency feature that unites speakers of all ages as demonstrated by tokens in, for example, Coplow Dale (C1190/14635 – it might tell you on them two sheets I’ve gave you), Arnold (C900/12562 – I could get rid of all them pigeons in twenty-four hours) and Coalville (C1190/20/05 – oh ah I’ve heard them words). It also regularly serves as the vernacular demonstrative pronoun as confirmed by SED tokens in, for instance, Markfield (C908/56 C8 – I’m not one of them as condemns fox-hunting) and by numerous modern examples across the whole region, including in Mansfield (C1190/26/04 – them from down south), Kimberley (C900/12604 – them as’d been wore out most) and Swadlincote (C900/03055 – do you know what one of them is).

3.2.2 Articles In common with dialects to the immediate north in Yorkshire and Lancashire, some speakers in the East Midlands exhibit definite article reduction (DAR), a process whereby the definite article, the, is articulated simply as a consonant (see section 2.4.1 for a description of the phonology of DAR). Where DAR occurs in our present-day data, it is nearly always represented as a glottal stop, as demonstrated by in the kitchen [ɪnʔ kɪʧɪn] in Heanor (C1190/12/04) and over the moon [ɒvəʔ muːn] in Kirkby-in-Ashfield (C1190/26/03). There are a handful of examples of DAR with a voiced fricative, primarily where the article precedes a noun with a vowel onset (or deleted /h/), as demonstrated by the only way [ðəʊnɪ wɛɪ] in Nottingham (C1190/26/05) and on the hill [ɒn ðɪɫ] in Two Dales (C1190/12/03), but also very occasionally before a noun with a consonant onset, as demonstrated by she went into the pantry [ɪntəð pantɹɪ] in Swadlincote (C1190/12/05). DAR can occur where the article functions as a subject, as in when the school bell rang [wɛnt skuːɫ bɛɫ ɹaŋ] in Two Dales (C1190/12/03); and an object, as in reading the news [ɹiːdɪnʔ nuːz] in Mansfield (C1190/26/04); but surfaces most frequently in prepositional phrases, such as weak in the head [wiːk ɪnʔ ɛd] in Nottingham (C1190/26/02). SED evidence at TO THE GROUND (IV.4.1), for instance, shows the as [t] in all sites in Derbyshire and all bar one in Nottinghamshire, but consistently as [ðə] in Leicestershire. There are frequent examples of DAR in SED sound recordings in Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire and occasional instances in Leicestershire, albeit less

3.2 Determiners 

 79

frequently and always as [ð], as confirmed by e.g. one atop the other [wɒn ətɒp ə ðʊðə] in Great Dalby (C908/56 C9) and we used to work the horses single [wɪ jusːt tə wəːk ðɒsɪz sɪŋgɫ̩] in Sheepy Magna (C908/56 C10) and in the Survey of English Dialects Incidental Material (Brotherton Library Special Collections shelfmark: LAVC/ SED/2/2/13) in Hathern – them’s the handles [ðɛmz ðandɫ̩z]; and Ullesthorpe – the doors want the hinges putting on [ðə dɔːz wɒnt ðɪnʤɪz pʊtɪn ɒn]. Although absent from our present-day data in Leicestershire, DAR remains relatively common in parts of Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire. Even here speakers seldom favour DAR exclusively; rather they are ranged along a continuum from frequent users to those who only occasionally exhibit DAR, with frequency of use correlating to social factors such as age, gender, social class and context; DAR is avoided entirely, for instance, by middle-class speakers and  –  in our data at least  –  most common among older working-class speakers. The presence of DAR is, nonetheless, evidence that East Midlands English bears greater comparison with northern dialects than West Midlands English where Clark and Asprey report very occasional use of ‘the definite determiner [ð] before vowels’, but only this variant and, moreover, only among elderly informants from the Black Country (2013: 75). Perhaps surprisingly Docherty and Foulkes (1999: 47–71) do not comment on DAR in Derby, although we are informed it was present in their data, including among young working-class speakers (private correspondence) and it certainly features strongly in popular representations of local speech. Braber (2015b) has a handful of entries that imply a /t/ or glottal stop, such as Queen o’t’ Midlands [= ‘nickname for Nottingham’], and a single example that implies a fricative  –  down th’pit [= ‘in the mine’], while the alphabetical glossary in Smith (2013) lists T’ (or Th’) [= ‘the’] for Derbyshire and has examples of both – dead er t’ neet [=  ‘middle of the night’] and let dog see th’rabbit [= ‘move up’]. Scollins and Titford (2000: 26) note that in Ilkeston the “general rule is to abbreviate ‘the’ to ‘t’ before a consonant” but “[b] efore a vowel, the abbreviation becomes ‘th’”. Beal notes that zero articles occur in some dialects in Yorkshire and Lancashire, citing evidence of zero definite article from a study in York and of zero indefinite article in Bolton (Beal 2008: 379–380). Like DAR, this is perhaps neither as common nor as frequent in our East Midlands data but is, nonetheless, clearly a feature that unites some East Midlands speakers with dialects to the immediate north. While Shorrocks (1999:47) notes that in Bolton “[t]here is no rule to predict any individual case” for zero indefinite article, there is an observable tendency in our data for it to occur preceding a noun with vowel onset (or deleted /h/) in object position or where it functions as a complement. There are tokens in all three counties in SED recordings, such as Charlesworth (C908/11 C5 – there were _ housing estate at the top of the brow); Oxton C908/52 C5 – I could hit _ horse and hold him) and Harby (C908/56 C5 – there were _ hole on the top) and in present-day

80 

 3 Morphology and syntax

recordings in Heanor (C1190/12/04 – we all went to bed and there were _ almighty bang) and Nottingham (C1190/26/05 – a week and _ half ago). Although it does occur in other phonetic environments, both in SED audio and in our present-day data, such as in Mansfield (C1190/26/04  –  here for _ couple of month then they get kicked out) and Leicester (C1190/26/04 – my dad’s got _ little bit of a Geordie accent), as a relatively low-frequency phenomenon it is difficult to evaluate with any degree of certainty, but we sense pre-vocalic and H-drop environments might be a potential trigger. There is no evidence of zero definite article in our data from Leicestershire, but there are a handful of examples from Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire, both in the SED and more recently. With only a small number of tokens it is unclear what prompts this as it occurs in a variety of phonetic environments and both in the object case and following a preposition, as demonstrated by modern examples in, for instance, Mansfield (C1190/26/04  –  we were taught to say the ends of the words you know and put your aitches on _ beginning of words) and Arnold (C900/12562 – I told you you ain’t heard _ last of it). Finally, there are a couple of intriguing examples of indefinite a where Standard English requires an. Two are supplied by older speakers in Heanor (C1190/12/04 – he didn’t blink a eyelid) and Mansfield (C1190/26/04 – there isn’t a ‘R’ in ‘bath’) and one is a young British Caribbean speaker in Nottingham (C1190/26/05 – I mean for some children every second word is you know has got a ‘F’ in it). This feature occurs both in traditional dialect and in Caribbean Creoles, so the motivations may differ between the two older speakers and the speaker in Nottingham. There is also a single example of the premodification in Nottingham (C1190/26/05 – I’ve only been the once). We suspect this is slightly marked in Standard English, but certainly a feature of Scots and English in the north and thus possibly more widespread in the East Midlands preceding numerals, but not in the full range of environments where it occurs further north.

3.3 Nouns 3.3.1 Plural As is true of many varieties of English, some count nouns do not always show plural marking, notably imperial units of currency or weight, such as pound, and measurements of time and space, such as year and mile. Unmarked noun plurals crop up regularly both in SED sound recordings and in present-day recordings across the whole of the region as demonstrated by instances from Mansfield in the north (C1190/26/04 – it’s only what two mile) to Groby (C1190/20/03 – two pound of Brussels) and Coalville in the south (C1190/20/05 – me mam’s been dead ten year).

3.4 Pronouns 

 81

3.4 Pronouns 3.4.1 Personal pronouns The widespread use of second person forms noted during SED fieldwork in Derbyshire and, to a lesser extent, in Nottinghamshire, is almost entirely absent from our present-day data. Intriguingly forms are less common in SED sound recordings than one might expect, given their prominence in the responses noted in the Basic Material at e.g. YOU ARE (IX.7.7). There are several reasons for this: firstly, informants are by definition less likely to ask questions than fieldworkers, an inevitable consequence of which is that second person pronouns are frustratingly rare in interviews. Secondly, forms function locally as a marker of familiarity and thus the few questions directed at a fieldworker are generally framed with you. Nonetheless, there are occasionally spontaneous examples of forms in, for instance, Kniveton (C908/51 C10 – it’d cure thee of measles thou knowest cowslip wine) and indirect evidence in the form of reported speech in anecdotes, such as in Charlesworth in the north (C908/11 C5 – dunna [= doPRESNEG] bother thysel he says) and North Wheatley (C908/52 C3 – hast thee got any twitches [= ‘noose used to restrain horse (e.g. during operation)’]). The only instances of forms in our present-day data are ‘performed’ by older speakers in Heanor as examples of local idiomatic usage, such as the response to the prompt TIRED: hast thou been up all night [astə bɪn ʊp ɔːɫ nɛɪt]. Nonetheless, we suspect forms remain present in some speech communities – perhaps especially among older speakers in areas with a history of traditional industry, such as mining – and as they feature prominently in popular dialect books and humorous representations of local speech, as demonstrated by a list of financial tips presented in Nottinghamshire dialect by Wright (1979: 22) “mek sure thi missus gives thee plenty o’ pocket money” [= make sure your wife gives you plenty of spending money], they may be used by some speakers as conscious self-parody. A well-known feature of West Midland dialect grammar is pronoun exchange: a process whereby the case marking of a pronoun reverses the Standard English subject-object contrast. Hogg et al. note that “[e]arly dialect literature and glossaries show a complete absence of pronoun exchange in northern English, but make frequent reference to it in the west midlands and south west” (1992: 231) – in the case of West Midlands English this is widely reported for subject her (Clark and Asprey 2013: 77–78). Although clearly much more common in West Midlands than East Midlands English there are a handful of examples in SED recordings in Derbyshire and Leicestershire (i.e. the south and west of our region), as demonstrated by tokens in Sutton on the Hill (C908/51 C8 – her always shouts to me if her sees me) and Sheepy Magna (C908/56 C10 – her was afraid I should be riding off with some

82 

 3 Morphology and syntax

other woman). Present-day examples in Swadlincote (C1190/12/05 – in case her’d got park in Swad) and Coalville (C1190/20/05 – my eldest daughter went university and her changed a bit) – crucially also both located in the south-west – confirm this feature extends beyond the West Midlands into adjacent East Midlands areas. A feature we suspect may now be restricted to very broad dialect speakers in some parts of Derbyshire is the use of the historic Old English feminine pronoun hoo. Captured in humorous caricatures of Derbyshire dialect such as in the expression oh’s not gorrall er chairs ut om [= she’s not got all her chairs at home, i.e. she’s ‘crazy/insane’] (Scollins and Titford 2000: 99), SED responses at SHE WEARS THE BREECHES (VI.14.14) suggest hoo  –  pronounced variously [ɔʊ, ɛʊ, ʏː, uː]  –  survived in mid-twentieth century rural dialects in an area centred on Derbyshire and Cheshire, extending slightly into southern Lancashire and south Yorkshire. This distribution is confirmed by several spontaneous examples in SED sound recordings throughout Derbyshire from Charlesworth (C908/11 C5 – great job hoo had there aye) to Sutton on the Hill (C908/51 C8 – hoo were always a mad one when hoo were riding). Remarkably, there is also evidence of its survival among older speakers in our present-day data and although she is very much the preferred subject pronoun nowadays, there are nonetheless occasional examples of hoo in Belper (C1190/12/01 – hoo’s in there), Heanor (C1190/12/04 – hoo’s a knockout) and multiple tokens from more than one speaker in Swadlincote (C1190/12/05 – e.g. hoo were cleverer than me). As in many dialects of English, us can function in East Midlands dialect as a first person singular object pronoun, giving constructions such as they were right as rain with us [= ‘me’] recorded in Mansfield (C1190/26/04); get us [= ‘me’] my sixpenceworth of stew in Swadlincote (C900/03055); and can you lend us [= ‘me’] a quid in Leicester (C1190/26/04).

3.4.2 Possessive pronouns A near universal feature of vernacular English in England (and, presumably, elsewhere) is the realisation of an unstressed first person singular possessive pronoun with a relatively weak vowel, [mɪ], suggesting possible convergence with the object pronoun, me, and hence another potential example of pronoun exchange. As noted previously (see chapter 2) the fact that realisations such as [ma] and, to a lesser extent, [mə] are also common leads one to infer this is probably more likely to be an example of vowel reduction in connected speech. Nonetheless, if we are to interpret this as possessive me, then there are certainly numerous examples across the whole of the region from Two Dales (C1190/12/03 – that came into me head) and Mansfield in the north (C1190/26/04 – he were me area manager),

3.4 Pronouns 

 83

via Nottingham (C1190/26/05 – one of me sisters) and Swadlincote (C1190/12/05 – me mam used gie me some money fetch cigarettes) and south to Coalville (C1190/20/05 – me mam’s been dead ten year) and Leicester (C1190/26/02 – I can feel the hair standing on the back of me neck now). A much more unambiguous case of pronoun exchange is the use in East Midlands dialect of plural possessive us, offering further evidence of grammatical similarity with dialects in neighbouring Yorkshire and Lancashire, while contrasting with West Midlands and southern dialects and Standard English which favour our. Intriguingly, SED published evidence at WITH OUR EYES (VI.3.3) and OUR OWN (VIII.8.8) might lead one to assume that us only extends into Derbyshire, where it was elicited in a handful of localities, but spontaneous examples in SED sound recordings also occurred in Leicestershire as far south as Sheepy Magna (C908/56 C10 – sit on us stool) and Ullesthorpe (C908/57 C2 – they wouldn’t let us out of school till us parents were there to fetch us). In fact our present-day data confirms that possessive us occurs throughout the whole of the East Midlands, as demonstrated by tokens from, for example, Mansfield (C1190/26/04 – they still think we’ve got caps and whippets in us hands) through Wirksworth (C900/03012 – we were having us lunch) and Nottingham (C900/12530 – we used to have to go and pay us rent on the High Street) to Leicester (C900/09073 – we only had half an hour for us lunchtime) and Coalville (C1190/26/05 – we’n [= ‘we have’] got us own house).

3.4.3 Reflexive pronouns Reflexive pronouns with are recorded consistently in all three East Midlands counties in the SED published data at e.g. WASH MYSELF (IX.11.1) and HIMSELF/HERSELF (IX.11.2), with variants also available in Derbyshire. Popular representations of East Midlands dialect consistently contain this feature but employ varying orthographic solutions e.g. mesen [= ‘myself’] and thysen [= ‘yourself’] are included by Braber (2015b), missen [= ‘myself’] and thissen [= ‘yourself’] by Smith (2013) and Evans notes ‘“sen” is substituted for “self” […] and generally compounded with the possessive instead of the personal pronouns’ so that in nineteenth century Leicestershire dialect ‘“[h]is-sen” is the usual form of “himself” and “their-sens” of “themselves”’ (1881: 27). There is only one token of the variant in our present-day data, from a speaker in Nottingham (C1190/26/02  –  eventually he started listening to me and stuck up for hissel), but pronouns were captured, albeit exclusively from working-class male speakers, as in examples from Mansfield (C1190/26/04  –  you watch a video of yoursen and you s[ay] oh Jesus I don’t talk like that), Swadlincote

84 

 3 Morphology and syntax

(C1190/12/05 – used to take you a fortnight to three week clean yoursen properly) and Coalville (C1190/26/05 – the others can talk for theirsens). While these variants are unmistakably geographically marked and once again suggest links with dialects to the north, there are also several examples of non-standard reflexives that are common to vernacular speech across England. Regularised reflexives as demonstrated in, for instance, Nottingham (C1190/26/02 – they’ll go out tank theirself up and they end up fighting) and unbound reflexives, as in an example from Leicester (C1190/26/02 – there’s fifteen years between myself and Matt) are clearly permissible in the East Midlands.

3.4.4 Relative pronouns SED responses at WHO (IX.9.3) show a preference among East Midlands speakers for as or zero for the Standard English relative pronoun who or that, although there are also two examples of what – in Bamford, Derbyshire and in Hathern, Leicestershire. While the northern variant at is absent from the published data it does occur in two SED sound recordings in the far north – in Charlesworth (C908/11 C5 – her at’s married) and North Wheatley (C908/52 C3 – we used to happen to have them sort at doesn’t need pollenizing) and, moreover, in a present-day recording with an older speaker further south in Kimberley (C900/12604 – practically all them at come pawning). However, as and zero are by some margin the most frequent non-standard forms in our audio data and although it is difficult to establish a clear pattern for regional distribution from spontaneous tokens alone, as occurs in SED localities across the whole region from Charlesworth (C908/11 C5 – there’s houses on Glossop Road too as wasn’t there) via South Clifton (C908/52 C4 – very big floods as gets into the village) to Goadby (C908/57 C1 – there isn’t many ordinary people as can say that), but is restricted in our present-day data to locations in the centre of the East Midlands as demonstrated by tokens in places such as Wirksworth (C900/03012 – the majority of youngsters as I’ve met are grand kids), Arnold (C900/12562  –  people as worked at the big house) and Kimberley (C900/12604 – a regular gang of people as were there regular). Evans confirms that in nineteenth century Leicestershire “[f]or the relatives, ‘that,’ ‘ho,’ or ‘which,’ ‘as’ is the universal substitute” (1881: 26). Although zero relatives are prominent in the published SED data at WHO (IX.9.3), they are thin on the ground in the audio archive with only two examples – both in Leicestershire – such as at Seagrave (C908/56 C7 – there’s a man up here used to make that). They are, however, more frequent in our present-day data and occur in places as far afield as Two Dales (C1190/12/03 – there were only two consignments of cattle went) and Mansfield in the north (C1190/26/04 – there’s still

3.5 Verbs 

 85

a lot don’t talk to each other though), through Nottingham (C1190/26/05 – there’s about twenty of us go round on a weekend) and Groby (C1190/20/03 – there’s a lot of people get us confused with Birmingham) to Swadlincote (C1190/26/05 –there inna [bePRESNEG] many wear pumps) and Coalville in the south (C1190/20/05 – there was a couple of items I’ve wrote). Finally, what, which is rare in SED published data and only occurs in sound recordings in Charlesworth (C908/11 C5  –  there were housing estate at the top of the brow what wasn’t here) and Seagrave (C908/56 C7 – I’ll forego my bit of mucky wage what I get) appears nowadays to be more common throughout the region as a whole, from New Houghton (C900/12543 – all this what you’re eating today’s false) and Meden Vale (C900/12505 – my husband’s money what he had from the colliery) and Crich (C900/03010 – the drills what you used on the rocks) and Nottingham (C900/12606 – I knew a couple of girls what lived in them) to Swadlincote (C1190/26/05 – we just found summat do what didn’t cost anything) and Coalville (C1190/20/05 – we should do things what are right).

3.5 Verbs 3.5.1 Be As we have noted repeatedly here, there are many similarities between East Midland and northern dialects and this is certainly true of non-standard past forms of the verb to be, where singular were competes with standard was. A pair of present-day examples from a male speaker in Kimberley (C900/12604) demonstrates how non-standard were can occur both as a 1st and 3rd person singular variant: I were left in charge when I were eighteen and she were one of the best customers. It is difficult to state with confidence the geographic area where singular were occurs today, but our data suggests it applies across much of the region, albeit varying in frequency according to speaker and location. It is especially frequent in recordings from the north, as confirmed by examples from, for instance, Coplow Dale (C1190/14635 – it were a bitter struggle), Kirkby-in-Ashfield (C1190/26/03 – smoke were puthering out of the windows) and Mansfield (C1190/26/04 – I were a miner everybody were a miner in my family) and also has a strong presence in the centre with examples in several locations including Swadlincote (C900/03055  – she were up at five o’clock on a morning), Heanor (C1190/12/04 – I didn’t like day school but the church school were different), Arnold (C900/12562 – the grass were fairly long), Nottingham (C900/03012  –  it were blackberry and apple) and Coalville (C1190/20/05  –  his dad before him were a Leicestershire miner). Further south there are fewer examples, although it is clearly present in some locations, as confirmed by an older male informant in Leicester (C900/09073 – he were a good lad)

86 

 3 Morphology and syntax

and a younger female speaker from Hinckley (C1190/20/02 – used that since I were a kid). Intriguingly SED published data at bePAST (VIII9.5b) records 1st and 3rd person were consistently in Derbyshire, in two of four sites in Nottinghamshire but in only one locality in Leicestershire  –  Carlton Curlieu, a few miles to the south-east of Leicester. Based on this evidence and the relatively low frequency with which were generalisation occurs in our present-day Leicestershire data one might conclude that were generalisation was a traditional feature of the north and centre of the East Midlands only and that it has, perhaps, more recently diffused southwards into Leicestershire. However, none of the speakers in our corpus use non-standard were categorically, and – as ever with dialect grammar – the speakers who do so most consistently are characterised more by social class than by geographic location with the most frequent users being the ex-miners recorded in Mansfield and Coalville, despite the two towns being located at the northern and southern ends of the East Midlands. Furthermore, SED audio data from Leicestershire contradicts the published evidence, with examples of non-standard were in several localities, including in Ullesthorpe (C908/57 C2 – there were nowt else to do them days in the country) in the extreme south-west. This leads one to conclude that singular were is indeed a historic – and robust – feature of local dialect in the East Midlands and another important distinction between East Midlands and West Midlands dialects as it is not noted by Clark and Asprey (2013) for Birmingham or the Black Country. In common with dialects in nearby South and West Yorkshire, some East Midlands speakers at the very broad end of the dialect spectrum also maintain a phonetic distinction between were in stressed and unstressed environments as shown, for instance, by speakers in Mansfield (C1190/26/04 – used to find out where the fire were [wɒ] put your hands down where the fire were [wɒ] so you could get your bum on it but Christ he were [wə] bloody posh weren’t he [wəːntɪ]), Belper (C1190/12/01 – he were [wɒ] badly but it were [wə] called a special name) and Coalville (C1190/20/05 – my wife were [wə] born and bred in a council house I were [wɔː]). As with many British dialects (including in this case, West Midlands varieties), plural and 2nd person be can also appear unmarked for plurality in the past. SED responses at bePAST (VIII9.5b) show no instances in Derbyshire, but record plural was in two of the four sites in Nottinghamshire and in several localities in Leicestershire, this is corroborated by evidence in the SED audio archive, which offer no examples in Derbyshire, but a handful elsewhere, such as in South Clifton (C908/52 C4 – all the trees was done up) and in Ullesthorpe (C908/57 C2 – very bad off people was). Present-day examples illustrate how non-standard was can occur throughout the region with you, we, they or a plural noun, as demonstrated by examples in, for instance, Nottingham (C900/12616 – you wasn’t allowed to leave until everybody’d finished), Wirksworth (C900/03012 – we was talking about this),

3.5 Verbs 

 87

Barlestone (C900/09131 – the rest of the staff enjoyed working for me when they was away) and Crich (C900/03010 – the wages was ten shillings a week). Unlike the data for were generalisation (and despite lack of SED evidence in Derbyshire), was generalisation appears to be present throughout the region nowadays. It is difficult, based purely on spontaneous speech data to assess the exact status of was generalisation in the East Midlands as we cannot always establish whether was is favoured with we, you, they, a plural noun or in all four environments since the likelihood of finding sufficient tokens of all four in any given location is entirely fortuitous. Equally, as noted earlier, most speakers who use non-standard was seldom do so categorically. The picture is further complicated by the possibility that some speakers (according to our data only in Leicestershire) favour a was-weren’t split  –  i.e. they distinguish between positive was and negative were – as demonstrated by the following exchange in Groby (C1190/20/03 – it was called the ‘jitty’ (‘jetty’ weren’t it you know) no it weren’t ‘jitty’). In summary, then, pastBE in the East Midlands seems to offer 4 potential paradigms in addition to Standard English: invariant were invariant was singular were with plural was (i.e. the converse of Standard English) was-weren’t split No speaker in our corpus is entirely consistent, so more detailed data would need to be collected to establish the geographic and social distribution of each of the four models, but we suspect there is a good deal of variation from speaker to speaker and from place to place. Plural is still occurs occasionally in the speech of older East Midlanders, presumably a relic of the northern subject rule as demonstrated by tokens such as the birds is eating them in New Houghton (C900/12543), them people who’s reading the news in Mansfield (C1190/26/04) and all the rest of them’s just plain ongoing sort of things in Groby (C1190/20/03). In common with the country as a whole there is also frequent use of existential there is and there was with a plural complement, allowing constructions such as there’s a lot more women who go football now and there was no seats at all as recorded in Leicester (C1190/20/02).

3.5.2 Have The conservative use of have as a full lexical verb is still quite common among older East Midlands speakers, as demonstrated by recordings in, for instance,

88 

 3 Morphology and syntax

Coplow Dale (C1190/14635  –  people haven’t time to see them) and Nottingham (C1190/26/05 – we have a sister), this contrasting with modern Standard British English ‘people haven’t got/don’t have time to see them’ and ‘we’ve got a sister’. A striking extension of this is the tendency for speakers to use enclitic forms, as in examples from Two Dales (C1190/12/03  –  I’d stock that was sold to a farmer in Scotland), West Stockwith (C900/12620 – we’d enough to do) and Swadlincote (C1190/12/05 – we’d no money left). Although have is arguably unmarked as a full verb here, other varieties (and, arguably, younger East Midlands speakers) generally favour a more prominent form of have – ‘I had stock that was sold to a farmer in Scotland’, ‘we had enough to do’ and ‘we had no money left’. According to BL research (Robinson 2005, Robinson et al. 2013) enclitic have occurs relatively frequently in recordings of speakers from the north of England, but is almost entirely absent from recordings with speakers from the south. Enclitic forms in our EM data are particularly common in SED sound recordings, such as in Charlesworth (C908/11 C5 – I’ve two children) and Kniveton (C908/51 C10 – I’d thirty-two cars stood in this yard), but much rarer in our present-day data suggesting they are perhaps no longer as widespread in the East Midlands as in dialects further north. Evidence of the northern subject rule applying to have was captured in a handful of SED recordings, such as in Stonebroom (C908/51 C6 – some has to be timbered), but a single modern token in New Houghton (C900/12543 – the thrushes has nearly all gone now suggests has generalisation is no longer common. Other historic forms such as hae and han do survive, albeit generally among older working-class speakers. Archaic/dialectal hae is extremely common in SED sound recordings across all three counties, as confirmed by tokens in Stonebroom (C908/51 C6 – he’d happen only hae to [atə] put a wedge or two in), Oxton (C908/52 C5 – we’ll hae [ɛɪ] a drink together) and Markfield (C908/56 C8 – you’ll hae to [ɛtə] pay for them). Although less prominent in our recent audio data it is nonetheless evident both as a full verb, as demonstrated in Mansfield (C1190/26/04 – you can’t hae [ɛ] somebody doing the national news speaking like us) and Heanor (C1190/12/04 –they used to hae [ɛɪ] a copper out on the back yard) and with obligatory have to, as in Leicester (C900/09073 – we used have to [atə] go and pay us rent). As an auxiliary it remains extremely common with speakers of all ages in conditional sentences – e.g. must hae been agony [mʊstə bɪn agənɪ] in Swadlincote (C1190/12/05), they would hae guessed [ðɪ wʊdə gɛst] in Nottingham (C1190/26/02) and we should hae won [wɪ ʃʊdə wʊn] in Leicester (C1190/20/02). In such cases, this could be interpreted either as a reflex of dialectal hae or  –  probably more likely  –  a phonologically motivated process in which word final /v/ is deleted from unstressed have such that the utterances cited would be must’ve been agony, they would’ve guessed and we should’ve won respectively (cf. the widespread realisation of unstressed of as [ə]). Plural and/or auxiliary han is recorded in the

3.5 Verbs 

 89

SED published data for most localities in Derbyshire and one in Leicestershire at HAVE GOT (1X.6.4), and is audible in several sound recordings, including Sutton on the Hill (C908/51 C8 – by God they han) and Sheepy Magna (C908/56 C10 – I’n only been on a bike once). Perhaps surprisingly, there are several examples of this in two present-day recordings: Swadlincote (C1190/12/05 – e.g. I’n got a broken a floating bone in my knuckle now, times han altered and they’n changed it round completely) and Coalville (C1190/20/05 – most words han got two meanings, two of my girls han gone university and we’n got us own house [wɛɪŋ gɒɹ ʊz əʊn aʊs]). Significantly, both recordings feature older working-class speakers – i.e. similar profiles to SED informants. As is true of most dialects of English, auxiliary have can frequently be omitted in rapid speech, such as in Heanor (C1190/12/04 – if you _ got no money). The same is also true of auxiliary be and do, as demonstrated by tokens in Groby (C1190/20/03 – how _ they gonna change that) and Swadlincote (C1190/12/05 – what _ you think you’re doing) respectively.

3.5.3 Past As in all dialects, East Midlands English allows several non-standard past tense paradigms that reveal a number of processes, including zero marking (e.g. come-come-come), regularisation (e.g. throw-throwed-throwed), generalisation of the simple past (e.g. break-broke-broke) or of the past participle (e.g.  do-done-done), and archaic irregular or strong forms (e.g. get-got-gotten). Many of these are not unique to East Midlands dialects and establishing the relative frequency with which they alternate with standard forms or the geographic spread of each variant using naturally elicited data is inevitably inconclusive. Table 3.1 below, however, records evidence of non-standard past tense forms that occur spontaneously in our present-day audio data and thus give a sense of the kind of variants present in modern East Midlands English. Only one token per location is included in Table 3.1, but in some cases there were several examples from individual speakers or a particular recording location.

3.5.4 Infinitive phrase In Standard English modal verbs combine with a bare infinitive to create an infinitive phrase – e.g. I can read and we might come. This also applies to a small set of verbs (e.g. feel, hear, help, let, make, see and watch) when combined with a direct object – she watched him fall or we heard them shout, but other verbs and

90 

 3 Morphology and syntax

Table 3.1: Examples of non-standard past forms in present-day East Midlands English. Verb

Variant Context

Location (shelfmark)

ZERO PAST COME

come

if they come up here they wouldn’t understand Mansfield (C1190/26/04) half of what we were saying he come to Arnold every Friday night

Arnold (C900/12562)

she come back with fresh cream scones and jam Meden Vale (C900/12505)

GIVE

give

practically all them at come pawning

Kimberley (C900/12604)

the trams come right across Bulwell market

Nottingham (C900/12616)

everything were just same when mum come back

Heanor (C1190/12/04)

a bar that come across

Swadlincote (C900/03055)

he never come for about three month

Swadlincote (C1190/12/05)

then they come back

Barlestone (C900/09131)

he give an example of why he was against it

Wirksworth (C900/03012)

if anything went wrong with my car I just Derby (C900/03118) basically give it them and they’d have a look at it RUN

run

SIT

sit

there was a large clay bed run across the quarry Crich (C900/03010) it all run down his chest

Swadlincote (C1190/12/05)

they sit me the other side desk

Swadlincote (C1190/12/05)

REGULARISED PAST DRAW

drawed that’s all you drawed

Swadlincote (C1190/12/05)

KNOW

knowed soon as her knowed my family

Swadlincote (C1190/12/05)

SEE

seed

Houghton (C900/12543)

THROW

throwed throwed the moulds away

I’ve seed as many as thirty clutches

Swadlincote (C1190/12/05)

GENERALISATION OF SIMPLE PAST BREAK

broke

EAT

ate

FALL

fell

FORGET forgot GIVE

gave

the war had just broke out

Crich (C900/03010)

a mouse’d ate it

Kimberley (C900/12604)

when you’d ate a handful

Heanor (C1190/12/04)

you wouldn’t’ve fell to the bottom

Crich (C900/03010)

if you’d fell out

Heanor (C1190/12/04)

the other I’n forgot

Swadlincote (C1190/12/05)

them two sheets I’ve gave you

Heanor (C1190/12/04)

you’ve gave her a fiver

Swadlincote (C1190/12/05)

3.5 Verbs 

 91

Table 3.1 (continued) Verb

Variant Context

Location (shelfmark)

SPEAK

spoke

it’s just how we’ve always spoke it

Mansfield (C1190/26/04)

the week were spoke for weren’t it

Heanor (C1190/12/04)

I would’ve spoke

Swadlincote (C1190/12/05)

WEAR

wore

them as’d been wore most

Crich (C900/03010)

WRITE

wrote

it was wrote out separate

Crich (C900/03010)

I’ve wrote a sentence down here

Belper (C1190/12/01)

there was a couple of items what I’ve wrote

Coalville (C1190/20/05)

GENERALISATION OF PAST PARTICIPLE DO

done

SEEN

seen

STINK

stunk

I done a Health Studies course

Barlestone (C900/09131)

I seen this horse and cart

Meden Vale (C900/12505)

you never seen them again

Heanor (C1190/12/04)

he stunk that much

Swadlincote (C1190/12/05)

OTHER FREEZE

frozzen I’m frozzen cold to the marrow

Heanor (C1190/12/04)

GET

gotten

I’ve gotten over my obstacles

Lutterworth (C900/09070)

GIE [= ‘to give’]

gen

she would’ve gen him a clout round the ear-hole

Heanor (C1190/12/04)

they gen you six

Swadlincote (C1190/12/05)

he gen him a tenner

Leicester (C1190/20/02)

SWELL

swolled its knees’d swolled up

Swadlincote (C1190/12/05)

adjectives require a ‘to-infinitive’ – e.g. she decided to drive or we are happy to help. In East Midlands English bare infinitives extend to all environments and are especially common with use [= ‘be accustomed’] and want. SED entries at USED TO (IX.4.15) for the three East Midlands counties include several examples of [juːstə] (i.e. used to), but also numerous instances of [juːs⨚t] ], an unusual use of the IPA ‘linking’ symbol which presumably represents a reduced articulation of to (see section 2.4.1 on preposition reduction), and a handful of examples of [juːs, juːst] that we suspect imply a bare infinitive. SED audio recordings offer greater confirmation of the presence of bare infinitives, with examples in, for instance, Youlgreave (C908/51 C2 – we used go three times into Whaley Bridge station a day) and Great Dalby (C908/56 C9 – aged men used be playing then). Bare infinitives with use are too frequent in our present-day data to discuss individually here,

92 

 3 Morphology and syntax

but examples from Nottingham (C900/12606 – used climb over the wall) or Mansfield (C1190/26/04 – they used take piss out of me) are typical. Given the potential in East Midlands dialects for to to surface as /t/, it is not always possible to judge whether utterances such as these are examples of a genuine bare infinitive or whether they result from to reduction: [juːst klaːɪm] and [juːst tɛk pɪs] might be interpreted as used climb and used take piss with word final devoicing due to assimilation with the voiceless onsets of climb and take respectively, or they could represent used to climb and used to take with a contracted form of to [t] and used realised with /s/ prompted by the same anticipatory assimilation process. Similarly ambiguous examples occur in other environments where an infinitive with a word initial voiceless stop is preceded by a main verb with a word final voiceless stop, as illustrated by an SED example in, for instance, Charlesworth (C908/11 C5 – you want start [wɒnt sta˞ːt] early with that job) and a present-day example in Groby (C1190/20/03 – have we got say [gɒt sɛɪ] surnames). However, other instances clearly show ‘to’ is absent, such as in Harby (C908/56 C5 – how long would that take for one sheep wash it) and in Belper (C1190/12/01  –  we couldn’t wait get back to school tell everybody about it [wɪ kʊnʔ wɛɪʔ gɛp bak tskuːɫ tɛl ɛvɹɪbɒdi əbaːt ɪt]). This latter utterance shows both a contracted form of to as a preposition preceding the noun ‘school’ but two clear bare infinitives in the verbal phrases ‘couldn’t wait _ get back to school _ tell everybody’. Bare infinitives like these occur frequently in our present-day data with have (to), want (to) and be going (to) as in examples from Heanor (C1190/12/04 – you’ll have wait while I think of her name), Mansfield (C1190/26/04 – they want kill him) and Leicester (C1190/26/02 – we talk about what we think’s going happen) respectively. Further tokens indicate that bare infinitives occur with a variety of other verb phrases in the East Midlands both with and without direct objects as demonstrated in, for instance, Belper (C1190/12/01  –  trying be something you’re not) and Kimberley (C900/12604 – some folks didn’t like folks know they were going to pawn). SED sound recordings also include frequent examples of ‘for-to-infinitives’ such as in Charlesworth (C908/11 C5  –  when I come for to draw me wage he knocked it out) and Oxton (C908/52 C5 – for to cart milk). Although much rarer in our present-day data a handful of examples suggest ‘for-to-infinitives’ still occur among older East Midlands speakers, as shown by tokens in, for instance, Arnold (C900/12562 – they were glad for to get rid of them), Swadlincote (C1190/12/05 – he were too big for to peddle it) and Coalville (C1190/20/05  –  dad’s and mam’s too proud for to change). Some speakers use both bare infinitives and ‘for to’ but there is insufficient data to determine whether these are distinguished according to grammatical function; rather we suspect they are in free variation, with bare infinitives increasing and ‘for-to-infinitives’ apparently declining locally. Every ‘for-to-infinitive’ in our data is realised with preposition reduction – both in our

3.5 Verbs 

 93

older SED recordings, as in Kniveton (C908/51 C10 – we got a youth out of Ashbourne for to come and help us [fəʔ kʊm ən ɛlp ʊs]) and in recent recordings, as in Swadlincote (C900/03055 – you’d got about that much for to have your breakfast on [fəʔ av jə bɹɛkfəst ɒn]). East Midlands English, therefore, has a number of alternatives available for forming infinitive phrases: ‘to’ reduction is extremely common; reduced forms with ‘for to’, although in decline are still present; and bare infinitives are particularly widespread. Although not exclusive to East Midlands dialects (see e.g. Shorrocks 1999, for evidence in Bolton), present-day BL audio data suggests bare infinitives are most common in the East Midlands so this represents a salient marker of East Midlands dialect. Finally the retention of clause final infinitive do can be heard in parts of the East Midlands in expressions such as I couldn’t do, we wanted to do, they used to do and she might do (cf. Standard English I couldn’t, we wanted to, they used to and she might). Although perhaps not as common as in dialects further north, this is nonetheless a striking feature that is not, to our knowledge, encountered in West Midlands English nor in southern varieties, although we can find very little discussion of the phenomenon other than in the descriptions of BL sound recordings (Robinson 2005, Robinson et al. 2013) on which we base the northsouth distinction proposed here. Examples occur in our data from Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire, but we have no tokens in Leicestershire, suggesting this is another feature showing continuity with dialects to the north. Examples occur in declarative statements, such as in New Houghton (C900/12543 – we eat it today because we’ve got to do) and Meden Vale (C900/12505 – I don’t think you can do when you’re with anyone else), but are arguably most marked as an emphatic or contradictory response to a question, as in Nottingham (C900/12530  – they just asked you if you wanted to take an early retirement so I did do), Belper (C1190/12/01  –  they probably did do) and Heanor (you can do). Standard varieties here would favour I did, they probably did and you can respectively, with pragmatic emphasis or contradiction/denial expressed by assigning prominent stress to the modal verb.

3.5.5 Other East Midlands speakers frequently use a simple past with continuous/progressive sense where Standard English arguably favours a present participle: thus I was sat in the kitchen alternates in East Midlands English with I was sitting in the kitchen. The relative merits of each variant are much debated in online language forums with observers such as Soanes (2012) characterising simple past as non-standard here. Our data suggests this variant is well established in the East Midlands with

94 

 3 Morphology and syntax

tokens in SED recordings, such as I’d thirty-two cars stood in this yard in Kniveton (C908/51 C10), and more recently in Mansfield (C1190/26/04  –  Sarah’s sat there now). Equally censured in online discussions are double conditionals, which are a feature of many varieties of English. Typical examples in our East Midlands recordings include if he’d’ve been caught in Crich (C900/03010) and if you’d’ve spoke different to your gaffer in Mansfield (C1190/26/04). Older phenomena such as participles captured in SED recordings, such as in Charlesworth (C908/11 C5 – I went a-working at the mill) and Sheepy Magna (C908/56 C10 – I’m a-getting so much for what time I’m a-putting in) are entirely absent from our present-day data. Finally, there are a few examples of double past with used to, thus adding to the variety noted above for East Midlands constructions with used to. It is unclear from utterances such as the following from Groby (C1190/20/03 – I’d used to call mine my husband) whether this utterance represents had used to or did used to, but other tokens suggest had used to is favoured in East Midlands English with negatives, as confirmed by a speaker in Sheepy Magna (C908/56 C10 – there hadn’t used to be this here bus work) and is also possible in declaratives, as demonstrated in Swadlincote (C1190/12/05  –  I had used to come up with some concoction if I wanted a day off).

3.6 Negation The way in which speakers form negative statements varies widely within British dialects and East Midlands English is particularly interesting as widespread vernacular constructions, such as ain’t and secondary contraction, alternate with the more regionally marked auxiliary contraction and a highly localised form with .

3.6.1 Auxiliary contraction Most accounts of spoken English describe how speakers generate negatives with auxiliary verbs by attaching a contracted form of the particle ‘not’ to the relevant verb  –  thus havePRESNEG can be hasn’t or haven’t depending on person, bePASTNEG is either wasn’t or weren’t. Alongside negative contraction most speakers also use auxiliary contraction  –  that is, the negative particle remains intact but the verb is contracted to produce forms such as she’s not, I’ve not and you’ll not (cf. she isn’t, I haven’t and you won’t respectively). For some speakers negative contraction is the unmarked, default form – you aren’t wearing jeans is a simple observation – while auxiliary contraction might be used for emphasis – you’re not

3.6 Negation 

 95

wearing jeans represents a command or reprimand. Trudgill, however, suggests that unmarked forms of auxiliary contraction occur more frequently “the further north one goes” (1978: 13), although recent analyses suggest the geographic distribution may be more nuanced (e.g. Tagliamonte and Smith 2003). There is certainly considerable evidence to suggest that auxiliary contraction can be used as an unmarked form in the East Midlands with numerous examples from speakers of all ages across the whole region, from Mansfield (C1190/26/04 – there’s not many local landlords left) and Kirkby-in-Ashfield (C1190/26/03 – we’ll not go into that) in the north via Crich (C900/03010 – you’d not go up till you were fourteen) and Nottingham (C1190/26/05 – they’ll not know that I’m from somewhere else) to Leicester (C1190/20/04 – I’ve not heard things like that) and Groby (C1190/20/03 – you’ve not got an accent) in the south. 3.6.2 Secondary contraction Secondary contraction refers to the simplification of the word final consonant cluster in enclitic negatives, so that speakers produce forms such as didn’t [dɪnt], haven’t [ant] and isn’t [ɪnt] by deleting the final /s/, /v/ or /z/ of the verb preceding the suffix /nt/ that represents a contraction of the negative particle, not. Although not unique to East Midland dialects secondary contraction is by far the most common vernacular negative form in our present-day data and unites speakers of all ages across the whole region and is also fairly common in SED audio data. Individual examples are too numerous to mention, but Table 3.2 below offers a comprehensive set of environments where this can occur nowadays and confirms the broad geographic spread from Mansfield in the north to Leicester in the south. The right-hand column lists confirmed tokens in specific location, but all of these forms Table 3.2: Examples of secondary contraction in present-day East Midlands English. Construction

Underlying form

Realisation

Location (shelfmark)

bePRESNEG bePASTNEG canPASTNEG doPRESNEG doPASTNEG havePRESNEG havePRESNEG havePASTNEG shallPASTNEG willPASTNEG

isn’t wasn’t couldn’t doesn’t didn’t hasn’t haven’t hadn’t shouldn’t wouldn’t

[ɪnt] [wɒnt] [kʊnt] [dʊnt] [dɪnt] [ant] [ant] [ant] [ʃʊnʔ] [wʊnʔ]

Groby (C1190/20/03) Arnold (C900/12562) Kirkby-in-Ashfield (C1190/26/03) Nottingham (C1190/26/02) Crich (C900/03010) Two Dales (C1190/12/03) Swadlincote (C1190/12/05) Heanor (C1190/12/04) Mansfield (C1190/26/04) Leicester (C1190/20/02)

96 

 3 Morphology and syntax

are available throughout the East Midlands and occur frequently in our corpus. In common with many dialects of English, some East Midlanders also exhibit word final consonant cluster reduction, so that the final /t/ of the negative particle can also be deleted, producing forms such as isn’t [ɪn] in Swadlincote (C1190/12/05), doesn’t [dʊn] in Mansfield (C1190/26/04) and didn’t [dɪn] in Leicester (C1190/20/02). Secondary contraction can occur in ‘normal’ declarative statements, such as I wouldn’t [wʊnʔ] get a mortgage in Nottingham (C1190/26/02) and we haven’t got a [aŋk gɒdə] front room no more in Groby (C1190/20/03), but is particularly common in tag questions, with numerous examples of isn’t it [ɪntɪt, ɪnɪt], doesn’t it [dʊntɪt, dʊnɪt], haven’t I [anta], didn’t she [dɪnt ʃɪ], wouldn’t they [wʊnt ði] etc. 3.6.3 Dialectal & none One of the most distinctive features of broad East Midlands dialect is a localised morphological process applied to auxiliary and modal verbs to form negative constructions. Where most varieties of English add the suffix /nt/ to negate an auxiliary or modal verb, in some cases in combination with vowel mutation – e.g. havePASTNEG becomes hadn’t but willPRESNEG becomes won’t – variants with /nə/ exist in some East Midlands dialects – e.g. havePASTNEG as [adnə] and willPRESNEG as [wʊnə]. As noted by Scollins and Titford in their description of dialect in Ilkeston (2000: 38), this often combines with secondary contraction to produce forms such as inna [ɪnə] for bePRESNEG or hanna [anə] for havePRESNEG, while Evans lists an impressive range of analogous variants for Leicestershire – e.g. bePASTNEG as wasna, worna, wurna or weerna (1881: 31). Rather frustratingly there is no explanation as to how these are distributed and whether geographic criteria or linguistic environment is the crucial factor. SED fieldwork recorded several such forms in numerous localities in an area centred on the Peak District and the Potteries at e.g. willPRESNEG (IX.4.5) and the sound recording in Kniveton (C908/57 C7–C10) contains several tokens, including thou canPRESNEG do nowt [ða kɒstnə dʊ nɛʊt] and I says thou doPASTNEG [a sɛz ða dɪdstnə]. Restricted to older working-class speakers in our present-day data we sense this is an increasingly rare feature, but survives nonetheless in very broad local speech and, anecdotally, is used consciously by speakers for whom mainstream negation markers are the norm as a humorous local identity marker in phrases such as dunna [=  doPRESNEG] be daft [dʊnə bɪ daft]. Wright’s rendition of the Ten Commandments in Derbyshire dialect (1975: 12) captures this in ‘[n]ivver coss and swear – except when tha conna ’elp it’ [= thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain] and Braber (2015b) includes canna [= canPRESNEG], didna [= doPASTNEG], dunna [= doPRESNEG] and wunna [= willPRESNEG] for Nottinghamshire as does Smith (2013), which additionally

3.6 Negation 

 97

includes conna [= canPRESNEG], couldna [= canPASTNEG] and werena [= bePASTNEG] for Derbyshire. Table 3.3 below lists several naturally occurring examples from our present-day audio data: Table 3.3: Localised negative constructions in East Midlands English. Verb

Form

Example

Location (shelfmark)

be

bePRESNEG

I arena [ɑːnə] going on my bike

Swadlincote (C1190/12/05)

bus inna [ɪnə] coming

Swadlincote (C1190/12/05)

bePASTNEG

them days werena [wʊnə] like they are now

Swadlincote (C1190/12/05)

can do have will

canPRESNEG

I canna [kanə] find it

Two Dales (C1190/12/02)

canPASTNEG

I cudna [kʊdnə] spell

Swadlincote (C1190/12/05)

doPRESNEG

you dunna [dʊnə] think about it

Two Dales (C1190/12/02)

doPASTNEG

your parents didna [dɪdnə] like him

Heanor (C1190/12/04)

havePRESNEG

I hanna [anə] put owt

Swadlincote (C1190/12/05)

havePASTNEG

they hadna [ɛdnə] got houses

Swadlincote (C1190/20/05)

willPRESNEG

this stuff wunna [wʊnə] burn

Coalville (C1190/20/05)

willPASTNEG

I told you it wudna [wʊdnə] work

Coalville (C1190/20/05)

Unlike historic forms with , we found no present-day examples of historic dialectal forms with none, as captured in SED interviews in Charlesworth (C908/11 C5 – none above a mile away) and Kniveton (C908/51 C10 – I says it’s none a ghost) 3.6.4 Vernacular ain’t, don’t & multiple negation A comparison of SED and contemporary recordings suggests that ain’t has become more common and more widespread in East Midlands dialects in recent years. The only SED examples of ain’t occur in a handful of sites in Leicestershire – both with have, as in Harby (C908/56 C5 – you clip horse what ain’t been groomed much), and with be, as in Markfield (C908/56 C8 – that’s usually a vixen takes them ain’t it) and Sheepy Magna (C908/56 C10 – I ain’t a-getting so much) – but there are none in Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire. Given that ain’t occurs in vernacular varieties across the world and is arguably one of the most ubiquitous non-standard grammatical forms in English (Hancock and Todd 2005: 13) it is perhaps not surprising it appears to be more widespread in present-day East Midlands English, with examples from speakers of all ages from Mansfield in the north via Swadlincote to Leicester in the south, where it is particularly common. Table 3.4 gives several

98 

 3 Morphology and syntax

Table 3.4: Examples of ain’t in present-day BL sound recordings of East Midlands English. Form

Example

Location (shelfmark)

1psg bePRESNEG 1ppl bePRESNEG 2psg bePRESNEG 3psg bePRESNEG 3ppl bePRESNEG 1psg havePRESNEG 2psg havePRESNEG 3ppl bePRESNEG

I ain’t gonna have a tattoo we’re working with men ain’t we all the while he’s the baby of the lot ain’t you definitely bog ain’t it they’re on the way up ain’t they I ain’t got any you ain’t heard last of it they have ain’t they

Leicester (C1190/20/02) Groby (C1190/20/03) Leicester (C1190/20/02) Nottingham (C1190/20/05) Leicester (C1190/20/02) Mansfield (C1190/26/04) Arnold (C900/12562) Groby (C1190/20/03)

examples, and although we do not have tokens for every possible environment, we suspect for those speakers who use ain’t it is available for all forms of bePRESNEG and havePRESNEG. There are two examples of invariant don’t in SED sound recordings: in Oxton (C908/52 C5 – if he don’t behave hissen now I says I’ll take him outside) and Harby (C908/56 C5  –  takes some getting through don’t it). As with ain’t we have evidence of more frequent and more widespread use in present-day East Midlands dialects with tokens from the north in Kirkby-in-Ashfield (C1190/26/03  –  (it just sounds disgusting though don’t it), the centre in Heanor (C1190/12/04 – who don’t) and from two younger speakers in Leicester (C1190/20/02  –  my dad don’t like it when he says that and no it don’t (C1190/20/04)). Both ain’t and invariant don’t are recorded as “pervasive or obligatory” in East Anglian English, “neither pervasive nor extremely rare” in the south east of England and “rare” in northern English by Kortmann and Lunkenheimer (2013: 155, 156 & 158) so the increase in usage in the East Midlands may reflect influence from dialects to the immediate south and east and, in the case of ain’t, a general tendency towards universal vernacular grammatical markers. Finally, as with all varieties of English, multiple negation occurs quite naturally in the East Midlands. There are examples in all three counties in SED recordings, including in Youlgreave (C908/51 C2 – there were never a line up nor telegraph lines nor nothing), South Clifton (C908/52 C4 – they never tent none now) and Hathern (C908/56 C6  –  I couldn’t hear nowt) and countless tokens in contemporary recordings with speakers of all ages across the whole of the region. Here we offer examples from each of the three major cities by way of illustration: my first car didn’t have no air-bags at all in Derby (C900/03118), you ain’t got no money in Nottingham (C1190/26/05) and it’s not like that no more is it in Leicester (C1190/20/02).

3.7 Prepositions 

 99

3.7 Prepositions 3.7.1 Preposition deletion Speakers of many British dialects delete the word final consonant of prepositions such as of [ə] and with [wɪ, wi], while East Midlands speakers also frequently reduce the preposition to to a consonant [t, ʔ] as discussed in greater detail in chapter 2. A parallel to the preference for bare infinitives discussed above, however, is the omission of the preposition to, especially in common collocations such as with place names or habitual destinations like school, toilet or shops. This feature was tested in the SED questionnaire at GO TO SCHOOL (VIII.6.1) and although no East Midlands responses record zero to here, Evans notes the “frequent omission” of the preposition ‘to’ as “one of the most noticeable peculiarities” of Leicestershire dialect, citing the following submission from a correspondent by way of illustration: “I hope to soon get church” (1881:32). This is corroborated by a spontaneous token in an SED sound recording in Ullesthorpe (C908/57 C2 – used to go market three days a week) and we have several examples in our present-day data: all from the southern half of the region. Typical examples occur in two different recordings in Swadlincote (C900/03055 – I went York Road school) and (C1190/12/05 – there was a couple as went school with us); two recordings in Leicester (C1190/20/02 – there’s a lot more women who go football) and (C1190/20/04 – I’m going bed); and one in Coalville (C1190/20/05 – my eldest daughter went university). Less widespread, but nonetheless noteworthy are a handful of examples of zero prepositions in other environments. Where Standard English requires for with a time phrase of extended duration, for instance, East Midlands speakers occasionally use a null preposition, as demonstrated by SED informants in Youlgreave (C908/51 C2  –  three month at a time) and South Clifton (C908/52 C4 – it’s been closed a good many years) and present-day counterparts in Meden Vale (C900/12505 – he’s been dead eleven years) and Coalville (C1190/20/05 – me mam’s been dead ten year). Zero of is relatively common in SED sound recordings with tokens in, for instance, Sutton on the Hill (C908/51 C8 – you want to leave a bit ditch for to be cleaned out), North Wheatley (C908/52 C3 – a bit overtime) and Sheepy Magna (C908/56 C10 – there’s only one out every twenty as is interested). Less evident in present-day data there are nonetheless examples in Swadlincote (C1190/12/05 – they sit me the other side desk) and Leicester (C1190/20/02 – I know a lot rugby fans). Intriguingly, there are also two modern examples of a null preposition with locatives – in Nottingham (C1190/26/02 – he used to live Wolves [= Wolverhampton]) and Leicester (C1190/26/04 – my mum’s like lived Liverpool), where one might expect in.

100 

 3 Morphology and syntax

3.7.2 Preposition substitution The use of on with a pronoun to express Standard English of remains relatively robust in the East Midlands. The ubiquity of this in SED data suggests it was at one time not a defining feature of any particular dialect and is certainly widespread in SED recordings from our area, including tokens in Kniveton (C908/51 C10 – I kept walking at side on him), Oxton (C908/52 C5 – I hadn’t got hold on him) and Seagrave (C908/56 C7 – he used to make quite a lot on it). Although less frequent in our present-day data we have tokens from older speakers in all three counties, suggesting it is perhaps recessive in the East Midlands (as elsewhere). Prohibited before nouns, on can occur with most (probably all) pronouns across the whole of the area, as demonstrated by examples from, for instance, Mansfield (C1190/26/04 – never heard on it), Heanor (C1190/12/04 – that meant they’d had enough on you), Nottingham (C900/12606  –  most on them miners) and Coalville (C1190/20/05 – if they arena proud on us they ought be ashamed of theirsens). With prepositions of time that convey the sense of repeated or regular activity (i.e. in the sense of ‘every evening/Sunday/weekend’), of can be used by East Midlands speakers, as demonstrated by tokens in Great Dalby (C908/56 C9  –  of a night), Markfield (C908/56 C8  –  of the Saturday) and Kimberley (C900/12604 – they couldn’t handle money of a weekend). In these cases Standard English requires ‘at night’, ‘on a Saturday’ and ‘at the weekend’ respectively. For older East Midlands speakers at competes with of (and mainstream on) preceding days of the week as in an example from a speaker in Crich (C900/03010 – he’d pay you out at the Friday). Other examples of archaic/dialectal prepositional usage in our East Midlands data include agent with, as in the work were done with hand in Sheepy Magna (C908/56 C10 – cf. Standard English ‘by hand’) and Yorkshire pudding that was kissed with an angel in Swadlincote (C900/03055 – cf. Standard English kissed by an angel); against in the sense of ‘next to/beside’, as illustrated in Swadlincote (C900/03055 – I had to sit against that gel at school); and by in the sense of ‘past’, as demonstrated by speakers in Oxton (C908/52 C5  –  I said now where’s the blacksmith’s shop and I’d come by it) and Swadlincote (C900/03055 – you used to go by the cop shop [= ‘police station’]). Finally, as is the case with many British dialects, East Midlands speakers frequently use off where Standard English prefers ‘from’, as confirmed by examples in, for instance, Swadlincote (C900/03055 – you knew what you’d get off your dad or your mum), Mansfield (C1190/26/04 – bits like that I suppose we’ve like pinched off them haven’t we really) and Leicester (C1190/26/02 – cheap ones off the market).

3.8 Adverbs 

 101

3.7.3 Double prepositions In some cases East Midlands speakers use single prepositions where other varieties require double prepositions and, in the case of ‘off’, some East Midlands speakers favour a double preposition. Examples of the former occur with down, as in a token recorded in Mansfield (if you went down London); out, as in an example from Leicester (C1190/26/02 – going out my way to mix with different people); and up, as in an example from a speaker in Groby (at half three four o’clock in the morning up the wholesale market). Non-standard double prepositions are confirmed by SED examples in Youlgreave (C908/51 C2 – I’ll take chain off on him and take bluffs) and Oxton (C908/52 C5 – he bought one off of a man named Weatherall) and by several recent examples, including in Leicester (C1190/20/02 – we’d been getting a lot of stick off of the Manchester United fans).

3.8 Adverbs 3.8.1 Intensifiers English offers a variety of vernacular intensifiers corresponding to mainstream very, of which right, dead and well are worthy of comment here. Right was recorded in several SED localities in Derbyshire at VERY (VIII.3.2), and there is also a single token in a sound recording in Leicestershire in Harby (C908/56 C5 – a right old racehorse). Nowadays it is most closely associated with older speakers in Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire, as confirmed by examples in, for instance, Swadlincote (C900/03055 – you’d be right lucky if they give you a round of bread and jam), and Mansfield (C1190/26/04 – sounds right rough when you listen to it I think). In all our present-day examples right as an intensifier is pronounced [ɹɛɪt], a realisation captured in all bar one of the tokens for Derbyshire at VERY (VIII.3.2) and, presumably, the pronunciation intended by the entry eh’s a raight dull ‘un [= ‘he’s really lazy’] in Scollins and Titford (2000: 101). More common with speakers of all ages in our present-day data, dead occurs across the whole of the EM, as confirmed by tokens in, for instance, Belper (C1190/12/01 – dead right), Nottingham (C1190/26/02 – I thought sofa was dead rough) and Leicester (C1190/26/04 – they walk like dead hard down the corridor). Right in particular and dead are both associated with speech in the north of England, so once again reflect continuity with dialects to the north. The intensifier well on the other hand is much more closely associated with southern varieties of English so it is perhaps not surprising that well only occurs in our data among young speakers recorded in Leicester,

102 

 3 Morphology and syntax

as demonstrated by phrases such as well made-up (C1190/26/02) and I’m well tired (C1190/26/04). Interestingly, Smith (2013) lists all three in his glossary of Derbyshire dialect: reet (i.e. a localised pronunciation of right) he illustrates with examples of usage such as ‘I’m reet sorry’ and ‘I were reet glad’; dead is exemplified by the phrase ‘it wer’ dead good’; and well included in the phrase ‘well pleased’.

3.8.2 Unmarked adverbs The degree modifier adverb real can appear unmarked as an intensifer in East Midlands English, where more mainstream varieties require the adverbial suffx , as demonstrated by an SED token in Hathern (C908/56 C6 – if any poor bugger’s had a real hard life I have) and modern counterparts in Belper (C1190/12/01 – she’s real smart-looking) and Eastwood (C1190/26/01 – I was getting real vexed with this). The same rule applies – for older speakers at least – with fair as demonstrated by a single token in Belper (C1190/12/01 – [I was] fair rattled). By extension, manner adverbs can be unmarked in East Midlands English, as confirmed by an SED informant in, for instance, Ullesthorpe (C908/56 C8 – we were very bad off) and recent recordings in several places including Swadlincote (C900/03055 – they reckon they keep your snap [= ‘snack/packed lunch’] good), Mansfield (C1190/26/04 – it’s been snowing heavy) and Groby (C1190/20/03 – they just talk so slow don’t they), although this is true of many, probably most, dialects.

3.8.3 as, so (as), that More distinctive are the functions to which East Midlands speakers assign the adverbs as, so and that. When making comparisons some East Midlands speakers use so where Standard English favours ‘as’, with so invariably realised with a weak vowel, as in North Wheatley (C908/52 C3 – not quite so good [sə gʊd] as Bramleys for cooking), Harby (C908/56 C5 – it didn’t weigh so much [sə mʊʧ]) and Markfield (C908/56 C8 – he never knowed a case of that sort settled so quick [sə kwɪk]). This weakly articulated so is even more striking when used as an adverb of degree, as illustrated by speakers in North Wheatley (they’re not so keen [nət sə kiːn]) and Leicester (C1190/26/02 – if you’re from Birmingham and you have an accent and you speak at a normal speed then it’s not so bad [nɒt sə bad]). The contrast here is arguably more marked as other varieties of English favour a stressed that here: ‘not that keen’ and ‘not that bad’ respectively. Conversely, that is used by some East Midlands speakers where Standard English favours ‘so’ in the sense of ‘to such an extent’, as demonstrated by SED

3.8 Adverbs 

 103

informants in Kniveton (C908/51 C10 – I cudna [= canPASTNEG] go out because hoo [= ‘she’] were that frightened) and numerous recent examples from speakers of all ages in our present-day data: Heanor (C1190/12/04 – they was that delicate weren’t they) Swadlincote (C1190/12/05 – it used to be that foggy) Nottingham (C900/12606 – the houses was that close) Nottingham (C1190/26/02 – they demolished it it was that bad) Leicester (C1190/26/02 – there’s that many games to choose from) Coalville (C1190/20/05 – they’re that pretty they fetch ducks off the water) An emphatic that is also captured in an utterance by an SED informant in Charlesworth (C908/11 C5 – he says do you smoke oh yes I says I do that) where other varieties would perhaps use too here. A single present-day token from Mansfield (C1190/26/04 – (they do talk different to us don’t they) yeah they do that) confirms this is also possible nowadays. Evans (1881: 27) reports this for Leicestershire, calling it a ‘circuitous affirmative’, and noting the following exchange by way of illustration: “Do you like apples?” “Oi dew that.” “Can you eat one?” “Oi can that!” Finally, just as as is available as a relative pronoun in East Midlands English it can also serve as a declarative complementiser, either on its own or in conjunction with so to express the notion ‘in order that’. There are several examples in SED sound recordings, such as in Stonebroom (C908/51 C6 – you place your detonator so’s when it goes it punches forward) and Seagrave (C908/56 C7 – when they get as they can stand on their own) and a handful of modern examples in, for instance, Crich (C900/03010 – cleaned off the rubble that was left on so’s it didn’t fall into the bottom) and Swadlincote (C1190/12/05 – it used to be that foggy as you used to hae to walk). This distinctive use of as, so and that is yet more evidence of similarity with varieties further north.

3.8.4 Otiose what In common with many vernacular varieties, East Midlands English speakers occasionally include a redundant what when making comparisons with than as demonstrated by tokens in, for instance, Two Dales (C1190/12/03  –  busier than

104 

 3 Morphology and syntax

what ever it was), Mansfield (C1190/26/04  –  I think we’re a bit easier in Mansfield than what they are in Notts), Nottingham (C1190/26/05 – the churches were fuller a lot fuller than what they are today), Leicester (C1190/26/02 – the whole day out is ten times better than what your rugby is) and Groby (C1190/20/03 – I think they’ve got more of a Leicester accent than what some of us have). Evans (1881: 96) comments on what being ‘frequently redundant’ in his description of Leicester grammar in the nineteenth century, citing the example ‘Theer warn’t a man in Bos’oth as could sweer loike what that man could’.

3.9 Discourse 3.9.1 Forms of address Forms of address can vary markedly between English dialects and the use of duck or my duck (invariably pronounced me duck) at the end of a statement is an extremely distinctive feature of East Midlands dialect. Despite enjoying the status of a local stereotype this is nonetheless a genuinely flourishing feature and one frequently hears complete strangers address each other in this way. Transactions in a shop, for instance, frequently include duck or me duck often regardless of the age of the speaker or addressee (see also section 4.5). One of the authors recalls visiting Ashbourne as a twenty-year-old student in the 1980s and being initially stumped by the query salt and vinegar duck addressed to me by an older male assistant in a local fish and chip shop, and more recently as a fifty-something was equally intrigued to be asked by a young female receptionist in the local barber’s shop have you got an appointment duck. There is one genuinely spontaneous example in a recording in Swadlincote (C1190/12/05 – oh it were terrible duck), but its use (and that of me duck) is discussed enthusiastically in every BBC Voices Recording from Mansfield (C1190/26/04) in the north, via Eastwood (C1190/26/01) and Coalville (C1190/20/05) to Leicester (C1190/26/02) in the south and several older speakers in numerous locations also discuss the use of surry and youth. All three are cited in Scollins and Titford (2000), Smith (2013) and Braber (2015b) so are clearly widely associated with East Midlands speech. The respective entries also offer interesting insight into the various approaches employed in popular publications to present dialect forms in local pronunciation without recourse to IPA transcription: Braber (2015b) opts for serry; Smith (2013) favours sorry and notes an alternative spelling with surry; and Scollins and Titford (2000) choose sorrey. As noted in section 2.5, the East Midlands greeting ey up me duck even gained brief international recognition when it was used by US actor and director Angelina Jolie when presenting a prestigious award to Derby-born actor Jack O’Connell at the 2014 Hollywood Film Awards (tootonica 2015).

3.9 Discourse 

 105

3.9.2 Narrative devices There are a number of discourse strategies used by East Midlands speakers to increase dramatic effect or create immediacy when telling an anecdote or narrating events from the past. As in all varieties of English be like is increasingly common among younger speakers when introducing reported speech, as in an example from Leicester (C1190/26/04  –  when you get home you’re just like oh that’s shit and mum’s like grrr what are you swearing for), while quotative go is used by speakers of all ages as demonstrated by a speaker from Nottingham (C1190/26/05 – if someone’d say hello […] you go you all right). More distinctively, the historic present as a narrative device unites SED speakers with present-day East Midlanders. The historic present refers to the use of a pseudo present tense, distinguished from a ‘normal’ indicative present tense as the third person singular suffix is extended to all forms of the verb. There are several examples in SED sound recordings, including in Kniveton (C908/51 C10 – he says it were that ghost I says there were no ghost I says dunna [= doPRESNEG] be so daft), Oxton (C908/52 C5 – if he don’t behave hissen now I says I’ll take him outside and I’ll throw him) and Hathern (C908/56 C6  –  by God I says it’s fell through) and numerous present-day examples, including in Meden Vale (C900/12505 – when we gets to the camp), Heanor (C1190/12/04 – he says uh are you going home Jack I says yeah so we gets in me and my dad) and Nottingham (C900/12530 – I says well I shall leave when the war is finished and I did leave).

3.9.3 Like Finally, it is worth reviewing briefly the use of discourse like in SED sound recordings in the East Midlands as it potentially offers new insight into this much debated phenomenon in contemporary spoken English. There has been considerable evidence in recent years of the rapid increase in the use of like as a hedge, filler or discourse particle in varieties of English worldwide (Andersen et al. 2000: 31–33) – especially the apparent rise of clause internal like. The use of clause final like with similar discourse properties appears to be well established in East Midlands English, with examples in SED sound recordings in all three counties (and indeed in much of the SED audio data nationwide), including for instance, in Charlesworth (C908/11 C5 – we went for to have a shave like), South Clifton (C908/52 C4 – then they used to gee again like and then hauve again so they hadn’t so far to run round set the rigs) and Sheepy Magna (C908/56 C10 – there’d be a couple or three labourers to help him and uh another chap like). This is replicated in present-day recordings in, for instance, Belper (C1190/12/01 – I’ll have a go like)

106 

 3 Morphology and syntax

and Mansfield (C1190/26/04 – he’s actually retired now like), but clause internal like is much more common in our contemporary recordings – even among older speakers. At some point in the last fifty years,  then, the subconscious restriction of discourse like to clause final environments has been eroded in East Midlands English as in other varieties. The examples in our present-day data are too numerous to list individually and do not in any case differentiate geographically between speakers; rather, all speakers now apparently use discourse like clause internally in a variety of syntactic environments as shown in Table 3.5 below. Table 3.5: A selection of examples from East Midlands speakers of clause internal like. syntactic environment

example

Location (shelfmark)

between auxiliary and finite verb

them at the front were like pulling

Heanor (C1190/12/04)

I suppose we’ve like pinched off them haven’t we really

Mansfield (C1190/26/04)

within infinitive

it looks rough but when you live here you get to like know what it’s all about

Nottingham (C1190/26/02)

between determiner and noun phrase

when I’m in a shop and I’m talking to a like salesperson or something

Leicester (C1190/26/04)

between noun and complement

when I was like seventeen

Nottingham (C1190/26/05)

between preposition and noun phrase

if you’ve got a tuition one-to-one in like in a private school or something like that

Groby (C1190/20/03)

you look at like Newcastle and Liverpool

Leicester (C1190/26/02)

if the person in the middle like tags you then you join the person in the middle

Swadlincote (C1190/12/05)

between noun and verb phrase

In other words the distinguishing factor in the use of like for East Midlands English, as with other varieties, is between older speakers for whom it tends to appear clause finally and – occasionally – clause internally and younger speakers for whom it occurs (a) more frequently and (b) predominantly clause internally. Thus a sentence such as ‘I went into this shop’ may, for older speakers, surface as I went into this shop like, whilst for younger speakers like can appear anywhere within such an utterance: I went into this shop like I went into this like shop I went into like this shop

3.10 Conclusion 

 107

I went like into this shop I like went into this shop like I went into this shop None of this is peculiar to East Midlands English, but what is significant is that there are, perhaps surprisingly, a handful of examples of clause internal like in our present-day data from speakers born in the 1930s and, moreover, within the SED audio data for Leicestershire (and indeed other counties in the south of England), but not in Derbyshire or Nottinghamshire (or in other counties further north where clause final like is, however, extremely frequent). This vernacular use of like seldom appears in writing and is difficult to capture meaningfully in surveys so we rely primarily on examples in spontaneous speech, for which we have few examples prior to SED. This SED evidence of clause internal like in Leicestershire and further south is, therefore, extremely instructive in that one might tentatively suggest it occurred earlier in southern varieties of British English than in northern varieties. To the best of our knowledge, the Leicestershire tokens in Harby (C908/56 C5 – so then one like side looks short), Seagrave (C908/56 C7 – course they used to like make it n… curd it night and morning don’t you see) and Sheepy Magna (C908/56 C10 – they’d have more that come like in a month or or such-like or six weeks) represent the northernmost examples in SED data and offer hitherto unexploited data for those investigating early evidence of this vernacular feature.

3.10 Conclusion As we observed in chapter 2 with accents, dialects seldom exhibit grammatical features restricted to a single speech community; rather the particular combination of morphological and syntactic variants allows us to distinguish between dialects. As with phonology, so too the grammar of East Midlands English shares features with dialects to the immediate north, west and south, while some communities reveal phenomena that are, if not entirely unique to the East Midlands, then certainly discernibly more frequent compared with elsewhere. The presence of DAR and retention of second person pronouns in some speech communities especially to the north of our area; the availability of singular past were and possessive us across the whole of the East Midlands; and the particular functions assigned to as, so and that suggest greater affinity with dialects to the immediate north. On the other hand the presence of ain’t and invariant don’t hint at continuity with southern varieties, while the use of pronoun exchange – in some parts of Derbyshire at least – is shared with speech

108 

 3 Morphology and syntax

communities in the West Midlands. While there are relatively few features that define East Midlands grammar alone, we consider the marked preference for bare infinitives extremely salient, while the localised negative variants with and the survival of the historic feminine pronoun hoo are especially striking, albeit we suspect these latter features are extremely rare among younger speakers nowadays. The form of address me duck is also widely acknowledged as a popular marker of East Midlands speech. As noted repeatedly here there are precious few previous publications that describe East Midlands grammar in any detail so much of our evidence for traditional dialect grammar is based on published SED evidence and sound recordings. Literary representations are also less widely available than for many other British dialects, although DH Lawrence and Alan Sillitoe provide useful insight into early and mid-twentieth century Nottinghamshire dialect. To conclude our description, then, we present a selection of noteworthy examples of vernacular grammar captured in Alan Sillitoe’s Saturday Night and Sunday Morning (1958). Set in Nottingham, the novel depicts working-class frustrations and aspirations through the lens of Arthur Seaton, a 22-year-old factory worker. Sillitoe’s use of non-standard orthography in passages that represent dialogue or Arthur’s internal monologue reveal a number of phonological features, but also capture several dialect forms. Many forms occur repeatedly, but Table 3.6 below includes a single example of significant features encountered in the novel. Table 3.6: The grammar of Alan Sillitoe’s Nottingham (1958). Form

Example (p)

demonstrative

them

are all them clo’es yourn (185)

DAR

t’

I go out on a Monday night as well to t’pictures (151)

yourn

I’ve got my way and you’ve got yourn (190)

theirn

Bert took theirn off ’em (133)

mysen

I didn’t believe it mysen (35)

yoursen

come on, get up yoursen now (7)

hissen

he’ll find issen in a cell (82)

as

who was that girl as you brought ’ome las’ night (181)

Construction DETERMINERS

PRONOUNS possessive pronoun reflexive pronoun

relative pronoun

3.10 Conclusion 

 109

Table 3.6 (continued) Form

Example (p)

2p was

I thought you was badly (46)

3ppl. was

I heard they was getting him a dog (26)

bePRESNEG

ain’t

it ain’t as if you was a young girl (68)

bePASTNEG

weren’t

she worn’t my friend (148)

Construction VERBS bePAST

we worn’t engaged or owt like that (187) they worn’t ready (185) havePRESNEG

ain’t

she ain’t got owt to do wi’ it (112)

doPRESNEG

invariant don’t

it don’t pay to miss owt (151)

willPASTNEG

wain’t

you see if I wain’t (166)

zero past

forget

I’ve forget it (151)

generalisation of simple past

hid

try and mek him tell ’em where he’d hid the money (158)

infinitive phrase

to reduction

we’d got nowt t’eat (130)

secondary contraction

din’t

when I was a lad they din’t even have wireless sets (26)

multiple negation

not … no

there ain’t no gun in that house (123)

preposition reduction

with reduction

I see nowt wrong wi’ that (207)

preposition deletion

zero habitual to

Eddie’s going up Clifton (73)

preposition substitution

on [= ‘of’]

I’m allus glad to get shut on ’em at weekend (73)

dead

they’re dead good at that (26)

PREPOSITIONS

ADVERBS intensifier

unmarked manner adverb quick

news gets around so quick (72)

comparative

so … as

I’m not so daft as you think (86)

complementiser

as

he’s read in the paper as a war was goin’ ter start (172)

so as

these atom bombs poison the earth so’s nowt can grow (173)

duck

I’ll see you tomorrow night duck (54)

DISCOURSE form of address

110 

 3 Morphology and syntax

All of the features noted in Table 3.6 are captured in our spontaneous speech data and thus discussed in some detail here, apart from the possessive pronouns with and wain’t for willPASTNEG. Neither feature prominently in our audio corpus so it is difficult to evaluate their status in present-day East Midlands dialects, although it is worth noting there is a single example of ourn in a modern recording made in Mansfield (C1190/26/04 – their accent were worse than ourn wasn’t it) and Braber’s glossary of Nottinghamshire dialect (2015b) includes ourn, theirn and yourn and Evans reports that in nineteenth century Leicestershire dialect the possessive pronouns hisn, hern, ourn, yourn, and theirn were “universally in use” (1881: 27). There is also a reference in the Evolving English VoiceBank (BL shelfmark: C1442), a collection of recordings submitted to the British Library in 2010/11 in response to a request for examples of vernacular English. A male contributor born in Leicester in 1954 reflects on how his mother discouraged him as a child from using phrases such as give it back to us it’s ourn and also mentions a book in which his grandfather had written the saying: “he that takes what isn’t his’n gets what’s coming and goes to prison” (C1442/3230). Braber (2015b) also includes wain’t alongside wunna for willPRESNEG and there is one spontaneous token in an SED interview in Sutton on the Hill (C908/51 C8 – there wasna [= bePASTNEG] no earth see badgers and foxes and all wain’t [= willPRESNEG] use them now).

4 Lexis 4.1 Introduction An exhaustive study of the lexicon of the East Midlands lies beyond the scope of this book. Instead, this chapter will examine particular fields of lexical interest which are crucial to the East Midlands such as language used by coal miners and farmers. It will also investigate vocabulary which is considered ‘local’ by inhabitants, and the influence of outside varieties, notably in the use of local place names. In doing so, this chapter aims to make a contribution to the discourse on regional lexical variation. Although earlier dialectological studies such as The Survey of English Dialects (SED) focused on this variation, in recent years there has been less research on this subject, leading Beal to refer to the study of regional lexis as the “Cinderella” of academic dialectology (Beal 2010: 53). Recently collected data archived at the BL, including BBC Voices and the WordBank, has also attempted to address this and will be discussed in this chapter. Over recent decades extensive economic and social changes taking place throughout the UK have also affected the East Midlands and traditional industries such as agriculture and mining have changed or suffered a total decline. As a result, much of the vocabulary associated with specific trades and industries is also in danger of disappearing (see also Beal 2006: 54). Many of the traditional words documented by studies like the SED look set to disappear from usage, if they have not already done so. Clark and Asprey argue that in the West Midlands, words and phrases linked with local cottage industries, such as glass-blowing and nail-making, are in decline, but that there are other lexical phrases which are still frequently used and are “enregistered as emblematic of the region” (2013: 118). In the East Midlands words that have to do with practices used historically, such as words associated with wash-day and farming tools (Scollins and Titford 2000: 13), are being lost. This is not to say that variation between regions is disappearing completely; new words are appearing in the East Midlands and, despite studies examining dialect levelling (for example Kerswill 2003), many words are still used to signal identity. Examining such variation allows us to review language change. As discussed in chapter 1, the East Midlands has long been neglected in linguistic studies and is a region that many speakers find hard to place. It is unlikely that speakers from outside the region could give many examples of ‘typical’ words local to the East Midlands, but that is certainly not to say there are no such features, merely that the lack of representation in media makes it harder to do so for outsiders. The East Midlands’ position between North and South also makes it interesting with regard to lexical studies. There are certainly words which are https://doi.org/10.1515/9781501502354-004

112 

 4 Lexis

distinctive to the East Midlands, but these varieties are also influenced by neighbouring regions, such as Yorkshire. When one of the authors moved to Nottingham and passed a cob shop, she had to look in through the window to see what was sold there, as this was not a word she had come across before in the sense of ‘bread roll’. After having lived in Manchester for a few years and being used to terms such as barm cake this was an entirely new variant. Cob is seen as a very typical ‘local’ word by East Midlanders and is the default word in local bakeries and sandwich shops (see Figure 4.1). There are other terms which strongly indicate local identity, including duck [ = ‘term of endearment or greeting’] and mardy [= ‘sulky’ or ‘bad tempered’], which we discuss in more detail later, and a recent increase in merchandise exploiting such words and slogans mirrors other regions such as the North-East in marking local identity through language (see for example Beal 2009 and also Johnstone 2009; 2011 for similar trends in Pittsburgh, USA). Certain words which are seen to enregister local identity are actually more complicated and we explore the symbolic significance of this ‘local’ language in section 4.5.

Figure 4.1: Example of cob on a menu in Nottingham.

4.2 Past research on East Midlands vocabulary 

 113

4.2 Past research on East Midlands vocabulary It is important to establish what research has been carried out on East Midlands vocabulary over the last hundred years or so. Using historical and more recent studies will allow us to comment on lexical attrition in the region and this section will evaluate nationwide surveys which have included the East Midlands as well as scholarly and non-scholarly local investigations of language in the East Midlands, and, as noted elsewhere, we draw heavily on BL sound recordings listed in section 1.9.

4.2.1 Nationwide lexical studies which include the EM The English Dialect Dictionary (EDD), compiled by Joseph Wright, is a six-volume work published between 1898 and 1905 and represents the most comprehensive inventory of dialect words in use in the nineteenth century. Much of the material was based on publications of the English Dialect Society and some of it had never been published before. It contains around 70,000 entries and is thought of as the main standard work in the historical study of dialect in the British Isles. In addition to the extensive dictionary, the final volume contains a list of writings in dialect arranged by county. A digitized version of the EDD has been made available by Innsbruck University and can be used free of charge for non-institutional, non-profit purposes (see http://eddonline-proj.uibk.ac.at/edd/index.jsp). The SED is an invaluable tool for dialectologists wishing to compare the distribution of lexical variants in England, especially vocabulary related to traditional agricultural practice (see 4.2.2 below) and several publications use SED data to examine this variation. Orton and Wright (1975), Orton et al. (1978) and Upton and Widdowson (1996) all contain maps produced from the SED findings which confirm the geographic distribution of lexical items and localised pronunciations of words supplied by SED informants. As noted elsewhere, the BL provides access to the entire set of SED sound recordings at sounds.bl.uk with linguistic descriptions that include a glossary of lexical items occuring spontaneously in a given recording. Similar linguistic descriptions are available for each MMB recording available at sounds.bl.uk and, in the case, of BBC Voices Recordings, these descriptions include an inventory of lexical items elicited in response to the 40 prompt words and, selectively, glossaries of ‘incidental’ lexis that either occurred spontaneously during the conversations or was offered as illustrative of local dialect. We also draw here on the BL’s Evolving English: VoiceBank (BL shelfmark: C1442). This collection was created between November 2010 and April 2011 by visitors to the British Library exhibition, Evolving English: One Language, Many

114 

 4 Lexis

Voices, and includes contributors of all ages and embraces varieties of English in the UK and overseas including non-native speakers. Participants were invited to record a reading passage or ‘donate’ a word or phrase they considered to be special in their variety of English. This latter subset, known as the WordBank (Robinson 2015), includes several contributions from speakers in the East Midlands.

4.2.2 Contemporary East Midlands language collections There are non-academic publications which give us detailed information about language used in the East Midlands region. These are mainly lexical in nature, although from the way authors adapt conventional spellings in such publications to capture local vocabulary and phrases we can also learn about the phonology and morpho-syntax of these local varieties. Most of these books do not focus on the East Midlands as a whole, but on counties within the East Midlands – and of the three counties we consider in scope, Nottinghamshire is particularly well represented in this form of dialect literature. These publications, which are referred to throughout the book (additional details can be found in section 6.4) rarely provide any etymological information about such lexis, and dialectal forms are listed alongside more Standard English versions. Frequently these books offer insight into attitudes towards local varieties. Beeton, for instance, states that it may appear as if “Nottinghamese is a form of slang born out of a lazy or slovenly method of speaking, but closer inspection shows that it is, in fact, a complete language, containing many unique words and observing a strict grammatical pattern” (Beeton 1999: 2). He comments that local speech should be loud and strident and also recommends that there should be no pauses between words. Many of his examples show this by his fondness for combining words in a single orthographic string, for example ‘aya seenoatonnimm?’ [= ‘have you seen him at all’?]. This can be deconstructed as aya [= ‘have’ + ‘you’]; seen [= see PAST]; oat [=  owt, i.e. ‘anything’]; onn [= ‘of’]; imm [= ‘him’]; see sections 2.2.3 on H-dropping, 3.5.3 on past tense forms and 3.7 on prepositions for more details of these phenomena. Other publications include Wright (1979) on Nottinghamshire dialect and Wright (1975) which concentrates on Derbyshire. Peter Wright was an SED fieldworker and an academic linguist, so although they are targeted at a popular audience, they are informed by credible linguistic data. Other publications include those which focus on language thought to be disappearing, including Holland (2008), which examines the disappearing dialect of a Derbyshire village and MacFarlane (2015), which has nationwide coverage of words thought to be in decline. The dialect series published by Bradwell Books, which currently contains 32 volumes, ranging from Somerset to Glaswegian, also contains four varieties of the

4.3 Place names 

 115

East Midlands: Smith (2013) focuses on Derbyshire, Davies (2015) on Leicestershire, Bourne (2015) on Lincolnshire and Braber (2015b) on Nottinghamshire. These books provide a glossary plus features of local interest and are illustrated with local photos. Probably the most well-known book locally, is Scollins and Titford (2000), which contains a wealth of information about local lexis. Although the authors comment that they started writing this to preserve the dialect of the Erewash Valley (an area on the border between Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire), they add that they refer to local speech over a much wider area and its subtitle is ‘dialect of Derbyshire and the East Midlands’. To provide an overview of historic and present-day lexical usage in the East Midlands we first look at place names, then consider local vocabulary associated with traditional industries that play an important part in the region’s economic and cultural heritage – mining and farming – before evaluating the state and status of dialect and vernacular vocabulary in the East Midlands today.

4.3 Place names Many of the dialect books from around the East Midlands mentioned in sections 1.9 and 4.2.2 comment on place names in the region and explain what they tell us about the history of the region and the peoples who lived there – Celts, Romans, Danes and Anglo-Saxons. In chapter 1 we noted that the East Midlands area is likely to have been inhabited for over 100,000 years. The linguistic varieties used in the region appear to owe much to Viking influence, following the invasions from Denmark which resulted in the Danelaw, and the subsequent Anglo-Saxon and Norman invasions, but influences of all these groups are visible in place names. Many of the local books described in the previous sections contain information about the history of place names and alternative pronunciations. In addition to these books, there is an entire volume on place names in Nottinghamshire (see Gover et al. 1999) as well as publications on place names in Derbyshire (Cameron 1958). The following sections cannot give a full overview of the historical influences found in the region, but they attempt to give a flavour of the different impacts on the language during invasions and migration by different groups in the East Midlands.

4.3.1 Celtic influence Celtic river names (such as Darren for Derwent) and locations in the north-west of Derbyshire suggest that the Celts remained here for longer than in other areas

116 

 4 Lexis

of the East Midlands. We can also see the Celtic influence in names like Stoney Cloud near Ilkeston and Thorpe Cloud in Dovedale, both in Derbyshire, where cloud comes from the Celtic ‘clud’ meaning ‘rock’ (Wright 1975: 6). Also in Leicestershire, the fact that Celts were early settlers can be evidenced by names. The river near the city, named Ligore by the early Celtic settlers was adopted by the Anglo-Saxons at a later date when they named Leicester, Ligoracester, which means fortified town of the Ligore (Davies 2015: 30). There are other Celtic influences, such as Charnwood in Leicestershire, where the first element carn is from Welsh, meaning ‘rock’ (Field 2004: 92). Breedon (Leicestershire) consists of Welsh bre and English dūn; interestingly these both mean ‘hill’. Gelling (1978: 92) suggests that the earlier local inhabitants called this bre and the English, not realising this was a common noun, took it to be the name for the hill, and added dūn. An even later failure to understand this led to the modern name Breedon on the Hill, where the hill is now mentioned in triplicate.

4.3.2 Roman influence Latin was not used by many peasants in Britain, but a certain number of Latin words may have been adopted by them. Some of these found their way into Old English (Gelling 1978: 21), but the small number of Latin place names suggests that even the Latin-speaking administrators were using British place names. The village of Ratby in Leicestershire may have a Roman-British name in its first element. For some towns, we have records of Roman names which were used at the time, for example Margiduno in Nottinghamshire and Vernemeto on the Leicestershire/Nottinghamshire border (Field 2004). We can also see Latin additions, such as Appleby Magna and Appleby Parva and Ashby Magna and Ashby Parva (all in Leicestershire), where the suffixes denote ‘great’ and ‘little’ respectively to distinguish between two places with the same name (Field 2004: 34). We also detect Latin prepositions being used occasionally, for example Norton juxta Twycross (Leicesteshire) with juxta meaning ‘near’ and Langar cum Barnstone (Nottinghamshire) with cum meaning ‘next to’.

4.3.3 Anglo-Saxon influence Many of the changes taking place in the place names of Britain were due to the introduction of a vast number of Germanic names (Gelling 1978: 22). Here we can see the influence of the Anglo-Saxons with endings such as -field (Mansfield and Ashfield) which comes from the Anglo-Saxon word meaning open ground. Wright (1979: 6)

4.3 Place names 

 117

states that names such as this in these areas of Nottinghamshire prove that Sherwood Forest could not have stretched unbroken from northern Nottinghamshire to Nottingham itself. The earliest record of Sherwood Forest is in 986 (Field 2004: 47) when it was referred to as Scyryuda and later Scyrwuda, meaning ‘county wood’. Field comments (2004: 8) that there is an “unbroken block” of Shires from the Lake District to the English Channel, where this name comes from the Old English scir meaning administrative division. One of the few exceptions to this is Rutland where the ending signifies ‘estate’ following Rota, an early lord in the region. The word Nottingham itself means “settlement of the family of Snot” (Wright 1979: 7) and this is likely to have come from the original Saxon words where -inge appears in place names following a person’s name and means ‘the people or followers of’ so that Snotingeham means ‘the homestead of Snot’s people’. During Norman times the initial S was dropped from the name, which we discuss further at 4.3.5 below. Many names show influence from Old English, for example Mickleover in Derbyshire (from mycel meaning ‘great’ and ofer meaning ‘slope’ or ‘ridge’) and hlāw meaning ‘burial mound’ appears as –law or –low in place names such as Baslow, Hucklow and Arbor Low all in Derbyshire. These names occur very frequently in Derbyshire but are rare in Nottinghamshire. Other names from this period can be seen in forms which reflect the local landscape, such as woods and waterways. Some settlements near water are denoted by –burn/bourne or –brook(e), such as Ashbourne (Derbyshire) and Claybrooke (Leicestershire). We also see examples such as Whitwell (Derbyshire) referring to a spring of a particular colour. The Anglo-Saxons also used burna or brōc, meaning ‘brook’, originally only in stream names and then applied later to close-by settlements, such as Shirebrook (Derbyshire). Field also comments that the most common Old English element is tūn, meaning ‘farm’ or ‘estate’. It is generally combined with personal names, such as Osmaston (Derbyshire) and Kniveton (Derbyshire) and Kneeton (Nottinghamshire), which comes from the woman’s name Cēnfigu (Field 2004: 22). There is a suggestion that the lack of places ending in –ingham in Derbyshire, (such as Birmingham and Nottingham) occurs as this area was colonised after the custom for making such place names had stopped (Wright 1975: 4).

4.3.4 Viking influence The Vikings who came to Britain were from two present-day Scandinavian countries – Norway and Denmark – where different dialects were spoken, so that there were different influences throughout the UK. In the East Midlands, the Danish invasions in the 9th and 10th centuries resulted in significant Norse influences in

118 

 4 Lexis

the East Midlands. This region was part of the Danelaw, and such Scandinavian influence can be seen most clearly in –by (the Danish word for ‘town’ or ‘village’) in names such as Derby and Thoresby (Nottinghamshire). This word can be added to an Old English name, such as Linby (Nottinghamshire) meaning ‘village with lime trees’ and Kirkby and Kirby meaning ‘village with a church’ is also very common in the Danelaw. The ending can also be added to personal names, which may be Scandinavian in nature, such as Barkby and Oadby (Leicestershire), Stainsby (Derbyshire) and Bleasby (Nottinghamshire). Such village names can also give us information about their inhabitants. Denby (Derbyshire) means ‘village of the Danes’ and suggests that this was a Danish settlement in an area predominantly occupied by other ethnic groups. This is also the case for Frisby (Leicestershire) meaning Frisians’ village and Ingleby (Derbyshire) meaning village of the English. Davies comments that –by can also be linked to farms as it is the Viking term for ‘farmstead’ (Davies 2015: 31), such as Oadby, Enderby and Thurnby in Leicestershire (Davies 2015: 31). Another frequent Norse input is –thorpe or –thorp meaning ‘settlement’ in names such as Wilsthorpe, and Ullesthorpe in Leicestershire. Sometimes this word is used in addition to a parent village, where the Thorpe suggests a secondary settlement, as in Barkby Thorpe in Leicestershire. There are also examples where compass terms are used to show where the settlement is in relation to the original settlement, for example Easthorpe and Westhorpe in Nottinghamshire which are dependencies of Southwell. A name such as Newthorpe in Nottinghamshire can also tell us that a settlement is newer. Similarly to –by, -thorpe can also be combined with personal names, such as Sibthorpe (Nottinghamshire) and Oakthorpe (Leicestershire), which commemorates the Scandinavian name, ‘Aki’. Other personal names can also be found in place names, such as Gonalston (in Nottinghamshire) from Gunnulf and Kedleston (Derbyshire) from Ketil (Field 2004: 26). Field comments specifically on Grim (Field 2004: 26) which he states is found around the country and can be seen as Grimston in Leicestershire. He suggests these ‘Grimston hybrids’ (place names that are a mixture of Anglo-Saxon and Viking elements) are unfavourable terms and may even allude to the devil. Such hybrids also include examples of personal names being used in place names, for example ‘Gamall’, which can be found in Gamston in Nottinghamshire. Although Norse names could replace Old English ones, Norse terms could also be added to them too, so for example, the Old English tūn was added to a Norse personal name, so Thurcaston, Thurlaston and Thurmaston (all in Leicestershire) combine the Scandinavian names ‘Thorketil’, ‘Thorleif’ and ‘Thormod’ with the Anglo-Saxon suffix tūn. Generally, the Scandinavian influence is weaker in Derbyshire than in Nottinghamshire and Leicestershire (or Lincolnshire), but it is still present. We can see this in street names, where gata means ‘way’ or ‘street’, such as in Irongate

4.3 Place names 

 119

and Sadler Gate in Derby (Wright 1975: 5), Church Gate and Gallowtree Gate in Leicester and Goosegate in Nottingham and in many street names linked to local trades, such as Flesher Gate for butchers (flesher is a historic dialect term for ‘butcher’), Bridlesmith Gate for harness-makers and Griddlesmith Gate for bakers. In the previous section, we mentioned the Anglo-Saxon hlāw [= ‘burial mound’], which appeared as haugt in Old Norse but is not common in Derbyshire, with a rare exception being the parish name Hoon (Gelling 1978: 138).

4.3.5 Norman influence Norman French was introduced to Britain after the Norman invasion in 1066 – the word Norman itself means ‘man of the North’ (Gelling 1978: 23). Norman influences in Leicester can be seen particularly in the retention of personal names in places such as Ashby de la Zouch (where Ashby became a possession of the La Zouche family) and Melton Mowbray where Mowbray is a Norman family name. Some names changed in Norman times, for example Kibworth (where -worth refers to a settlement, so this place name means ‘estate of Cybba’ after an Anglo-Saxon lord), which after the Norman Conquest became Kibworth Beauchamp and Kibworth Harcourt by adding the names of the Norman lords as a suffix (Davies 2015: 31). We can also occasionally see the remnants of the French preposition and article in names such as Chapel-en-le-Frith (Derbyshire) meaning ‘chapel in the woodland’ and Ashby de la Zouche (Leicestershire) where the second part is a family name. Although terms such as –thorpe come from the time of the Danelaw, after the Norman Conquest such endings were often combined with French names, such as Countesthorpe (Leicestershire) and Donisthorpe (Leicestershire) which comes from the old French name, Durand. Scollins and Titford (2000: 51–7) give examples of place names which originated from this and earlier periods and can be found in the Domesday Book. These names can help us examine the effects of Norman French pronunciation on English place names (Gelling 1978: 23). At this time, French-speaking government officials would have been travelling round the country asking questions of local people about place names. We can also see that important spelling changes were made to accommodate French speakers. For example, consonant clusters at the beginning of names were sometimes simplified to be easier for French speakers. As noted earlier, Nottingham appears in the Domesday records as Snotingeham and this consonant cluster was probably reduced to make pronunciation easier. Field also comments on the fact that the Normans rejected names which they found ‘distasteful’ (Field 2004: 28), for example Merdegrave (in Leicestershire) became Belgrave. The original name derived from Old English mearð [= ‘marten’]

120 

 4 Lexis

+ grāf ‘[= ‘grove’], but after the Norman Conquest the first element was too closely associated with Old French merde meaning ‘dung’ or ‘filth’, and changed to Old French bel meaning ‘fair’ or ‘lovely’, to remove such an unpleasant association. The Normans also used this prefix for villages with beautiful scenery or views, such as Belvoir (Leicestershire), Beauchief meaning ‘fine headland’ (Derbyshire) and Belper [= ‘fair retreat’] in Derbyshire. This also extends to names such as Beauvale (Nottinghamshire) and Beaumanor in Leicestershire. Many local dialect books (see for example Scollins and Titford 2000; Wright 1975, 1979) give examples of alternative pronunciations for towns and villages, such as Ilson for Ilkeston (Derbyshire) or Meddas for the Meadows, a suburb of Nottingham, showing how the unstressed suffix surfaces as a weak schwa vowel as discussed at GOAT at 2.2.2. This is a feature of several of the local books, where local pronunciations are given for place names and suggests a strong sense of belonging. These names are prominent in locally sold merchandise, such as souvenir tea towels and other novelty items which have such place names printed on them (see for example Figures 2.4, 4.4, 4.5, 4.6 and 4.7).

4.4 Case studies 4.4.1 Mining-related vocabulary Coal mining historically formed the bedrock of the East Midlands’ regional economy, and mining activity can be traced back to the Romans, who mined lead in Derbyshire (Tonge 1907: 3). There are records of small-scale coal mining in medieval Derbyshire, Leicestershire and Nottinghamshire; some of the earliest written evidence dates back to the late Middle Ages (Griffin 1971: 3). In July 2015 the last coal mine in the East Midlands, Thoresby Colliery, closed and ended hundreds of years of coal mining in the region. In Nottinghamshire many mines were situated close to the river Trent, which provided the only navigable waterway in the county until canals were cut in the late 18th century (Griffin 1971: 62). From the middle of the 16th century the demand for coal rose rapidly, mainly because of the growing scarcity of wood. This burgeoning demand stimulated technological developments and the pits in the East Midlands’ counties developed in a major way in the 19th and 20th centuries, with collieries increasing in size as deeper pits were sunk in more concealed coalfields rather than in the earlier exposed, shallower seams. From 1550 to 1950 the extent of coal extraction and the number of those employed in the UK industry overall expanded at a colossal rate. In 1550 approximately 15,000 tons of coal were mined, by 1950 this had expanded to 21,600,000 tons. Those employed in

4.4 Case studies 

 121

the industry increased to over one million persons in around 4,000 mines by the time of the 1984–1985 Miners’ Strike (Keyworth and District Local History Meeting Report 2003). The importance of coal generally in the UK led to the nickname “King Coal” during its heyday (Waddington et al. 2001: 9) and the East Midlands coalfield was one of the most productive fields in the country. However, 2015 saw the ‘end of an era’ for deep coal mining in the East Midlands when the last mine closed. Overall, deep coal mining in Britain had been in decline for just over a century, from the peak year in 1913 with the production of 287 million tons of coal. Significant colliery closures occurred in the postWorld War Two era, especially from the late 1950s through to 1970 and again in the decade following the 1984–1985 Miners’ Strike. In 1960 around 600 collieries were in production in Britain, this halved to around 300 collieries by 1970. By the start of the 1984–1985 Miners’ Strike, just over 170 collieries were in production in Britain. Only a handful of small private coal mines remain in production in various parts of Britain, along with opencast mining or outcropping as it is known in parts of the East Midlands. One of the authors has been working on the language used by former miners in the East Midlands (see Braber et al. 2017). These interviews have not yet been catalogued so no references to individual interviews can be given due to the sensitive nature of some of the interviews, but we are currently exploring how to make this collection more accessible to a wider audience. We shall use the term ‘Pit Talk’ here to refer both to this British Academy-funded project and to the language used by miners in their daily work. It is a language which is distinctive but now at risk of receding from view. Although the coal mining industry has ended, preserving our knowledge of this way of life and language is important. Angela Franks, when writing about Nottinghamshire miners, states that although monuments to mining are a welcome legacy, it is crucial to preserve other aspects of this culture as a record of the community for future generations: “Most of the county’s pits have vanished, and monuments are gradually appearing across the county. But their significance will soon be lost, because memories are so short-lived that all can be forgotten within the space of one generation. However, through words and pictures, the story can be saved for posterity.” (Franks 2001: 4). For many years miners’ language has been an enigma to non-miners. In 1724, Daniel Defoe commented when visiting a coal mine not only that “the man was a most uncouth spectacle”, but that when he described the tools that he used, “not one of the names […] we could understand but by the help of an interpreter” (Defoe 1979: 466). W. Forster comments when writing about mining in the South Midlands that miners have developed their own language that is a mixture of local dialects and technical mining terms. He goes on to say that the language expresses a miner’s whole culture and that their voices are a “common consciousness” (Forster 1969: 1).

122 

 4 Lexis

One informant in the ‘Pit Talk’ project observed that the fact that the mines were such an integral part of the East Midlands economy makes this language so significant: “Only Nottinghamshire language, I mean, is part and parcel of pit talk because it was such a big industry and in Nottinghamshire I should say it was the biggest industry […] and I would say that the Nottinghamshire accent [ties in] with pit talk, it’s all linked into one”. The same could of course be said for Derbyshire and Leicestershire, where the pits were some of the main employers in the region. Many of the miners interviewed said that colliers from other areas spoke differently which could lead to confusion and they often commented on “alien terminology” when miners moved into the region from other areas. Other miners added that outside influences were important. Two informants stressed that there was a big difference between Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire mines but that both had been influenced by the large number of Geordie miners coming from the North-East when the mines there closed. One word for which there was consensus among all the miners was the universal use of the word snap for ‘food taken to work’. This is also a word which was used widely outside of the mines, for example by miners’ families, but it also seems to have spread beyond the mining community. Its meaning, particularly in the sense of ‘snack’ or ‘packed lunch’ is also found in the SED at SNACK (VII.5.11) where it occurs in all three of our counties. The word snap also occurs in numerous compounds, with miners talking about snap time, snap bag, snap tin, snap cabin [= ‘hut or room where lunch could be eaten above ground’], snap ticket [= ‘food sent down the mine to men working overtime’] and paid snap [= ‘overtime pay for working through a food break’]. The word snap was also used by miners in Yorkshire (also confirmed by the SED), but other variants occur elsewhere: miners from the North-East, for instance, would refer to bait and Scottish miners to their piece. The word snap in this sense is categorised in the OED as ‘dialect’ and a citation from D.H. Lawrence’s Sons and Lovers confirms its provenance in the East Midlands. ’Pit Talk’ documented many terms for the different tasks carried out by miners. Miners themselves could be referred to as pit moggies or colliers and individual workers were known as back rippers and belt drivers, banksmen, dinters, hauliers, fitters, lipmen, sinkers, onsetters, panzer drivers, face men and pit bottom lads. Some men worked above ground, some below and some combined above and below ground. Many of these terms changed over time, and job titles, for example hostler or ostler (the men who worked with the pit ponies, also occasionally referred to as gangers), became obsolete as the mining process became increasingly mechanised. As mines stopped using ponies, the term ganger was used to describe the men moving equipment and coal along the roadways by

4.4 Case studies 

 123

other means. In the older systems there were butties and in the big butty system, the main butty was put in charge of producing all coal by the owner or manager and then paid out the rest of the workforce himself. These butties would then manage the pit with a stover (or stever), who was the pit top foreman controlling wages and labour conditions. Many other job terms were more obviously descriptive: sinkers were in charge of sinking new shafts (the tunnel down from the pit top); sawyers worked in the saw mills, cutting timbers; and fitters were mechanics in charge of fixing machines both above and below ground. The man who carried the explosives was called the powder monkey and he would assist the shot firer with the explosive work. The men working on the actual coalface itself were variously called hewers, ratchers or colliers. The men who carried the drills and drilled holes were borers; the men who moved the roof supports in advance of those creating the tunnels were called chockers and the men who removed old supports and set new ones as required were called back rippers. Floors in the mine could lift up unexpectedly and the men whose job it was to level these back out again were called dinters, whereas lipmen would raise the roof where needed. The coal also had to be transported back from the coalface to ground level and this required a number of workers. The gate lad would be in charge of opening the safety gates in the tunnels to allow the tubs of coal to pass through. These could be transported by horse or on a conveyor belt which was controlled by a belt driver; the onsetter (or jigger) would load onto the lift and the offsetter would take it off again. The man who worked at the pit top in charge of the lift and safety at the pit top was often called the banksman. This lift was also controlled by a bell man who would ring a bell when it was safe to haul the coal up (or down). On ground level, stackers were employed to empty the tubs and grade the coal. As the tunnels were excavated they had to be supported, not only by the chockers who moved along with roof supports behind the advancing conveyor, or chock fitters and chock men who were in charge of checking and repairing the chocks, but also by packers who built walls from mine debris to hold up the ceiling (see Figure 4.2). Not only did job titles and job descriptions have their own unique names, but the terminology used for the miners’ tools and equipment was also varied and distinctive. There were bodgers [= ‘flat-ended spanners’], lockers [= ‘metal blocks to stop the coal tubs rolling away’], nopers [= ‘tools which had a hammer and pick at the top’], pecks [= ‘picks’], dumplings [= ‘wooden blocks on track which acted as safety devices’], mells [= ‘hammers up to 14lbs’], shifters [= ‘spanners’], panzers [= ‘electric conveyor belts’] and tommyhawks [= ‘combined pick and hammer’]. A more comprehensive discussion of mining terminology in the East Midlands is given in Braber (2017) and Braber et al. (2017). Some of the miners interviewed commented: “Every tool had a different name”. One informant observed: “I guess there were tools that I’d never heard a specific name for, so men used to make names up

124 

 4 Lexis

Figure 4.2: Miners at work at road junction underground (used with permission of Local Studies Library, Nottingham).

for them. Sometimes it was because of what the tool looked like, and sometimes they made no sense at all. For instance, there was the tool they used to use for taking coal-cutting pipes out of the coal-cutting machine when they were worn away, and for some reason they called it a “spitchel”, which never made any sense to me at all”. One miner from Derbyshire alerted us to the fondness for animal references in the names of many mining implements when he observed: “A jimmy crow is for bending rails underground; all it is, is a cramp, and we were thinking of the animals’ names like an elephant’s foot. We got a pig’s head: a drilling machine. Animals, like terms of endearment”. We found that animal terms were used very widely to describe all sorts of items of equipment and working conditions. They include: black dog [= ‘blacksmith’]; bobcat [= ‘small digger used for carrying equipment’]; bull bars [= ‘bars running perpendicular to the tunnel along the roof’]; bull’s-eye lamp [= ‘small hand-held lamp’]; bull-nose shovel [= ‘shovel with rounded end’]; butterfly [= ‘platform on top of cage, i.e. ‘lift’ (see Figure 4.3), to allow shaftsmen to inspect shaft sides’]; cow [= ‘safety brake’]; dog on/off [= ‘to couple/uncouple tubs’]; doggy hammer [= ‘device used to attach doggy nails to sleepers’]; doggy nail [= ‘special nails for sleepers’]; elephants’ feet [= ‘type of stilt put into ground to raise the prop’]; elephant’s tab [= ‘large shovel’]; hogback [=  ‘sharp rise in floor of coal seam’]; horse-head clip [= ‘clip for fastening objects to

4.4 Case studies 

 125

Figure 4.3: Miners ascending in the cage (used with permission of Local Studies Library, Nottingham).

railings’]; jimmy crow [= ‘tool for bending rails’]; pig’s head [= ‘drilling machine’]; pigtail [= ‘hook for a mine bucket’]; ram’s head [= ‘hand-held boring machine’]; rat tail [= ‘spanner with tapered end on one side’]; stag [= ‘abbreviation for ‘nystagmus’, i.e. an eye disease caused by working in poor light conditions’]; and swan clip [= ‘clip for fastening tubs to a rope’]. There were other interesting expressions used by miners to reflect their working conditions which seem to be typical of the region. For example, a belt job was used to describe an easy job, such as watching the conveyor belt which gave a miner the chance to fall asleep. The expression throwin’ a green ’un meant having a sick day while not really ill, and off the rod was used mainly by Leicestershire miners to describe two men who had fallen out (a reference to the custom of a miner hanging his tools on a rod next to his colleague at the end of a shift). These phrases and the other language used by miners was an important factor in strengthening the camaraderie, or ‘brotherhood’ that many miners felt was essential to coping with such difficult working conditions. Much of this language is now disappearing, following the closure of the mines, but projects like ‘Pit Talk’ ensure it is preserved for future generations.

126 

 4 Lexis

4.4.2 Farming language We now turn to another important industry in the East Midlands which has some specific language associated with it. Similarly to coal mining, farming has been in decline over recent years, with ever fewer small-scale farmers and constantly changing farming methods. As a result much of the farming language is disappearing from usage. The landscape of the East Midlands has long been shaped by farming – the various soils of the region support successful farming of both animals and crops. It also had an important position in the region historically; the earliest remaining evidence of farming in the region dates from Roman times and shows that the Romans bridged the Trent and built villas with land for farming near the bridge. Grain was grown for export, with beans, rye and oats cultivated for personal use and for feeding animals. Although cattle rearing was developed long before this time, shortly after the Romans arrived in Britain cattle and sheep farming increased for the production of meat, wool and milk. After this time, the Angles, Saxons and Danes worked their way from the East coast to the Trent valley. It is unknown whether the open-field system was brought over by these groups or whether it had already developed gradually before their arrival. By the 12th century most of Nottinghamshire’s arable land was farmed on the open-field system, where villagers farmed certain areas communally. The village of Laxton, in Nottinghamshire, is famous for still operating with open fields and strips even today, which makes it the last region to do so in the United Kingdom. Such open-field systems were farmed communally by local farmers and villagers alongside other farming methods (full details can be found at the Laxton Visitor Centre, http://www.laxtonvisitorcentre.org.uk/). The time around the mid-1800s was known as the Golden Age of English farming in the region (Lyth 1989: 39) because the industrial growth and subsequent population increase created a rising demand for food, and as a result, farmers could charge good prices for their livestock and food products. Growing enclosure allowed for new techniques and machinery to be used more effectively and enabled farmers to produce their products more efficiently. Large areas of the East Midlands are still dominated by farming today, ranging from 63% in Nottinghamshire to 75% in Leicestershire and 86% in Derbyshire. In 2016 around 35,000 people were employed on 12,000 registered farms with a gross output of around £2.4 billion. This includes all of the East Midlands, where each of the three counties under discussion here has around 6,000 people working on farms (all sourced from NFU Countryside, see www.nfuonline.com/BackBritishFarming). In total, agriculture and horticulture utilises over 1.2 million hectares in the East Midlands, which makes up 78% of the region’s total land area.

4.4 Case studies 

 127

This activity has resulted in distinct local vocabulary. From names for equipment and jobs such as bird tenting [= ‘scaring away birds using a clapper’] and brushing [= ‘trimming field hedges’] to distinctive ways of calling animals and describing the noises they make. In the region there are different ways of referring to the noises animals make and to the calls farmers make to their animals. According to SED data at MOO (III.10.4) and COME IN! (III.10.1), in Nottinghamshire cows and bulls blooer and to call a sheep a farmer would say Come yowe! [i.e. imperative ‘come you’ with a markedly localised pronunciation of the second person pronoun – see GOOSE at 2.2.2]. It would be cup cup to beckon a horse, otch otch for chickens and cush cush for cows. Chickens live in a fahl-ahse (i.e. ‘fowl house’ with localised pronunciation  – see mouth at 2.2.2 and H-dropping at 2.3.3) and female sheep are gimmers. The OED entry for ‘gimmer’ states that this refers to a ‘ewe between first and second shearing’ and is confirmed by SED entries in Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire at GIMMER (III.6.5), whereas theave is recorded in most of Leicestershire and one site in Derbyshire. There are different words which relate to different aspects of farming life. Some of these refer to equipment and processes used in farming (see Table 4.1); others to calls and animal noises (Table 4.2). There are also many local names for animals, often used by people who are not farmers and farm labourers (Tables 4.3, 4.4 and 4.5). Some of these terms also occur in dialects outside the East Midlands so may not be exclusively East Midlands forms, but are nonetheless of interest. Table 4.1: A selection of EM farming terms. Word

Definition

Source

Adlands Unploughed part of field (i.e. local pronunciation of headland)

Davies (2015); SED (II.3.3) confirms this as local pronunciation of headland in localities in Derbyshire and Leicestershire

Badge

Davies (2015)

To cut up and tie beans in sheaves

Badging hook Large sickle

Smith (2013)

Bellyband

Girth for fastening saddle onto horse SED (I.5.7) confirms this throughout EM

Bird tenting

To scare away birds using a clapper or rattle

SED sound recording in South Clifton (C908/52 C4)

Brush

To trim field hedges

Scollins and Titford (2000); SED (IV.2.3) confirms this in localities in Derbyshire and Leicestershire

Clot

To break up clods in a field/to scatter manure

Davies (2015)

Cow-gate

The right to graze cows on lanes Davies (2015) (sometimes given as right to the poor) (continued)

128 

 4 Lexis

Table 4.1 (continued) Word

Definition

Source

Dew-pond

Artificial pond used for watering cattle Smith (2013)

Fotherum

Hay loft

Braber (2015b); SED (I.3.18) confirms this for several localities in Nottinghamshire and Leicestershire

Jagg

Large bundle of twigs used for breaking up clods of earth

Davies (2015)

Kibble

To crush oats/corn

Davies (2015)

Kimnel

Large tub used for whey (watery solution that remains after milk has been churned to form curds)

Davies (2105)

Knibs

Scythe handles

Davies (2015); SED (II.9.8) records this in Markfield, Leicestershire

Malkin

Scarecrow

Davies (2015); SED (II.3.7) confirms this for several localities in Leicestershire

Pingle

Small enclosure of land

Davies (2015)

Quoil

Haycock

Davies (2015)

Snead

Long handle on scythe

Davies (2015) SED (II.9.7) confirms this throughout EM

Ted

To spread out grass to dry in haymaking

Davies (2015) SED (II.9.11) also records this in Derbyshire

Thurrow

Furrow

Davies (2015)

These terms are good indicators of the work being carried out by local farmers and the language used to describe local tools, customs and practice. Some of these terms can be found in the SED sound recordings, such as the informant in South Clifton in Nottinghamshire (C908/52 C4) who recalls bird tenting as a young farm worker and many are also documented in the EDD as East Midlands forms. There is much terminology to describe different aspects of animal life on the farm. This includes the different types of noises made by animals, different ways farmers call out to specific animal groups as well as actual names for the animals themselves. Examples of these can be found in Tables 4.2 and 4.3 below. Some of these terms also occur spontaneously in specific SED recordings, such as gee and hauve in South Clifton in Nottinghamshire (C908/52 C4); tit was used by an SED speaker from Oxton in Nottinghamshire (C908/52 C5) and a farmer in Two Dales in Derbyshire (C1190/12/03) refers to several animals including beast [= ‘cattle’], gilt [= ‘young female pig’], gimmer [= ‘female sheep between first and

4.4 Case studies 

 129

Table 4.2: A selection of EM animal terms. Word

Definition

Source

Beestings

Milk produced by cow in late pregnancy/after calving

Smith (2013)

Belder

(of bulls) To bellow

Wright (1979)

Blart

(of cows) To moo

Wright (1979)

Blaught or Blooer

(of cattle) To bellow

Wright (1979)

Come yowe

Farmer’s call to sheep

Wright (1979)

Cup cup

Farmer’s call to horses

Wright (1979)

Cush cush

Farmer’s call to cows

Wright (1979)

Gee

Command to horse to turn right when ploughing

SED (II.3.5)

Hauve

Command to horse to turn left when ploughing

SED (II.3.5)

Jib

(of horse) To refuse to move forwards

Davies (2015)

Jiggin!

Command to horses to get them to turn to one side

Davies (2015)

Otch otch

Farmer’s call to chickens

Wright (1979); Braber (2015b)

Rash out

(of horse) To sweat

Davies (2015)

Strap

To get the last bit of milk from a cow

Davies (2015)

Table 4.3: A selection of EM animal names. Word

Definition

Source

Beasts

(Horned) cattle

Davies (2015); SED (III.1.3)

Bobbo

Horse

Beeton (1999)

Crop

Group of new-born lambs Smith (2013)

Gilt

Young female pig

Gimmer

Female sheep between SED (III.6.5) confirms this for one site in first and second shearing Derbyshire and two in Nottinghamshire

Lamb-hog/Hog

Castrated male sheep up to a year old

Davies (2015)

Moldiwarp (multiple spellings)

Mole

OED lists moldwarp as ‘English regional (chiefly north and midlands)’; SED has mould(i)warp (IV.5.4) in three sites in Derbyshire, all four in Nottinghamshire and three sites in Leicestershire

Poddywig

Tadpole

Davies (2015)

Wright (1979); SED (III.8.5) confirms this throughout EM

(continued)

130 

 4 Lexis

Table 4.3 (continued) Word

Definition

Source

Recklin’

Youngest pig of a litter

Wright (1979); SED (III.8.4) also has ritling in Derbyshire and rinkling/runtling/rutling in Leicestershire

Theave

Female sheep before bearing first lamb

Davies (2015); SED (III.6.5) confirms this for most of Leicestershire and one site in Derbyshire

Thiller

Horse used for ploughing Davies (2015)

Tit

Small horse

SED sound recording in Oxton (C908/52 C5)

second shearing’] and hog [= ‘castrated male sheep’]. It would be worthwhile carrying out a new study with East Midlands farmers to establish which, if any, of these local variants remain in use. In addition to words for farm animals, there are also local words for other wildlife, particularly birds and insects. One of the authors took part in a radio programme broadcast on BBC Radio Nottingham in March 2017, after a journalist had gone onto the streets of the town to ask local residents if they were familiar with some of the names of the animals given in tables 4.4, 4.5 and 4.6. The journalist interviewed a number of speakers, including younger ones, many of whom claimed to be aware of these terms, even though they may not use them actively themselves. The word moggy in Table 4.3 is a particularly interesting example, Table 4.4: A selection of EM bird names. Word

Definition

Source

Hedge-jugg

Long-tailed tit

Davies (2015)

Jack-squealer

Swift

Davies (2015)

Pewit

Lapwing

MMB sound recording in Wellow (C900/12517) & New Houghton (C900/12543)

Rain-bird

Green woodpecker

Davies (2015)

Spader or Spadger

Sparrow

Beeton (1999); Pit Talk

Spink

Chaffinch

Scollins & Titford (2000), Davies (2015) and Braber (2015b)

Sprog

Baby pigeon

Pit Talk

Stannel

Kestrel

Davies (2015)

Starnel or Stahnal

Starling

Scollins & Titford (2000); Beeton (1999)

Utic

Winchat

Davies (2015)

4.5 Popular local language 

 131

Table 4.5: A selection of EM insect names. Word

Definition

Source

Battletwig

Earwig

Wright (1979); Smith (2013) SED (IV.8.11) confirms this for three sites in Derbyshire, all four localities in Nottinghamshire and one in Leicestershire

Black jack

Black beetles

Smith (2013)

Cow lady

Ladybird

Wright (1979)

Dicks

Headlice

James (2008)

Harry-long- Daddy-long legs Davies (2015) SED (IV.8.10) confirms this for four sites in legs Derbyshire and two in Leicestershire Hoomble- Bee Coom-Booz

Davies (2015)

Jasper

Wasp

Guide to Newark slang (http://newslang0.tripod.com/ thechavsguidetonewarkslang/id7.html)

Pissmire

Ant

Wright (1979) SED (IV.8.12) confirms this for one site in Derbyshire, all four localities in Nottinghamshire and several sites in Leicestershire

as in most of the UK, including the East Midlands, it means ‘cat’. However, particularly in north Nottinghamshire, speakers use this word to mean ‘mouse’ and insisted it was still in current usage. Some of the miners who contributed to the ‘Pit Talk’ project also stated that miners were often referred to as pit moggies.

4.5 Popular local language Recent experience at the British Library confirms that there is currently considerable popular, media and academic interest in regional speech. This has been demonstrated by the impact of the BL’s online dialect archive at www.bl.uk/sounds, and its interactive educational website on contemporary spoken English, Sounds Familiar (www.bl.uk/soundsfamiliar), which has consistently attracted in excess of 300,00 unique visitors annually. The public response to these resources and interest from the media proves that this subject has wide appeal. Despite the relative low profile given to lexical variation in recent academic studies noted at section 4.1, we sense that the notion of ‘local’ vocabulary as an expression of linguistic identity resonates more strongly with the general public, as confirmed recently, for instance, by a series of Guardian articles inspired by the BL’s WordBank (Duncan and Holder, 2017; Duncan and Obordo, 2017) that prompted over 1,200 examples of vernacular words and expressions crowdsourced from Guardian readers.

132 

 4 Lexis

Fundamental to the popular notion of local dialect are the words people use on an everyday basis within a region. In the previous sections, we examined ways in which certain professional registers may be in decline, due to social change, and explored how history can influence language, for example from evidence in place names. However, the words that people use today and the awareness of how they reflect individual and shared identities continues to be relevant for signalling membership of a speech community or affiliation to a particular place. This section will examine words from ordinary daily experience, such as weather, food and social activities, which have either been identified by people as local, for example in contributions to the WordBank or are documented in dialect books and on websites or were the subject of discussions with participants either in BL sound recordings or featured in data collected by the authors. In recent years there has been an increase in the commodification of vernacular language and dialect in the UK, but this phenomenon has only recently emerged in the East Midlands. When one of the authors moved to Nottingham in 2005, there were relatively few opportunities to buy products that celebrated local words or pronunciations. This has since been embraced with great enthusiasm, and the local tourist information office in Nottingham sells products such as magnets and cups featuring local sayings and Dukki, a retailer with a shop in Nottingham and an online platform specialises in selling exclusively products of this kind (see Figure 4.4). To the best of our knowledge, this phenomenon is currently not as evident in commercial outlets in Derby or Leicester. Commodification is discussed in some detail by Beal (2009) and Johnstone (2009), who describe how local forms become linked with a location through material artefacts, such as T-shirts bearing

Figure 4.4: Local language on merchandise, photo by Dukki – the phrase gerrit dahn yer neck [= ‘get it down your neck’, i.e. ‘drink it’] captures several local pronunciation features, such as T to R (see 2.3.1) and monophthongal mouth (see 2.2.2).

4.5 Popular local language 

 133

‘local’ words and phrases. As well as celebrating local speech, a specific value is associated with this type of language and allows people to link local speech with particular social meanings and identities. This type of commodification is increasing in the East Midlands and a small selection of products available is shown here in Figures 4.4, 4.5 and 4.6. Although these products signal a sense of pride in the local language variety, they can also provide us with information about cultural stereotypes and associations with ‘local’ words and pronunciation. Of the many words, localised pronunciations and expressions that feature in products sold by Dukki, arguably the three most visible are cob, mardy and duck. As these were also frequently submitted by contributors from the East Midlands to the BL’s WordBank they are clearly considered extremely salient locally and thus merit further discussion.

4.5.1 Cob The two local words cited most frequently by the groups of school students studied in Braber’s study (2015a) were cob and duck. This research involved work with around 330 17–18 year-old school students from schools and colleges around the East Midlands from the three counties. As stated earlier, cob is common locally for ‘bread roll’. In line with many other areas of the country, there is always enthusiastic debate about what this item is called and every year at Nottingham Trent University, first-year students who come from around the country are invited by Braber to discuss local names for such bread products and responses range from barm cake to batch to hoagie, but in the East Midlands this is firmly a cob. Not only are there many cob shops in the region (see Figure 4.1), the word also features on several Dukki products, including representing the letter ‘C’ in humorous displays of the alphabet in local dialect (see Figure 4.5). Such alphabets are common educational tools for learning to read English – a typical entry for ‘C’ in Standard English is ‘cat’ – so clearly cob resonates sufficiently strongly with local speakers to appear in an A to Z list of local vocabulary. The word cob is also discussed in several BL sound recordings, for example, in Swadlincote (C1190/12/05), Leicester (C1190/20/04) and in two recordings in Nottingham (C1190/26/05 and C1190/26/02), while three speakers from the East Midlands submitted cob to the BL’s WordBank and it also appears in this sense in the OED from 1609. There are also examples of how the word cob extends to different constructions and vernacular expressions, such as sweat cobs [= ‘to perspire excessively’], recorded in Heanor (C1190/12/04) and Swadlincote (C1190/12/05). Anecdotally, we sense East Midlanders also use the phrase to have a cob on for ‘to sulk/be moody’, which Partridge (1937) categorises as ‘navy slang’, quoting evidence from 1937. Perhaps surprisingly, this particular expression was not

134 

 4 Lexis

Figure 4.5: Cob, photo by Dukki.

recorded for the East Midlands in BBC Voices, despite MOODY being a prompt word, but this is possibly due to the prominence of mardy as a high profile local variant.

4.5.2 Mardy Mardy poses an interesting dilemma for dialectologists as it is claimed by speakers from several locations as being ‘local’ to that region. A review of contributions to the Urban Dictionary (online) suggests that this word is used in many areas of the north, including the East Midlands, Yorkshire, Lancashire and Manchester. Many contributors claim that it originates from Derby and is related either to the word ‘moody’ or to the French word ‘merde’ (meaning ‘shit’), but this is not supported by more authoritative sources. The OED tentatively suggests it may be derived from mar [= ‘to spoil’] and categorises it as ‘English regional (chiefly north)’ and the EDD entry at mar includes citations for mardy [= ‘spoilt child’] from Staffordshire, Nottinghamshire and Sheffield. We encounter mardy in both Alan Sillitoe and D.H. Lawrence’s work, both local writers who frequently use East Midlands dialect in their work (see section 1.7). It is invariably cited by East Midlanders as a typical ‘local’ term and, not surprisingly, features prominently in Dukki merchandise (see Figure 4.6). Opie & Opie (1959: 177) state, moreover: “To people in Derbyshire,

4.5 Popular local language 

 135

Figure 4.6: Mardy, photo by Dukki.

Leicestershire and Nottinghamshire the term mardy has a meaning of its own” and include a map showing the use of mardy centred very much on the East Midlands and many of the students in Braber’s ‘mind map’ exercise (2015a) cited mardy as one of the most illustrative examples of local language. Figures 2.1 and 2.2 in Chapter 2 show examples where another group of school children were asked to draw a ‘local’ word, many of whom picked mardy as being salient to them. The word mardy was also one of the most popular submissions to the BL’s WordBank and among contributors to the subsequent Guardian appeal (Duncan and Holder, 2017). Several contributors claimed it as an exclusively Leicester word or claimed it was unique to Nottingham, but it clearly occurs over a wide area of the North and Midlands, and is particularly well established in the East Midlands and, despite dispute over ‘ownership’, East Midlanders are clearly united in their affection for the word. A selection of observations from WordBank contributors offers a glimpse of how it embodies a sense of local identity – perhaps especially when living away from ‘home’ – and illustrates the subtle distinctions speakers make between mardy and other more mainstream variants for ‘moody’. A contributor from Leicester (C1442/02502) comments “when I was a child I thought that everybody said mardy and I remember one day not knowing how to spell it so I tried to look it up in the dictionary and was slightly concerned that I couldn’t find it thinking the dictionary must be wrong until I realised that mardy was a slang word from the area in which I live having now lived all over the country I don’t tend to use mardy very often any more but whenever I do you can either see the blankness on people’s face or if they nod you know you’re talking to someone usually from the Midlands often particularly from Leicester and some sort of bond occurs just because of a simple word like mardy which basically means grumpy disgruntled irritable”; a speaker from Ashbyde-la-Zouch defined it as “being grumpy and grouchy but more stroppy than that

136 

 4 Lexis

like a four-year-old throwing a paddy and mardy weather is overcast cold and rainy” (C1442/01473); and a contributor from Nottinghamshire (C1442/00295) claims mardy comes from Nottingham and usually refers to a “sullen or bad-tempered child”. The age range of the contributors suggests mardy is used by both younger and older speakers equally enthusiastically and is clearly still very much an example of local dialect in current usage. Not only does it crop up frequently in Saturday Night and Sunday Morning (Sillitoe 1958), set in Nottingham, but perhaps more pertinently you now hear youngsters all over the world singing along to the hit single ‘Mardy Bum’ (Arctic Monkeys, 2004), meaning this nineteenth-century East Midlands dialect word now enjoys international currency (see figure 4.6).

4.5.3 Duck A number of local words are used as an affectionate form of address when greeting people and the word duck was consistently supplied in this sense by the groups of school children interviewed by Braber (2015a) as one of the strongest markers of local identity. It is mentioned in most of the BBC Voices Recordings from the region, and indeed commented on by speakers in other areas as typical of speech in the East Midlands. As can be seen in Figures 4.7 and in 4.8, the word is so salient, a picture of a duck suffices to make the word clear. The image of a duck in Figure 4.8 appears on a Nottingham bus, advertising the local television station, Notts TV. Frequently added to this most iconic East Midlands word is the phrase ey up, and these are often used in conjunction with one another (see Figure 4.8). An obvious example of this is the title one of the most famous local dialect books – Ey up mi duck! (Scollins and Titford 2000). As an affectionate form of address, duck – or equally commonly, me duck – is particularly interesting as it is used universally, by and to men and women, which is rather unusual for forms of address, which tend to be different for female and male referents. Although there have been discussions locally about whether such terms are disappearing (both authors have appeared on BBC Radio Nottingham – Braber in December 2016, Robinson in July 2017 – to discuss these terms, which illustrates how significant they are felt to be locally), ey up! and duck are certainly alive and well as is again demonstrated by its popularity as a slogan on local artefacts. The exact origin of duck in this sense is unknown, but it has been suggested it may come from a respectful form of address during Anglo-Saxon times and the OED records it from 1600 in this sense (including evidence from Shakespeare). The origins of ey up as a greeting are similarly unclear, but the expression can also be used as a warning to be careful or as an exhortation to take note as in the poster shown on the bus in Figure 4.8.

4.5 Popular local language 

 137

Figure 4.7: Examples of duck in merchandising (photos by Dukki) including aya masht miduck [= ‘have you brewed the tea, dear’]; mash is used locally for ‘to brew tea’ (see table 4.6) and the grammatical form aya [= ‘have you’] is discussed at 3.5.2.

Figure 4.8: Advert for Notts TV on a local bus, photo by Norma Braber-McKinney.

Other forms of address, such as kiddo and lad, used by and to men were discussed in the ‘Pit Talk’ project, where miners also gave variants such as mucka, mi owd, sirree, youth and lad. There is one token of surry in this sense in the SED Incidental Material

138 

 4 Lexis

in Sutton on the Hill (Ellis 1956), and of youth in Heanor (C1190/12/04), Swadlincote (C1190/12/05) and Mansfield (C1190/16/04), where owd lad also occurred. 4.5.4 Other local expressions Other local expressions are shown in Table 4.6, which includes a selection of words from all aspects of daily life. The word ganzi for ‘jumper’ is also recognised in many dialect books as a local pronunciation of ‘Guernsey’ (i.e. a type of sweater) and one which shows different spellings, including gansey and ganzie. This lack Table 4.6: A selection of local expressions. Word

Definition

Source

Beer off

Off-licence

Beeton (1999)

Bozz-eyed

Cross-eyed

Robinson (2015), this particular pronunciation was recorded in SED (VI.3.6) in Kniveton and still occurs in nearby Ashbourne

Croaker

Doctor

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_ Midlands_English#Dialectal_words

Croggie

A ride on the crossbars of a bike

Smith (2013)

Dobby

Children’s chase game variously referred to elsewhere as ‘it/tig/tag’; dobby off ground involves having one’s feet off the ground (i.e. on a wall/bench/ up a tree etc.) to guarantee immunity from capture

Beeton (1999); this term appears to be specific to Nottingham according to Opie & Opie (1959: 66), where the rest of the East Midlands has tig/tick. One of the authors’ sons (aged 9 and born in Nottingham) still currently uses this term.

Ganzi

Jumper

Smith (2013); Davies (2015), OED lists as gansey

Gleg

Look

Smith (2013)

Keggy

Left-handed

Scollins & Titford (2000), there is much variation in spelling; SED (VI.7.13) has keggy and keggy-handed for Derbyshire; keggy-handed or cawky-handed for Leicestershire; and BBC Voices has mainly caggy/keggy/keggy-handed

Mash

Make/brew tea

SED records mash at BREW (V.8.9) in two sites in Derbyshire, all four in Nottinghamshire and nine out of ten in Leicestershire

4.5 Popular local language 

 139

Table 4.6 (continued) Word

Definition

Source

Play snobs in the corsy

Children’s game catching stones

Pit Talk;OED includes corsey as causey

Scrat

To cry

Pit Talk

Skinny

Mean

Pit Talk

Tab

Ear

Smith (2013)

Teggies

Teeth

Discussion with residents in Nottingham – including older and younger speakers; also contributed to Guardian (Duncan & Obordo 2017) by contributor form Northampton

of agreement in spelling is a common feature of dialectal forms as they occur more frequently in speech or lighthearted publications so do not always develop universally adopted spellings. This is also found in variants for ‘left-handed’ which can be seen in local dialect books and BL descriptions of BBC Voices Recordings as caggy, kaggy, keggy and keggy-handed. Snobs is a local name for a game more widely known as ‘jacks’, in which children throw a stone in the air and put other stones in their hand before catching the falling stone. This game was traditionally played on the corsy meaning ‘pavement’. The word tab meaning ‘ear’ is used by many locals in a range of idiomatic expressions, including hang t’tab on which means ‘to listen attentively’ with the pronunciation here illustrating the local tendency for definite article reduction (see 3.2.2), while tab’anging (i.e. ‘tab hanging’) means ‘to earwig’ (i.e. listen in on a conversation). Another frequently used word is nebbeh or nebby for ‘nosy’, the first spelling indicating the local pronunciation of the happy vowel (see 2.2.3) in the East Midlands, particularly among younger speakers. As in all vernacular language, imaginative wordplay often leads to dialect innovation. Two WordBank contributors from Nottingham (C1442/680 and C1442/1310) volunteered the expression a bit Derby [= ‘cold’]. In this expression, ‘Derby Road’ (the name of the A52 trunk road from Nottingham to Derby) is used as rhyming slang for the local pronunciation of cold as ‘cowd’ (see 2.2.2). Rhyming slang is a wonderful vehicle for individual and collective linguistic creativity, and one speaker explains why this phrase is used so enthusiastically in Nottingham. This expression is pertinent, he says, to associate a negative concept such as ‘cold’ with Derby as “we particularly don’t like Derby in Nottingham so it’s doubly funny” (C1442/680), which neatly encapsulates the way local rivalries and attitudes can be expressed humorously in dialect.

140 

 4 Lexis

A set of words which vary locally are twitchel, jitty and gennel/ginnel. These variants all refer to an ‘alley between or behind buildings (usually) terraced houses’ for which there are numerous forms around the country, including ginnel in Manchester and close in Glasgow. The word twitchel is recorded in the OED from 1435 and categorised as ‘dialect’ and gennel from 1613 and most citations for twitchel are from Nottingham and Leicestershire. Jitty is recorded in the EDD for ‘all the n[orthern] counties to Not[tinghamshire], Lin[colnshire], Lei[cestershire]’, but recent BL evidence suggests it is now very much an East Midlands form only. These variants are frequently discussed in the BBC Voices Recordings, as this was one of the prompt words included in the survey. In Belper (C1190/12/02) speakers distinguished between ginnel (which they insist refers specifically to a covered walkway between terraced houses and is pronounced with /dz/ not /g/) and jitty (for a footpath between two streets), whereas in Kirkby-in-Ashfield (C1190/26/03) ginnel was supplied for a walkway between terraced houses and jitty as a walkway behind terraced houses. Speakers in Heanor (C1190/12/04) used both jitty and gennel (without any further explanation of potential differences between them), and in Swadlincote (C1190/12/05) participants only supplied jitty. In Two Dales (C1190/12/03) participants also used both gennel and jitty and in Coalville (C1190/20/05) jitty and snicket were supplied. Some Leicestershire miners in our ‘Pit Talk’ project also used snicket to describe a small passageway connecting two larger roadways underground. Speakers in Groby and Leicester (C1190/02, C1190/20/03 and C1190/4) confirmed jitty, which was also recorded in Nottingham (C1190/26/05). Speakers in Eastwood (C1190/26/01) supplied all three forms, jitty, twitchel and gennel and in Nottingham (C1190/26/02) speakers used jitty and twitchel. In a recent letter to the editor in The Times (16 May 2017), a reader responded to a previous letter discussing ginnels with the observation: “Sir, People in Nottingham would balk at the idea of walking through a ginnel or snicket. Where we come from such journeys are only undertaken through a twitchell”. As elsewhere in the UK, weather is an important topic for discussion and this is reflected in local dialect forms. There are terms for different types of (particularly) bad weather, including words for heavy rain, cold and impending bad weather (see Table 4.7). Many of the terms above are discussed in the local dialect books mentioned at 4.2.2 and can also be found in the BBC Voices Recordings. Nesh is also prominent in the WordBank where it is frequently cited as a ‘typical’ local word. A female from Chesterfield (C1442/00457) comments “nesh is a brilliant word it means to not like the cold or the wet to be a bit weak and wimpy and a bit you know just nesh it’s very difficult to describe” and an older male from Leicestershire (C1442/01124) says “I’ve never seen [nesh] written but we used to use it to describe someone who was very sensitive to the cold but by extension we called someone nesh who was feeble a weakling in general”. Another contributor from Nottingham

4.5 Popular local language 

 141

Table 4.7: A selection of EM weather terms. Word

Definition

Source

Azzled

Rough hands from frosty, cold weather

Davies (2015)

Brizzled

Cold

Smith (2013)

Black over Bill’s mother’s

When dark clouds visible on the horizon

Scollins & Titford (2000); Smith (2013); also frequently discussed in BBC Voices Recordings in the East Midlands and confirmed by a contribution to the WordBank from Long Eaton (C1442/951)

Back-end

Autumn

Wright (1979); Smith (2013)

Mawky

Overcast

Smith (2013)

Mizzle

Drizzle or light rain

Smith (2013)

Nesh

Weak, susceptible to cold

Smith (2013)

Ollin’ it dahn (i.e. Very heavy rain local pronunciation of hurling it down)

Wright (1979); Scollins & Titford (2000)

Rawky

Misty

Wright (1979)

Rime

Frosting of ice on objects

Wright (1979)

Silin’ dahn (i.e. local pronunciation of sile down)

Very heavy rain

Wright (1979)

Staavin’ (i.e. local pronunciation of starving)

Very cold weather

Wright (1979)

(C1442/01093) comments: “nesh is a word that’s quite local to Nottingham and it means being a bit whingey a bit sort of weedy being cold when you shouldn’t be cold really”. The OED records nesh from 1230 and suggests that it is ‘now English regional (chiefly north), rare’ and a BBC Voices contributor from Swanwick in Derbyshire (C1190/14/02) comments “if you kept your coat on in the house people’d say you want to take that off you won’t feel the benefit you’ll be nesh”. The East Midlands are famous for many different types of food, from Bramley apples to Melton Pies and Stilton Cheese, and it is therefore not surprising that there are many local words referring to food. Some of these can be seen in Table 4.8. This table shows that there is some regional variation even within the East Midlands, with different words for ‘sweets’, where tuffees does not just refer to ‘toffees’ but to all sweet types. The term faggots, which is generally used to

142 

 4 Lexis

Table 4.8: A selection of EM food and drink terms. Word

Definition

Source

Bakewell pudding

Sweet tart made with jam

Smith (2013)

Bread and Bunghole

Bread and cheese

Example given by George Norley (p.c)

Clammed

Hungry

Wright (1979); Scollins & Titford (2000)

Cob

Roll

Smith (2013)

Colleynobs/collywobbles/nobs Brussels sprouts

Beeton (1999); Scollins & Titford (2000); Smith (2013)

Dog in a blanket

Roly-poly pudding

Smith (2013)

Ducks necks

Bottles of lemonade

Given during a discussion with former miners

Faberry or Guzgogs

Gooseberries

Scollins and Titford (2000); Smith (2013)

Gollop or Larrop

Eat greedily

Smith (2013)

Maumy

Soft, overcooked – especially of potatoes

Davies (2015); confirmed by WordBank contribution from Leicester (C1442/1381)

Mash

To make a cup or pot of tea Smith (2013)

Oakie (i..e local pronunciation of hokey)

Ice cream

Smith (2013); confirmed by WordBank contribution from Leicester (C1442/4066) and recorded in OED as hokey

Robin Hood’s rhubarb

Burdock

D.H. Lawrence in Lady Chatterley’s Lover (1997: 13, 193)

Rocks, tuffees (i.e. local pronunciation of toffees), tuttoos

Sweets

’Pit Talk’, Alan Sillitoe’s Saturday Night and Sunday Morning; Scollins and Titford (2000); tuttoos confirmed by a BBC Voices contributor from Swanwick in Derbyshire (C1190/14/02). tuffees was ‘word of the week’ on the Nottingham City of Literature website in April 2017

Savoury ducks

Faggots (meat dish made ’Pit Talk’ from chopped pig’s liver and lights wrapped in pigs caul)

4.6 Conclusion 

 143

Table 4.8 (continued) Word

Definition

Source

Scrat

Thin spread on bread

James (2008)

Sucker

Ice lolly

Nottingham (C1190/26/05); confirmed by WordBank contribution from Nottingham (C1442/1076)

mean a type of meat dish made with pig’s liver and lights, can also refer to ‘a bundle of sticks used as fuel’ as captured in an SED recording in Ullesthorpe (C908 57 C2).

4.6 Conclusion This chapter set out to make a contribution to the discussion on regional lexical variation. While it has shown that some local dialect words are disappearing that were linked to traditional occupations which may no longer exist (such as coal mining) or where changes have resulted in new methods (such as in farming), we hope we have also demonstrated that there is a robust stock of local dialect vocabulary in the East Midlands – and their pronunciation and use – are an important expression of local identity. It is also clear that a thorough and up-to-date research project collecting data from around the East Midlands, including input on contemporary language use among younger speakers, would contribute to the increasing interest in lexical variation and identity.

Figure 5.1: Map of locations referred to in this chapter, produced by Chris Montgomery Note: This work is based on data provided through EDINA UKBORDERS with the support of the ESRC and JISC and uses boundary material which is copyright of the Crown and the ED-LINE Consortium. Contains OS data © Crown copyright and database right 2015, 2017. Contains National Statistics data © Crown copyright and database right 2017.

5 Annotated transcripts 5.1 Kniveton, Derbyshire Survey of English Dialects recording with Tom Woolley (farmer, b. Atlow, aged 62) Recorded by Stanley Ellis, May 1956 BL shelfmark C908/51 C9 – excerpt available at http://sounds.bl.uk/Accentsand-dialects/Survey-of-English-dialects/021M-C0908X0051XX-1000V1 Tom discusses a successful car sale and recalls an impressive thunderstorm Tom:

what’s good of working too hard thou knowest thou learnest a bit of sense as thee gettest older if thee startest when when thee startest stop thou knowest thou wantest start as an old man and keep on as an old man and thee can live longer but if thee startest and does a lot of work folks laugh at thee and then thee hast thee hast worn thysen out by time as thee gettest an old man dostn’t thou Stanley: oh yes Tom: I used sell cars motor cars I once bought one for well I bought two for three pound and I brought one home and I gen [= giePASTNEG] a man a ride in it and he he says where hast got this from I says I bought her at Derby how much is her I says sixteen pound he said wilt wilt let this youth run it up for me well he wanted me to run it up but I wudna [= willPASTNEG] I says let him take it I says he come back again in about an hour with the cheque for sixteen pound her only cost thir… thirty bob like for her thirty bob for tother I went for the tother and sold it the scrapiron dealer [laughs] I were milking in the shed and I’s just one calf for to finish and I were milking there and by Goy there come such a clap of thunder so missus is very frightened so I come and I says art all right mother always called mother thou knowest her says ah but oh dear her says what are we going to do well I says thee canstna [= canPRESNEG] do nowt only sit and wait on it going over oh her says artn’t thou going to stop with me ah I’ll stop with thee I says I canna [= canPRESNEG] milk cows cows wunna [= willPRESNEG] stand still they’re frightened oh her kept coming and all at once there come such a crash and it looked like as if it were out in the field there I says hold thy stress mother I says hoo’s got us next time says dost think so I says ah but hoo went over hoo hit that tree at tother side field there her busted her up I says now mother we shall all right now I says it’s only a strag as’ll hit us hoo were on it https://doi.org/10.1515/9781501502354-005

146 

 5 Annotated transcripts

were nine o’clock when I’d finished milking and I cudna [= canPASTNEG] I cudna [= canPASTNEG] go out because hoo were that frightened Stanley: aye Tom: well at last it went over and I finished milking but every time it thundered we jumped I says thee’rt all right I says he’ll none hurt thee I says let’s go to bed and go to sleep and we shall none be so bad I say if we can go to sleep all right I says we shall none hear her Stanley: aye 5.1.1 Glossary ah bob bust by Goy gie hoo missus mother none nowt strag thee thou thysen thy tother

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

yes shilling to burst, break exclamation of surprise/disbelief to give she, it wife familiar form of address to wife not nothing stray you (subject & object) you (subject) yourself your other

5.1.2 Phonological points of interest kit dress trap lot strut foot

[ɪ] think [ɛ] shed NB every [ɪvɹɪ] [a] clap NB canstna [kɒstnə], canna [kɒnə], man [mɒn] [ɒ] stop [ʊ] thunder NB mother [mɒðə] [ʊ] good

5.1 Kniveton, Derbyshire 

bath cloth nurse fleece face

palm thought goat

goose

price

choice mouth near square start north force cure happy letter comma horses started morning

NB looked [lɪʊkt] [a] last NB laugh [lɒf] no tokens [əː] hurt [ɛɪ > iː] sleep [slɛɪp]; keep [kiːp] no tokens NB again [gɛn], says [sɛz], take [tɛk] NB always [ɔːlɪz] NB wait [wiːt] [aː] calf [ɔː] called NB bought [bɛʊt], brought [bɹɛʊt] [oʊ] folks NB (dost think) so [suː], go [guː], going [gʊɪn], over [ʊə] NB home [ɒm], only [ɒnɪ] NB so (bad) [sə bad] NB old [ɛʊd], hold [ɛʊd], sold [sɛʊd] [uː] youth NB do [dɪʊ] NB too (hard) [tə haːd] [ɑː] time NB by [bɪ], thy [ðɪ] NB frightened [fɹɛɪtn̟d], right [ɹɛɪt] [ɔɪ] Goy [æː] pound NB thou [ða] [ɪə] hear no tokens NB there [ðɪə], where [wɪə] [aː] hard no tokens no tokens no tokens [ɪ] Derby [ə] thunder [ə] canna [ə] missus [ə] busted [ɪ] milking

 147

148 

 5 Annotated transcripts

one [wɒn], none [nɒn], once [wʊns], because [bəkɒs], nowt [nəʊt], us [ʊz] DAR T to R H-dropping for to reduction it reduction of reduction over reduction to reduction with reduction shall contraction linking R intrusive R

as if it were out in the field there [aːt ɪnʔ fɛɪɫd ðɪə] but if thee startest [bəɹ ɪf ðɛɪ staːtst] he’ll none hurt thee [ɪɫ nɒn əːt ðiː] I’s just one calf for to finish [wɒŋ kaːf fəʔ fɪnɪʃ] I gen a man a ride in it [a gɛn ə mɒn ə ɹɑːd ɪnt] there come such a clap of thunder [sʊʧ ə klap ə θʊndə] wait on it going over [wiːt ɒnʔ gʊɪn ʊə] let’s go to bed and go to sleep [guːʔ bɛd əŋ guːʔ slɛɪp] with the cheque [wɪt ʧɛk] we shall none be so bad [wɪsɫ̩ nɒn bɪ sə bad] her busted her up [ə bʊstəd əːɹ ʊp] ah I’ll stop with thee [aːɾ ɑɫ stɒp wiː ðɪ]

5.1.3 Grammatical points of interest zero definite article

by time as thee gettest an old man

zero plural

I bought two for three pound

2nd person forms

historic hoo [= ‘she/it’] pronoun exchange relative as

thou learnest a bit of sense as thee gettest older hold thy stress mother thee hast worn thysen out hoo’s got us next time oh dear her says it’s only a strag as’ll hit us

were generalisation has generalisation zero past bare infinitive for to infinitive historic present

I were milking in the shed I’s just one cow left for to finish all at once there come such a crash I used sell cars I’s just one cow left for to finish I says I bought her at Derby

canPRESNEG canPASTNEG willPRESNEG willPASTNEG negative none multiple negation

I canna milk cows I cudna go out cows wunna stand still he wanted me to run it up but I wudna we shall none hear her thou canstna do nowt

5.2 Oxton, Nottinghamshire 

 149

zero of zero to on [= for]

tother side the field I went for the tother and sold it the scrap-iron dealer wait on it going over

emphatic that [= so] discourse like

hoo were that frightened her only cost thir… thirty bob like

5.2 Oxton, Nottinghamshire Survey of English Dialects recording with Percy Strutt (farm worker, b. Oxton, aged 72) Recorded by Stanley Ellis, February 1957 BL shelfmark C908/52 C5 – excerpt available at http://sounds.bl.uk/Accentsand-dialects/Survey-of-English-dialects/021M-C0908X0052XX-0500V1 Percy talks about his expertise in handling difficult horses Percy:

cause I used to I were rough I were rough one I could hit horse and hold him but that don’t get your day’s work done you know you’ve got to be friends you’ve got be friends it’s no good if a man now look here if a man’s got to hit horse he wants to hit him in stable fore he goes to work now then when I were at Hawksworth with Bradwell the auctioneers over the Trent years ago 1910 and I’d I’d eight in stables there was there were six in in double standings like two in a stand and there were two single standing apiece and they were two four-year-olds chestnut and and a black one they were two lovely tits and they’d never been gaffered they’d never been gaffered so one morning about twenty past six to half past six time I put the collars on I gen [= giePAST] them a feed and I got a besom stave and I gen [= giePAST] them the bloodiest hiding and I got hold of their tails here stand up I get hold of their tails that there round my hand and then get hold of the dock and nip it and stand here you know and hit them at top of the ribs you know I did and soon there were there were six seven men in stable and foreman they says they’ll kick you first I says they wain’t [=willPASTNEG] I says they’ll go through that bloody wall if they could get I says they can’t get I’d got them doubled up they didn’t know what the hell to do with theirsens but by God it did them good I could do owt with them after that when I took them to work they were nice as the nicest it’s no good hitting them at when you’re at work cause always used hae some good tits and they were

150 

 5 Annotated transcripts

Stanley: Percy: Stanley: Percy: Stanley: Percy:

Stanley: Percy: Stanley: Percy:

fit for the job and if you got them upset you you were upset yourself you were walking about after them playing hell with you and all you know no they used to kick you know and they’d never been gaffered some fool’d broke them in who didn’t know how to go in in a way in a way you broke them in did you oh no I didn’t break them in no I mean did you ever break any in oh I broke scores in aye I wanted nobody with me I wanted no… uh body with me I could do owt with a bloody horse with myself I could I could hold him and we were friends in no time aye if you understand and how long would it take well I’ll tell you about selling them horses at Barker for hundred-andtwenty pound I said well he bought he sold that one for hundred-andtwenty pound and he bought two three-year-olds or rising threes in February time with the money with the money they were sixty pound apiece

5.2.1 Glossary and all besom fore gaffer gie hae hiding now then owt score standing stave theirsens tit

= = = = = = = = = = = = = =

too, as well broom before (of horse) to master, break in to give to have beating, thrashing phrase used to draw attention to what follows anything twenty (or multiple thereof) stall in stable handle, shaft themselves small horse

5.2 Oxton, Nottinghamshire 

5.2.2 Phonological points of interest kit dress trap lot strut foot bath cloth nurse fleece face

palm thought

goat

goose price choice mouth near square start north

[ɪ] kick [ɛ] friend NB never [nɪvə] [a] stand NB hae [ɛ] [ɒ] dock [ʊ] rough [ʊ] good [a] past no tokens [ɪː] first NB work [wə(ː)k] [iː > iːɪ] feed [fiːd]; apiece [əpiːɪs] NB been [bɪn] [ɛː > ɛɪ] stables [stɛːbɫ̟z]; eight [ɛɪt] NB says [sɛz] NB wain’t [wɪənt] NB always [ɔːləs] [ɑː] can’t NB [af past] half past [ɔː] wall NB auctioneers [ɒkʃənɪəz] NB bought [bəʊt] [əʊ > ɔː] ago [əgəʊ]; no [nɔː] NB goes [gʊ], goes [gʊz], over [ʊə] NB broke [bɹɒk] NB hold [ɛʊd], old [ɛʊd], sold [sɛʊd] [uː] fool NB you [jəʊ] [ɑː] nice NB my [mɪ] no tokens [æː] pound [ɪə] years no tokens [ɒː] Barker [ɔː] morning NB horse [ɒs]

 151

152 

 5 Annotated transcripts

force cure happy letter comma horses started morning

[ɔː] scores no tokens [ɪ] money [ə] collars no tokens [ə] horses [ɪ] wanted [ɪ] hiding

one (morning) [wɒn], (black/rough) one [black ən, ɹʊf ən], cause [kəs], owt [əʊt] DAR T-tapping H-dropping secondary contraction in reduction of reduction over reduction to reduction with reduction them contraction linking R

the auctioneers over the Trent [ðɒkʃənɪəz ʊəʔ tɹɛnʔ] I got a besom stave [a gɒɾ ə biːzəm stɛːv] I could hit horse and hold him [a kʊd ɪt ɒs ən ɛʊd ɪm] oh no I didn’t break them in [a dɪnʔ bɹɛːk əm ɪn] we were friends in no time [ɪ nɔː tɑːm] at top of the ribs [ət tɒp ə ðə ɹɪbz] over the Trent years ago [ʊəʔ tɹɛnʔ] twenty past six to half past six [twɛntɪ past sɪks taf past sɪks] I could do owt with them after that [a kʊd duː əʊʔ wi əm] but by God it did them good [ɪt dɪd əm gʊd] I were at Hawksworth [aɪ wəɹ ət ɔːkswəθ]

5.2.3 Grammatical points of interest determiner them

I’ll tell you about selling them horses at Barker

zero definite article zero indefinite article

there were six seven men in stable if a man’s got to hit horse

zero plural

they were sixty pound apiece

were generalisation generalised simple past full verb have bare infinitive historic present

when I were at Hawksworth some fool’d broke them in I’d eight in stables you’ve got be friends they says they’ll kick you first

invariant don’t willPRESNEG

that don’t get your day’s work done I says they wain’t

5.3 Ullesthorpe, Leicestershire 

with [= by]

I could do owt with a bloody horse with myself

discourse like

there were six in in double standings like

 153

5.3 Ullesthorpe, Leicestershire Survey of English Dialects recording with Mrs Bailey (domestic servant/laundry worker, b. Leicester, aged 89) Recorded by Stanley Ellis and Averil Playford, 4 May 1956 BL shelfmark C908/57 C2 – excerpt available at http://sounds.bl.uk/Accentsand-dialects/Survey-of-English-dialects/021M-C0908X0057XX-0200V1 Mrs Bailey reflects on living standards at the turn of the 19th/20th century Mrs Bailey: Stanley: Mrs Bailey:

Stanley: Mrs Bailey

Stanley: Mrs Bailey: Stanley: Mrs Bailey: Stanley: Mrs Bailey:

Stanley: Mrs Bailey:

they had no furniture only a table and a chair or two there were no sideboards nor no fancy things no a red brick smashed outside and they rubbed their feet in that fore they went in cause see there were nothing to cover the floors they were all raddled them time of day aye twopenny packets of raddle and put in your water and then you see when you rubbed your feet in this brick dust it only redded it the same I see and what was your grandfather what work did he do stocking-frame one of them oh in a stocking-frame aye and the other one he had a horse and cart and he used to go to the pit nearly every day and fetch a load of coal he used to sell it used to have a chain on the back of his cart and a wooden thing to put the coal on you know and weigh it on the cart half hundreds or what they wanted and leave it at the gates and what sort of a wage would they get for doing a job like that they’d have to get what he could make out of the coal wouldn’t he he’d have to pay for the coal at the pit and then he’d have to sell it to get his day’s work and his horse wouldn’t he for well the farmers labourers only got fourteen shillings and the station porters used to have seventeen

154 

 5 Annotated transcripts

Stanley: Averil: Mrs Bailey:

Stanley: Averil: Mrs Bailey: Stanley: Mrs Bailey:

Stanley: Mrs Bailey:

Stanley: Mrs Bailey: Stanley: Mrs Bailey: Stanley: Mrs Bailey: Stanley: Mrs Bailey: Stanley: Mrs Bailey:

Stanley: Mrs Bailey:

aye but you used to manage quite easily on it didn’t you course things were very cheap but still they were very bad off I’ve knowed what it is to want bread they were very bad off people was were they but I mean you managed to bring up quite a large family on it didn’t you oh yeah yes yes well they were very much in debt at one time of day were you you were bound to have food if you had it on on the never as the saying was but you’d got it to pay for but I mean anybody as couldn’t pay for it I’ve seen the bailiffs come and fetch their home out and sell it in the road aye we only used to reckon to have about one holiday a year that were Whitsuntide when the clubs walked and the bands and danced in the field and had suppers I mean dinners and that at the school and was that just for the children or no course it wasn’t it was for the village oh was it aye oh there’s no outdoor sports today not in the village it’s all seasides and and how old were you when you left school then I was ten were you aye and you started to passed my Fifth Standard then aye we used go school at two and mothers had to take us and bring us back fetch us back cause they wouldn’t let us out of school till us parents were there to fetch us not the out of the infants’ room and then what did you do when you came out here then went out to work washing and cleaning there were nowt else to do them days in the country

5.3.1 Glossary club fetch

= benefit club = to bring

5.3 Ullesthorpe, Leicestershire 

Fifth Standard fore nowt on the never pit raddle red stocking-frame

= standard required (by 1870 Elementary Education Act) for child aged between 10 and 13 to leave school = before = nothing = on credit = mine, colliery = red ochre used as dye = to redden = machine used to produce stocking-net [= knitted textile fabric used chiefly in manufacture of undergarments]

5.3.2 Phonological points of interest kit dress trap lot strut foot bath cloth nurse fleece face palm thought goat

goose price choice mouth near

 155

[ɪ] brick [ɛ] debt NB never [nɪvə] [a] packets NB had [ɛd], have [ɛv] [ɒ] holiday [ʊ] rubbed NB mothers [mɒðəz] [ʊ] wooden [a] danced [ɒ] off [əː ~ ɪː] furniture [fəːnɪːʧə]; work [wɪːk] [iː] cheap [ɛi] gates NB make [mɛk], take [tɛk] [aː] half [ɔː] walked [əʊ] road NB goes [gʊ] NB only [ɒnɪ] [uː] room [ɑɪ] time NB my [mɪ] no tokens [aː] bound [ɪː] nearly

156  square start north force cure happy letter comma horses started morning

 5 Annotated transcripts

[ɛː] chair [aː] cart [ɔː] horse NB nor [nə] [ɔːə] floor no tokens [ɪ] country [ə] dinners no tokens no tokens [ɪ] wanted [ɪ] cleaning

one [wɒn], nothing [nʊθɪŋ], nowt [nəʊt], us [ʊz, əz] DAR H-dropping secondary contraction in reduction it reduction of reduction to reduction them contraction linking R

the other one [ðʊðə wɒn] half hundreds [aːfʊndədz] they wouldn’t [wʊnt] let us out of school anybody as couldn’t [kʊnt] pay for it sell it in the road [sɛl ɪt ɪ ðə ɹəʊd] I’ve knowed what it is [wɒt tɪz] to want bread at one time of day [ət wɒn tɑɪm ə dɛi] you were bound to have food [baːn tav fuːd] stocking-frame one of them [wɒn ɒf ʊm] only a table and a chair or two [ɒni ə tɛɪbɫ̟ ən ə ʧɛːɹ ə tuː]

5.3.3 Grammatical points of interest determiner them

there were nowt else to do them days in the country

possessive us relative as

till us parents were there to fetch us anybody as couldn’t pay for it

was generalisation were generalisation regularised past bare infinitive

they were very bad off people was that were Whitsuntide I’ve knowed what it is to want bread we used go school at two

multiple negation

there were no sideboards nor no fancy things

unmarked adverb

they were very bad off

5.4 Swadlincote, Derbyshire 

 157

5.4 Swadlincote, Derbyshire Millennium Memory Bank recording with Vera Archer (chip shop assistant, b. Swadlincote, aged ‘in her seventies’) Recorded by Jan Rogers, December 1998 BL shelfmark C900/03055 – excerpt available at http://sounds.bl.uk/Accentsand-dialects/Millenium-memory-bank/021M-C0900X03055X-1200V1 Vera recalls childhood errands and her mother’s weekly chores Vera: Jan: Vera:

Jan: Vera: Jan: Vera:

and I mean people were poor in them days but they were proud you know they were proud and generous too oh yes yes but you know if you run an errand for anybody nowadays you run will you run down the road to the post office for me I’ll give you fifty pence that’s nowadays when we were kids they’d say will you run up to Knocky Dent’s that was the butcher up you see will you run up to Knocky Dent’s and get us my sixpenceworth of stew and when you come back you’d be right lucky if they give you a round of bread and jam oh yeah I mean me I used have run up to Gresley Co-Op many a time for my mam do you I can tell you some prices and all cause I used go and get them do then tell me sugar two pound for twopence halfpenny now this is twopence halfpenny not the new money do you want me translate into the new money no that’ll do uh bacon eightpence a pound now then boiled ham was sixpence a quarter corned beef were fourpence a quarter bread uh twopence a loaf two loafs for threepence halfpenny halfpenny ca… uh fancy cakes halfpenny penny full cream twopence but we never what we when we had full cream cakes I used have to go to Waterfields on a Monday and fetch sixpenceworth of stale cakes and we used have them for pudding and they were cakes that had been made f… on Saturday and not sold so I used have fetch them on Monday and get sixpenceworth of stale cakes you got a good bag full and we had them for pudding on a Monday and then we had my mam used do extra vegetables on a Sunday and fry them up for Monday’s dinner you see cold meat fried fried vegetables and pickles and then these here pastries from Waterfields cause she used to wash Monday you see well with a big family you can guess she were up at five o’clock in a morning oh and it were my job [laughs] that Sunday she we had fill the copper didn’t we and we’d got a cistern under the kitchen floor and a pump and it were my job pump the water [laughs] and

158 

Jan: Vera:

 5 Annotated transcripts

my mam carried the water into the copper and five o’clock in a morning she’d be up to get a fire under the copper two dolly-tubs go round with the old dolly-tub dolly-pegs and snowy white her washing was it must have been a nightmare and trying to get it dry as well and iron it yes and she hadn’t got a very big yard up at Gresley the yard the line zigzagged across like that you know such things like that never occurred to us and then on a Tuesday morning you’d get up for school she’d be ironing on the table and you’d got about that much for to have your breakfast on Wednesday you’d wake up she’d be doing the upstairs and she always did the attic stairs you know oh yeah come hell and high water she scrubbed the attic stairs and on a I think it was it on was on a Friday or a Saturday it were my job do the brasses she got brass stair-ra… rods as well you know all they had be fourteen stair-rods and they all had be done knives and forks and spoons all the brass ornaments all had to be done newspaper spread across the table and Christmas decorations we never bought Christmas decorations we made them you know

5.4.1 Glossary and all = copper = dolly peg = dolly-tub = kid = mam =

too, as well large boiler for cooking/washing clothes long-handled wooden implement used for stirring clothes in wash-tub old-fashioned wash-tub young child mother

5.4.2 Phonological points of interest kit dress trap lot strut foot bath cloth

[ɪ] kids [ɛ] pence NB halfpenny [hɛipnɪ], twopence [tʊpəns], threepence [θɹɛpəns] [a] jam [ɒ] job [ʊ] lucky [ʊ] butcher [a] brass [ɒ] across

5.4 Swadlincote, Derbyshire 

nurse fleece face palm thought goat goose

price

choice mouth near square start north force cure happy letter comma horses started morning

[əː] occurred NB sixpenceworth [sɪkspɛnəθ] [iː] people NB threepence [θɹɛpəns] [ɛi] cakes NB Saturday [satdɪ] no tokens NB halfpenny [hɛipnɪ] [ɔː] water [əʊ] loaf NB go [gʊ] [uː] stew NB school [ʉː] NB twopence [tʊpəns] NB unstressed you [jə] [aɛ] white NB my [mɪ] NB right [ɹɛʔ] [ɔɪ] boiled [aʊ > aː] proud [pɹaʊd]; now then [naː ðɛn] [ɪə] these here [ɛː] stairs [ɑː] yard [ɔː] forks [ɔː] fourteen [ɔː] poor [ɪ] money [ə] copper [ə] extra [ɪ] brasses no tokens [ɪ] pudding

cause [kɒs], us [ʊz, əz] DAR T-glottaling T-to-R NG-fronting H-dropping

run to the post office [tə ðpəʊst ɒfɪs] she scrubbed the attic stairs [ðatɪk stɛːz] get us [gɛʔ əz] my sixpenceworth of stew you got a [gɒɹə] good bag full five o’clock in a morning [mɔːnɪn] come hell and high water [kʊm ɛl ən aɛ wɔːtə]

 159

160 

 5 Annotated transcripts

L-vocalisation yod dropping yod coalescence secondary contraction of reduction for to reduction L-deletion them contraction linking R

pickles [pɪkʊz] stew [stuː]; new money [nuː mʊnɪ] Tuesday [ʧuːzdɪ] we had to fill the copper didn’t we [dɪnʔ wɪ] a round of bread and jam [ə raːnd ə bɹɛdn̩ ʤam] for to have your breakfast on [fə tav jə bɹɛkfəst ɒn] and all [ən ɔː] we made them [wɪ mɛid ʊm] you know if you run an errand for anybody [fəɹ ɛnɪbɒdɪ]

5.4.3 Grammatical points of interest determiner them determiner these here

people were poor in them days these here pastries

irregular plural

two loafs for threepence halfpenny

singular object us

get us my sixpenceworth of stew

were generalisation zero past bare infinitive for to infinitive

it were my job pump the water when you come back you’d be right lucky if they give you a round of bread and jam do you want me translate into the new money you’d got about that much for to have your breakfast

zero habitual to

I used have to go Waterfields on a Monday

5.5 Nottingham Millennium Memory Bank recording with Dorothy Sills (chip shop assistant, b. Nottingham, aged 71) Recorded by Jeremy Evans, November 1998 BL shelfmark C900/12530 – excerpt available at http://sounds.bl.uk/Accentsand-dialects/Millenium-memory-bank/021M-C0900X12530X-0200V1 Dorothy talks about her work at the Player’s cigarette factory Jeremy: Dorothy:

what did you do at Player’s um packing at first and then I went from packing well I went on all jobs cause they moved you around you know I went in laboratory and yeah

5.5 Nottingham 

Jeremy: Dorothy:

Jeremy: Dorothy:

 161

I worked in there for a little while weighing the tobacco and what have you and then uh what else did I do well it our part was called duty paid area and it was like an office but we had to pack all the traveller’s you know um samples and all like that and then I worked on the shop went down on the shop and it that used to take a kiosk round to the other factories people to you know um buy them so much cheaper and we used to go down Horizon and we used to go up um oh Nottingham Road there was a place up there of Player’s we used to go there and then we used to go to the Rec that’s on Aspley Lane you know the uh Recreation Ground used to go there and sell the cigarettes go all round then come back count it up and you know count all your stock up and your money up and take the money to the cashiers and I had that job so I’ve had quite a number of jobs what was it like then working at Player’s cause I mean it’s a big Notingham company isn’t it oh yeah oh it was all right you get some laughs sometimes sometimes you’re you’re bored I was bored towards the end yeah because there there wasn’t much to do you know just sat there when you’d done your work you’d go back Monday and Tuesday done all your work just sat there you’d got nothing else do the rest of the uh the week but we used to get uh Friday afternoons off and uh we used leave early at night because we only had half an hour for us lunch-time so uh that was all right so uh how many how many people do you think worked there were there lots oh yeah there was thousands I think there’s about one thousand six-hundred work there now that’s down the Horizon down Lenton you know you know where it is don’t you yeah so uh I should say there was about three thousand four thousand yeah because there was uh Number One factory Number Two factory Number Three factory and Number Four factory and then the Horizon’d opened I think that opened in 1972 so um and then you know it they all fi… Number One closed down then Number Two and then where I was that was uh how many years ago did I I’ve been finished um thirt … no wait a minute fifty-eight I finished fifty-nine sixty that’s thirteen years ago and um of course they bulldozed it down you know so uh and I didn’t want to go down the Horizon else I could’ve finished when I was sixty down the Horizon but I didn’t want to go down there because it was too far to travel so uh they just asked you if you wanted to take an early retirement so I did do and that was it yeah

162 

 5 Annotated transcripts

5.5.1 Glossary else = or else, otherwise

5.5.2 Phonological points of interest kit dress trap lot strut foot bath cloth nurse fleece face

palm thought goat goose price choice mouth near square start north force cure happy letter comma horses

[ɪ] think [ɛ] sell [a] pack [ɒ] stock [ʊ] number [ʊ] could [a] laughs [ɒ] off [əː] work [iː] three [ɛi] paid NB Tuesday [tuːzdɪ], Friday afternoon [fɹaɛdi aftənuːnz] NB take [tɛik, tɛk] [ɑː] half [ɔː] called [əʊ] closed NB tobacco [təbakə] [uː] moved NB unstressed you [jə] [aɛ] buy no tokens [aʊ ~ aː] count [kaʊnt]; went down [wɛnt daːn] on the shop NB our [aː], hour [aʊə] [ɪː] years [eː] there [ɑː] part [ɔː] towards [ɔː] four no tokens [ɪ] factory [ə] cheaper [ə] area no tokens

5.6 Leicester 

started morning

 163

[ɪ] wanted [ɪ] packing

(be)cause [(bɪ)kʊs], nothing [nʊθɪŋ], us [ʊz], one [wɒn] NG-fronting H-dropping L-vocalisation yod dropping secondary contraction of reduction L-deletion linking R intrusive R

packing [pakɪn] half an hour [ɑːf ən aʊə] samples [sampʊz] duty [duːtɪ]; Tuesday [tuːzdɪ] I didn’t [dɪnʔ] want to go down there quite a number of jobs [kwaɛt ə nʊmbəɹ ə ʤɒbz] called [kɔːd] half an hour for us lunch-time [fɒɹ ʊz lʊnʃtaɛm] tobacco and what have you [təbakəɹ ən wɒt hav jə]

5.5.3 Grammatical points of interest possessive us

we only had half an hour for us lunch-time

progressive simple past otiose do invariant there was bare infinitive

just sat there they just asked you if you wanted to take an early retirement so I did do there was thousands you’d got nothing else do the rest of the week

preposition deletion

down Lenton you know

5.6 Leicester Millennium Memory Bank recording with Brian Basford (shoe factory worker & engineer, b. Leicester, aged 65) Recorded by Jo Hollis, January 1999 BL Shelfmark C900/09073 – excerpt available at http://sounds.bl.uk/Accentsand-dialects/Millenium-memory-bank/021M-C0900X09073X-0100V1 Brian talks about his first job at the Co-Op shoe factory and describes how he met his wife Brian:

I was in the clicking room that was cutting the uppers the leather uppers not the soles or anything that the uppers of the shoe like the vamp the quarters the backstay and all that only on the linings though you had to be um you had to know how to cut a skin up imagine a an uh an animal

164 

Jo: Brian: Jo: Brian:

Jo: Brian:

Jo: Brian:

 5 Annotated transcripts

and it’s cut down the middle and opened up you know like that so you’ve got its legs apart you know up to about there you got to know how to put a pattern on and then cut round it you see and that’s your quarters your vamps and what have you you know tongue and uh you know the linings we did the linings for a start leather linings and then as you got older you progressed to the out … what they called the outsides the proper leather of the shoe you know and that’s what I got taught and I used hae to go to day school for this as well but they taught me all soles insoles and things like that machining you know what all the machining entailed c … it all got little how can I put it you like a raw edge or a turned over edge but mi … the ladies’d know more about that than I do but I do know because I before I went in the army I were on samples at the Co-Op you know you did a you had your designer Tom he were a good lad mind you he’s dead now poor devil he lived at Whetstone and uh [laughs] he used to design it I used hae to cut the patterns from his design I used to have to make the patterns and it went in the pattern room they’d cut the cardboard up and bind them so that it’s ready for going into the manufacturing side you see right yeah and I’d done all that so everyone had their little jobs that’s right and then when I were nineteen I di … I stopped there till I were nineteen and then I went in the army for two years and I was in the Leicester’s I went in my own regiment so oh aye yeah did you like it no [laughs] worst two years of my life really it were well it were wasted time I I had to give up a good job you know I were on the samples there used to have a white smock papers under my arm and go round that factory you know and telling other people what we wanted doing and but when I came back from doing my National Service I had to go back on the shop floor again as you might say and uh me and the foreman fell out a bit you know I think I were a little bit so they put you back yeah it it upset me a bit you know it wasn’t the same any more Jo so I left there and uh I went to quite a few other uh shoe firms but they weren’t much good the money wasn’t very good you know different firms and as I say then I met the wife and got married and then well just before I met the wife I went to into electrical electrical engineering and that’s [inaudible] Grace Road there you know on the way up to the County Ground there and that’s where I met the wife anyway you know

5.6 Leicester 

Jo: Brian:

Jo: Brian: Jo: Brian:

 165

she was working there no she was in the hosiery she was a linker and she used to earn more money than me she had you know linking men’s hose you know doing the on the linking machines aye she used to earn some damned good money really paid well you know can you remember what you were paid on the shoes about twenty-six shilling in old money right you’d pay your mam about seven shilling board or summat like that and the rest were you for yourself like you know or whatever you could afford you know

5.6.1 Glossary aye backstay

= =

clicking room hae linker

= = =

mam oh aye quarter

= = =

summat vamp

= =

yes short strip of leather connecting quarters down back of shoe/boot workshop in which upper components of shoe/boot are cut out to have worker (generally female) responsible for machine joining together loops of fabric in hosiery trade mother yes (confirming/contradicting) upper part of shoe/boot behind vamp and covering sides and back something part of shoe/boot covering front of foot

5.6.2 Phonological points of interest kit dress trap lot strut foot bath

[ɪ] skin [ɛ] dead [a] vamp [ɒ] smock [ʊ] cut NB tongue [tɒŋ] [ʊ] good no tokens

166 

 5 Annotated transcripts

cloth nurse fleece face palm thought goat goal goose price choice mouth near square start north force cure happy letter comma horses started morning

no tokens [əː > eː] firms [fəːmz]; worst [weːst] [iː] people [ɛi] day NB again [əgɛn] no tokens [ɔː] taught [əʊ] hose NB go [gʊ], going [gʊɪn] [ɔʊ] soles [uː] shoe [ɑː > ɑɪ] bind [bɑɪːnd]; time [tɑɪm] NB my [mɪ, mɑː] [ɔɪ] boiled [aʊ ~ aː] round [ɹaʊnd]; fell out [fɛl aːt] [ɪː] years [ɛː] there [ɑː] start [ɔː] quarters [ɔː] afford no tokens [ɪ] arm [ə] uppers no tokens no tokens [ɪ] wanted [ɪ] shilling

because [bɪkʊs] T-glottaling NG-fronting H-dropping L-vocalisation of reduction them contraction linking R intrusive R weak-strong contrast

cut round it [kʊʔ ɹaʊnd ɪt] about twenty-six shilling [ʃɪlɪn] men’s hose [mɛnz əʊz] samples [sampʊz] the proper leather of the shoe [ðə pɹɒpə lɛðəɹ ə ðə ʃuː] bind them [bɑːɪnd ʊm] leather uppers [lɛðəɹ ʊpəz] a raw edge [ə ɹɔːɹ ɛʤ] as you got older you progressed [pɹəʊgɹɛst] what all the machining entailed [ɛntɛɪʊd]

5.6 Leicester 

5.6.3 Grammatical points of interest the premodification

then I met the wife and got married

zero plural

you’d pay your mam about seven shilling board

were generalisation

he were a good lad

discourse like

the rest were you for yourself like

 167

6 Annotated bibliography and references 6.1 Geography, demography, and cultural factors Beckett, J.V. 1988. The East Midlands from AD 1000. London: Longman. This book deals with the history of the East Midlands, with individual chapters dealing with different eras. Britain, David (ed.). 2007. Language in the British Isles. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. This is a collection of chapters examining different varieties of English used in The British Isles. It also includes chapters on the Celtic languages and Other languages used in the British Isles. Culpeper, Jonathan. 2005. History of English. London: Routledge. There are many books which consider the history of the English language and many of these are cited in chapter 1. This book includes examples, maps and questions to answer and is particularly suitable for initial research. Foulkes, Paul & Gerard Docherty. (eds.). Urban voices. London: Arnold. This edited collection features descriptions of varieties of English and allows comparisons to be made across such varieties. It also includes a chapter which examines Derby by Paul Foulkes and Gerard Docherty. Hughes, Arthur, Peter Trudgill & Dominic Watt. 2012. English accents and dialects. London: Hodder Arnold. This book examines variation across varieties of English and deals with regional and social variation as well as phonology, lexis and morpho-syntactic variation. Included in its regional varieties is a section on Leicester and the book is accompanied by a CD with language recordings. Kortmann, Bernd & Clive Upton (eds.). 2008. Varieties of English 1: The British Isles. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. This is a collection of chapters which examines phonological, morphological and syntactic variation of The British Isles. Pearce, Michael. 2009. A perceptual dialect map of North East England. Journal of English Linguistics 39(3). 162–192. This article investigates how the language of the north-east of England is perceived by non-linguists. This is an interesting comparison to the East Midlands as it is a variety which is well recognised nationally and is a salient variety in media, including TV and celebrities. Trudgill, Peter. 1999. The dialects of England. 2nd edition. Oxford: Blackwell. This book considers how dialects were grouped historically and in modern varieties of English. It also investigates pronunciation, dialect words and grammar of such varieties. Wales, Katie. 2000. North and South: An English linguistic divide? English Today 16(1). 4–15. This article examines the very important perceptual divide in the UK, that of the north and the south. The East Midlands is a region which does not clearly fit into either category. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781501502354-006

6.2 Phonetics and phonology 

 169

Wells, J.C. 1986. Accents of English 2: The British Isles. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. This book contains the description of various accents of English spoken in the British Isles, identification of phonological processes which can be found in such varieties and attempts to bring together previous work carried out on such varieties to allow for a comparison of such varieties.

6.2 Phonetics and phonology BBC Voices Recordings. BBC, UK, rec. 2004–2005 [digital audio files]. British Library, C1190. This collection of sound recordings consists of 283 group conversations with members of the public across the UK based on a discussion of 40 everyday words and reflections on the language(s), accent(s) and dialect(s) people use and encounter in their daily lives. Evolving English: VoiceBank. British Library, UK, rec. 2010–2011 [digital audio files]. British Library, C1442. This partially catalogued audio archive consists of c. 14,000 recordings made by visitors to the British Library’s Evolving English exhibition. Contributors were encouraged to record a reading passage designed to capture their accent and/or ‘donate’ examples of vernacular lexis. Foulkes, P. & G. Docherty. (eds.). Urban voices. London: Arnold. This edited collection features descriptions of varieties of English and allows comparisons to be made across such varieties. It also includes a chapter which examines Derby by Paul Foulkes and Gerard Docherty. Hughes, A., P. Trudgill & D. Watt. 2012. English Accents and Dialects: An Introduction to Social and Regional Varieties of English in the British Isles, 4th edn. London: Hodder Arnold. This book examines variation across varieties of English and deals with regional and social variation as well as phonology, lexis and morpho-syntactic variation. Included in its regional varieties is a section on Leicester and the book is accompanied by a CD with language recordings. Millennium Memory Bank. BBC, UK, rec. 1998–1999 [digital audio files]. British Library, C900. This substantial archive of oral history recordings was created by BBC Local Radio and the British Library including c. 500 speakers recorded by BBC Radio Derby, BBC Radio Nottingham and BBC Radio Leicester. Orton, H., W. Halliday, M. Barry, P. Tilling & M. Wakelin. (eds.) 1962–1971. Survey of English Dialects (A) Introduction; (B): The Basic Material (4 volumes). Leeds: E.J. Arnold. This publication constitutes the complete set of data collected during fieldwork in 313 localities across England, presented in the form of transcribed responses to a questionnaire containing over 1,300 items. This survey represents the first and most comprehensive study of vernacular speech in England. Survey of English Dialects. University of Leeds, UK, rec. 1952–1974 [digital audio files]. British Library, C908. This collection consists of sound recordings made in 288 localities to complement the published data deriving from the corresponding fieldwork questionnaire. Conversations were unscripted

170 

 6 Annotated bibliography and references

and unrehearsed and capture informants reflecting on work, family and village life, and domestic routine at the start of the 20th century. Wells, J.C. 1986. Accents of English 2: The British Isles. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. This book contains the description of various accents of English spoken in The British Isles, identification of phonological processes which can be found in such varieties and attempts to bring together previous work carried out on such varieties to allow for a comparison of such varieties.

6.3 Morphology and syntax BBC Voices Recordings. BBC, UK, rec. 2004–2005 [digital audio files]. British Library, C1190. This collection of sound recordings consists of 283 group conversations with members of the public across the UK based on a discussion of 40 everyday words and reflections on the language(s), accent(s) and dialect(s) they use and encounter in their daily lives. Evans, A. 1881. Leicestershire Words, Phrases and Proverbs collected by A.B. Evans. London: A.B. Evans. This book presents an alphabetical glossary of words, phrases and proverbs to illustrate Leicestershire dialect and includes a set of dialect specimens and notes on pronunciation and grammar. Millennium Memory Bank. BBC, UK, rec. 1998–1999 [digital audio files]. British Library, C900. This substantial archive of oral history recordings was created by BBC Local Radio and the British Library in 1998 and 1999 including c. 500 speakers recorded by BBC Radio Derby, BBC Radio Nottingham and BBC Radio Leicester. Orton, H., W. Halliday, M. Barry, P. Tilling & M. Wakelin. (eds.) 1962–1971. Survey of English Dialects (A) Introduction; (B): The Basic Material (4 volumes). Leeds: E.J. Arnold. This publication constitutes the complete set of data collected during fieldwork in 313 localities across England, presented in the form of transcribed responses to a questionnaire containing over 1,300 items and representing the first and most comprehensive study of vernacular speech in England. Milroy, J. & L. Milroy. (eds.) 1993. Real English. The grammar of English Dialects in the British Isles. London: Longman. This book examines regional variation in spoken English grammar, presents case studies of specific varieties and considers the implications of this for education. It includes a useful directory of dialect resources arranged by county. Survey of English Dialects. University of Leeds, UK, rec. 1952–1974 [digital audio files]. British Library, C908. This collection consists of sound recordings made in 288 localities to complement the published data deriving from the corresponding fieldwork questionnaire. Conversations were unscripted and unrehearsed and capture informants reflecting on work, family and village life, and domestic routine at the start of the 20th century.

6.4 Lexis 

 171

6.4 Lexis Beal, Joan. 2009. Enregisterment, commodification and historical context: ‘Geordie’ versus ‘Sheffieldish’. American Speech 84(2). 138–156. This article examines the commodification of two regional varieties of English and how this has changed over time. Beeton, John. 1999. Nottingham as it is spoke. Nottingham: JB Enterprises. This four-volume pamphlet series, the author of which is a local cabinet-maker turned audiologist. The four booklets give extensive examples of local language and highlight the importance of examining local varieties and their distinctive features. Davies, Diane. 2015. Leicestershire Dialect. Sheffield: Bradwell Books. This book examines the language of Leicestershire and includes a dictionary as well as anecdotes about local festivals, village life and place names to illustrate local accent and dialect. Field, John. 2004. Discovering place-names. Their origins and meanings, 4th edition. Oxford: Shire Publications. This book gives background and information about place names and their heritage from around the UK, with plenty of evidence and examples. Forster, W. 1969. Pit-Talk: A survey of terms used by miners in the South Midlands. Leicester: Vaughan Papers in Adult Education. This book examines language used by coal miners in the South Midlands in the late 1960s. This allows for interesting comparison with other regions and times. Franks, Angela. 2001. Nottinghamshire miners’ tales. Nottingham: Adlard Print. This book is a collection of coal miners’ memories from Nottinghamshire, allowing for ‘pit talk’ to be examined in usage. Robinson, Jonathan. 2015. Evolving English WordBank. Sheffield: Bradwell Books. This book is a glossary of present-day English dialect and slang, taken from the recordings made at the Evolving English WordBank exhibition held at The British Library in 2010. Scollins, Richard & John Titford. 2000. Ey up mi duck! Dialect of Derbyshire and the East Midlands. Newbury: Countryside Books. This is probably the most famous book examining language of the East Midlands. Although it originally set out to focus on one particular variety, that of Ilkeston in Derbyshire, many of its findings are valid to much of the East Midlands. This book contains descriptions, stories, pictures and cartoons to illustrate local dialect. This popular book was supposed to focus on Ilkeston, in Derbyshire, but the writers themselves comment in the introduction that many of these forms are found in Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire and Leicestershire. Smith, Mike. 2013. Derbyshire Dialect. Sheffield: Bradwell Books. This book examines the language of Derbyshire and includes a dictionary as well as local customs and festivals, sport and place names to examine local accent and dialect. Wright, Peter. 1975. Derbyshire drawl: How it is spoke. Skipton: Dalesman Publishing. This ‘mini book’ as the author refers to it deals in a humorous fashion with local language variation and contain some pictures and quizzes to test the reader’s local knowledge of Derbyshire.

172 

 6 Annotated bibliography and references

Peter Wright was an SED fieldworker and academic linguist, so these findings can be treated as linguistically accurate. Upton, Clive & Bethan Davies (eds.). 2013. Analysing 21st century British English. Conceptual and methodological aspects of the Voices project. London: Arnold. This collection of chapters examines different usages of the Voices project, looking both at regional and topical foci. Upton, Clive & J.D.A. Widdowson. 1999. An atlas of English dialects. Oxford: Oxford University Press. This book sets out some the key findings of the Survey of English Dialects and uses a series of maps and descriptions to examine variation found in this data across England. Wright, Peter. 1979. Notts natter: How it is spoke. Skipton: Dalesman Publishing. As the previous book, but this book deals with Nottinghamshire and typical life there. Anecdotes, pictures and themes such as weather, sports and culture, make both books by Peter Wright humorous and entertaining reading for non-linguists.

6.5 References cited in this text Algeo, John. 2009. The origins and development of the English language. Boston: Cengage Learning. Anderson, J. (ed.) 2014. Sky Sports Football Yearbook 2014–2015. London: Headline. Andersen, Gisle & Fretheim Thorstein (eds.) 2000. Pragmatic Markers and Propositional Attitude. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Barber, Charles. 2000. The English language. A historical introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Baugh, Albert C. & Thomas Cable. 2002. A history of the English language. London: Routledge. Bayard, D. 1990. ‘God help us if we all sound like this’: attitudes to New Zealand and other English accents’. In Alan Bell and Janet Holmes (eds.), New Zealand ways of speaking English, 67–96. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. BBC Radio 5 Live. 2010. Geoff Hoon: I got it ‘wrong’ [Online]. https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=a0VXbcR6qeA (23 May 2016). BBC Voices Recordings. BBC, UK, rec. 2004–2005 [digital audio files]. British Library, C1190. http://sounds.bl.uk/Accents-and-dialects/BBC-Voices Beal, Joan. 2006. Language and region. London: Routledge. Beal, Joan. 2008. English dialects in the North of England: phonology. In Bernd Kortmann & Clive Upton (eds.), Varieties of English 1: The British Isles, 122–144. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Beal, Joan. 2009. Enregisterment, commodification and historical context: ‘Geordie’ versus ‘Sheffieldish’. American Speech 84(2). 138–156. Beal, Joan. 2010. An introduction to regional Englishes. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Beal, Joan, Lourdes Burbano-Elizondo & Carmen Llamas. 2012. Urban North-Eastern English: from Tyneside to Teesside. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Beckett, J.V. 1988. The East Midlands from AD 1000. London: Longman. Beckett, John (ed.). 2006. A centenary history of Nottingham. Chichester: Phillimore. Beeston Hockey Club [Online] http://www.beestonhockeyclub.com/history (23 May 2016).

6.5 References cited in this text 

 173

Beeton, John. 1999. Nottingham as it is spoke. Four volumes. Nottingham: JB Enterprises. Bourne, Lindsey. 2015. Lincolnshire dialect. Sheffield: Bradwell Books. Booth, L (ed.). 2013. Wisden Cricketers’ Almanac 2013. London: John Wisden & Co. Braber, Natalie. 2014. The concept of identity in the East Midlands of England. English Today 30(2). 3–10. Braber, Natalie. 2015a. Language perception in the East Midlands. English Today 31(1). 16–26. Braber, N. 2015b. Nottinghamshire Dialect. Sheffield: Bradwell Books. Braber, Natalie. 2016. Dialect perception and identification in Nottingham. In Jennifer Cramer and Chris Montgomery (eds.), Cityscapes and perceptual dialectology: Global perspectives on non-linguists’ knowledge of the dialect landscape, 209–231. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Braber, Natalie. 2017. Pit talk in the East Midlands. In Natalie Braber and Sandra Jansen (eds.), Sociolinguistics in England, 243–274. Basingstoke: Palgrave. Braber, Natalie & Nicholas Flynn. 2015. The East Midlands: Nottingham. In Raymond Hickey (ed.), Researching Northern Englishes, 369–392. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Braber, Natalie & Nicholas Flynn. 2016. What’s n(j)ew in the East Midlands? An investigation into yod dropping. Paper presented at Northern Englishes Workshop, University of Edinburgh. Braber, Natalie, Claire Ashmore & Suzy Harrison. 2017. Pit Talk of the East Midlands. Sheffield: Bradwell Books. Britain, David (ed.). 2007. Language in the British Isles. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. British Basketball League. [Online] http://bbl.org.uk/competition-history/ (2 May 2017). British Library. 2005. BL Sounds: Millennium Memory Bank. [Online]. http://sounds.bl.uk/ Accents-and-dialects/Millenium-memory-bank (12 July 2016). Burnley, J.D. 1989. Sources of standardisation in Later Middle English. In Joseph B. Trahern (ed.), Standardizing English, 23–41. Knoxville: The University of Tennessee Press. Cameron, Kenneth. 1958. The Scandinavians in Derbyshire: The place-name evidence. Nottingham Medieval Studies 2(1). 86–118. Chambers, J.K. and Peter Trudgill. 1998. Dialectology. Second Edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Clark, Urszula & Esther Asprey. 2013. West Midlands English: Birmingham and the Black Country. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Culpeper, Jonathan. 2005. History of English. London: Routledge. Davies, Diane. 2015. Leicestershire Dialect. Sheffield: Bradwell Books. Davies, Diane and Natalie Braber (2011) An investigation into dialect through oral history: The East Midlands. Funded by the British Academy (2011–12). http://www.le.ac.uk/ emoha/community/dialect/home.html Defoe, Daniel. 1979. A tour through the whole island of Great Britain. First published 1724–6. Reprinted 1979. London: Penguin Books. Docherty, Gerard & Paul Foulkes. 1999. Derby and Newcastle: instrumental phonetics and variationist studies. In Paul Foulkes & Gerard Docherty (eds.), Urban voices, 47–71. London: Arnold. Duncan, P. & J. Holder. 2017. The death of dialect? Don’t believe a word of it. The Guardian, 13 March [Online]. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/mar/13/death-of-dialectdont-believe-a-word-british-library (8 December 2017). Duncan, P. & R. Obordo. 2017. British Library project discovers two new words – thanks to Guardian readers. The Guardian, 24 November [Online]. https://www.theguardian.com/

174 

 6 Annotated bibliography and references

science/2017/nov/24/british-library-project-discovers-two-new-words-thanks-to-guardian-readers (8 December 2017). East Midlands Regional Plan. 2009. London: The Stationery Office. East Midlands Tourist Board. 1981. Industrial heritage in the East Midlands. Nottingham: East Midlands Tourist Board. Edwards, K.C. (ed.) 1966. Nottingham and its region. Nottingham: British Association for the Advancement of Science. Ellis, S. 1956. Derbyshire Response Books. [manuscript] Leeds Archive of Vernacular Culture. LAVC/SED/2/2/8. University of Leeds: Brotherton Library. European Hockey Federation. [Online] http://eurohockey.org/bulletin/2014-eurohockey-clubcup-trophy-challenges-women-final-positions/ (23 May 2016). Evans, Arthur Benoni. 1881. Leicestershire words, phrases and proverbs collected by A.B. Evans. London: A.B. Evans. Evolving English: VoiceBank. British Library, UK, rec. 2010–2011 [digital audio files]. British Library, C1442. Fennell, Barbara. 2001. A history of English. A sociolinguistic approach. Oxford: Blackwell. Field, John. 2004. Discovering place-names. Their origins and meanings. Fourth edition. Oxford: Shire Publications. Fixtures Live. [Online] http://w.fixtureslive.com/comp/32686/table/Investec-Womens-HockeyLeague-Championships-2011-12 (23 May 2016). Flynn, Nicholas. 2007. A sociophonetic comparison of adolescent speech in two areas of Nottingham. Essex: University of Essex MA thesis. Flynn, Nicholas. 2010. Gender-based variation of word-final unstressed vowels by Nottingham adolescents. In Proceedings of the 2nd Summer School of Sociolinguistics, University of Edinburgh, 14th – 20th June 2010 Online Proceedings, Chie Adachi, Agata Daleszyńska, Anna Strycharz and Miriam Meyerhoff (eds), http://www.lel.ed.ac.uk/sssocio/proceedings/ Flynn, Nicholas. 2012. A sociophonetic study of Nottingham speakers. York: University of York PhD thesis. Fordyce, T. 2016. Leicester City win Premier League: the greatest sporting story ever? BBC, 3 May [Online]. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/36151505 (20 May 2016). Forster, W. 1969. Pit-Talk: A survey of terms used by miners in the South Midlands. Leicester: Vaughan Papers in Adult Education. Foulkes, Paul & Gerard Docherty. (eds.) 1999. Urban voices. London: Arnold. Franks, Angela. 2001. Nottinghamshire miners’ tales. Nottingham: Adlard Print. Freeborn, Dennis. 1992. From Old English to Standard English. London: Macmillan. Freeborn, Dennis. 2006. From Old English to Standard English. A coursebook in language variation across time. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan. Gelling, Margaret. 1978. Signposts to the past. Place-names and the history of England. London: J.M. Dent & Sons Ltd. Goodey, Brian. 1973. Perception of the environment. University of Birmingham: Centre for Urban and Regional Studies. Goodey, Brian, John Gold, Alan Duffett, & David Spencer. 1971. City Scene. An exploration into the image of Central Birmingham as seen by area residents. University of Birmingham: Centre for Urban and Regional Studies. Gover, J.E.B.; Allen Mawer and F.M. Stenton. 1999. The place-names of Nottinghamshire. Nottingham: English Place Name Society. Green, J. 2010. Green’s Dictionary of Slang. London: Chambers.

6.5 References cited in this text 

 175

Griffin, Alan R. 1971. Mining in the East Midlands 1550–1947. Plymouth: Frank Cass & Company Limited. Hancock, Ian & Loreta Todd (eds.) 2005. International English Usage. London: Routledge. Holland, F. Philip. 2008. Words of the White Peak. The disappearing dialect of a Derbyshire village. Buxton: Anecdotes Publishing. Hollywood Awards. 2014. Jack O’Connell Red Carpet Interview – Hollywood Film Awards 2014. [Online]. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hsjsbQEyueg (23 May 2016). Horobin, Simon. 2010. Studying the history of early English. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan. Horton, Albert & Peter Gutteridge. 2003. The geology of the East Midlands. Essex: Doppler Press. Hoskins, William G. 1951. The East Midlands and the Peak. London: Collins. Hughes, Arthur, Peter Trudgill & Dominic Watt. 2012. English accents and dialects. London: Hodder Arnold. Inoue, Fumio. 1999. Subjective dialect division in Great Britain. In Dennis Preston (ed.), The handbook of perceptual dialectology, volume 1, 161–176. Philadelphia: Benjamins. James, Joy. 2008. Yo’d mek a parson swear. Nottingham: Joy James. Johnstone, Barbara. 2009. Pittsburghese shirts: Commodification and the enregisterment of an urban dialect. American Speech 84(2). 157–191. Johnstone, Barbara. 2011. Dialect enregisterment in performance. Journal of Sociolinguistics 15(5). 657–679. Jones, Mark. 1999. The Phonology of Definite Article Reduction. In Clive Upton and Katie Wales (eds.), Dialectal Variation in English (Proceedings of the Harold Orton Centenary Conference 1998), 103–121. Leeds Studies in English 30. Kerswill, Paul. 2003. Dialect levelling and geographical diffusion in British English. In David Britain and Jenny Cheshire (eds.), Social dialectology: In honour of Peter Trudgill, 223–243. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Kerswill, Paul & Jonathan Culpeper. 2009. Standard English and Standardization. In Jonathan Culpeper, Francis Katamba, Paul Kerswill, Ruth Wodak & Tony McEnery (eds.), English language. Description, variation and context, 223–243. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Kerswill, Paul & Ann Williams. 2002. Dialect Recognition and Speech Community Focusing in New and Old Towns in England. In Daniel Long & Dennis Preston (eds.), The handbook of perceptual dialectology, volume 2, 173–204. Philadelphia: Benjamins. Keyworth and Local History Meeting Report. 2003. Available online http://keyworth-history.org. uk/about/reports/0310.htm (25 May 2017). Kortmann, Bernd & Kerstin Lunkenheimer (eds.) 2013. The electronic world atlas of varieties of English. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. [Online]. http://ewave-atlas.org (21 April 2016). Kortmann, Bernd & Clive Upton (eds.). 2008. Varieties of English 1: The British Isles. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Lawrence, D.H. 1997. Lady Chatterley’s lover. London: Penguin Popular Classics. Leicester Mercury. 2011 [Online] http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/leicester-s-rivalryneighbour-nott-new/story-14243359-detail/story.html (12 May 2017). Leicester Tigers. [Online] http://www.leicestertigers.com/club/history/milestones.php (23 May 2016). Leith, Dick. 1997. A social history of English. London: Routledge.

176 

 6 Annotated bibliography and references

Long, Daniel. 1999. Mapping nonlinguists’ evaluations of Japanese language variation. In Dennis Preston (ed.), The handbook of perceptual dialectology, volume 1, 199–226. Philadelphia: Benjamins. Lyth, Philip. 1989. A history of Nottinghamshire farming. Newark: Cromwell Press. Macfarlane, Robert. 2015. Landmarks. London: Penguin. Marlow, Lee. 2013. More, August 10, 2013. McArthur, Tom. 1998. Oxford concise companion to the English language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Maidment, J.A. 1995. A neglected feature of British East Midlands accents and its possible implications for the history of a vowel merger in English. In J. Windsor Lewis (ed.), Studies in general and English phonetics, 379–384. London: Routledge. Masters, J. 2016. Leicester City: could Premier League triumph be sport’s greatest achievement?, CNN, 3 May [Online]. http://edition.cnn.com/2016/04/29/sport/leicestercity-premier-league/ (20 May 2016). Mathisen, Anne Grethe. 1999. Sandwell, West Midlands: ambiguous perspectives on gender patterns and models of change. In Paul Foulkes & Gerard Docherty (eds.), Urban voices, 107–123. London: Arnold. Matt Daaaamon. 2010. Lauren Socha Interview for Series 2 of ‘Misfits’. [Online]. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8LtFqqznQT4 (2 October 2017). McKie, R. 2017. Do you pronounce ‘scone’ to rhyme with ‘cone’ or ‘gone’? It depends where you’re from. The Guardian, 23 April [Online]. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/ apr/23/how-do-you-pronounce-scone-answer-says-a-lot-english-language-dayshakespeare-birthday (2 October 2017). McIntyre, Dan. 2009. History of English. London: Routledge. Millennium Memory Bank. BBC, UK, rec. 1998–1999 [digital audio files]. British Library, C900. Selected excerpts available online: http://sounds.bl.uk/Accents-and-dialects/ Millenium-memory-bank Milroy, James. 1996. A current change in British English: Variation in (th) in Derby. Newcastle and Durham Working Papers in Linguistics 4. 213–222. Milroy, James and Lesley Milroy (eds.) 1993. Real English. The grammar of English Dialects in the British Isles. London: Longman. Molyneux, Frank & David Dwelly. 1992. The East Midlands. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Montague, Trevor. 2004. A to Z of sport. The compendium of sporting knowledge. London: Little Brown. Montgomery, Chris. 2007. Northern English dialects: A perceptual approach. Sheffield: The University of Sheffield PhD Thesis. Montgomery, Chris & Joan Beal. 2011. Perceptual dialectology. In Warren Maguire and April MacMahon (eds.), Analysing variation and change, 121–148. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Netball Super League. [Online] http://www.netballsl.com/competition/about-us/ (2 May 2017). Nevalainen, Terttu & Ingrid Tieken-Boon van Ostade. 2006. Standardisation. In Richard Hogg and David Denison (eds.), A history of the English language, 271–311. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Newbrook, Mark. 1999. West Wirral: norms, self-reports and usage. In Paul Foulkes & Gerard Docherty, (eds.), Urban voices, 90–106. London: Arnold.

6.5 References cited in this text 

 177

NME. 2012. Kasabian – 66 second interview. [Online]. https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=nJgkrIvWC1U (23 May 2016). Nottingham City of Literature. Available online: http://nottinghamcityofliterature.com/blog/ nottingham-word-of-the-week-tuffees (27 April 2017). Nottingham Panthers. [Online] http://www.panthers.co.uk/content/club-history (23 May 2016). Office for National Statistics. 2011. Available online https://www.ons.gov.uk/ census/2011census Office for National Statistics. 2015. Available online https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates/datasets/ censusoutputareaestimatesintheeastmidlandsregionofengland Official World Golf Ranking. [Online] http://www.owgr.com/en/Ranking/PlayerProfile. aspx?playerID=4052 (23 May 2016). Opie, I. & Opie, P. 1959. The Lore and Language of Schoolchildren. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Orton, Harold, Eugen Dieth, Willfrid Halliday, Michael Barry, P.M. Tilling & Martyn Wakelin. 1962–1971. Survey of English Dialects A and B: Introduction and The Basic Material. Introduction and 4 volumes, each of 3 parts. Leeds: E.J. Arnold & Son. Orton, Harold & Nathalia Wright. 1975. Word geography of England. Cambridge, US: Academic Press. Orton, Harold, Stewart Sanderson & John Widdowson. 1978. The linguistic atlas of England. London: Routledge. Osborne, R.H. 1966. Atlas of population change in the East Midland counties 1951–61. Nottingham: University of Nottingham. Oxford English Dictionary. [Online]. 2016. http://www.oed.com (7 January 2016). Palmer, Marilyn & Peter Neaverson. 1992. Industrial landscapes of the East Midlands. Sussex: Phillimore. Partridge. E. 1937. A dictionary of slang and unconventional English. London: G. Routledge & Sons. Pearce, Michael. 2009. A perceptual dialect map of North East England. Journal of English Linguistics 39(3). 162–192. Playford, A. 1956. Leicestershire Response Books. [manuscript] Leeds Archive of Vernacular Culture. LAVC/SED/2/2/13. University of Leeds: Brotherton Library. Press Association. 2012. Carl Froch Interview. [Online]. http://www.dailymotion.com/video/ xsf2pz_carl-froch-interview_sport (23 May 2016). Preston, Dennis. 1989. Perceptual dialectology. Dordrecht: Foris. Ramsammy, Michael and Danielle Turton. 2012. /ɪ,ə/-lowering in Manchest[ʌ]: Contextual patterns of gradient variabilit[ɛ]. Paper presented at the 20th Manchester Phonology Meeting, Manchester, 24th – 26th May 2012. Read, Colin. 1981. The East Midlands. Hyde: Westgate Educational Publishing Company. Regional Economic Strategy. 2006. Available online http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov. uk/20100528142817/http:/www.gos.gov.uk/497296/docs/229865/Panel_Report.pdf Robinson, Jonathan. 2005 (re-published 2007). Sounds: Accents and dialects. [Online]. http://sounds.bl.uk/accents-and-dialects/ (11 May 2017). Robinson, Jonathan. 2015. Evolving English WordBank. Sheffield: Bradwell Books. Robinson, Jonathan, Jon Herring & Holly Gilbert. 2013. Voices of the UK; the British Library description of the BBC Voices recordings collection. In Clive Upton & Bethan Davies (eds.), Analysing 21st century British English. Conceptual and methodological aspects of the voices project, 136–161. London: Arnold.

178 

 6 Annotated bibliography and references

Richard Bacon. 2010. BBC Radio 5 Live. 22 April, 14:00. [Online]. http://www.bbc.co.uk/ programmes/b00s2mk9 (11 May 2017). Schleef, Erik & Michael Ramsammy. 2013. Labio-dental fronting of /θ/ in London and Edinburgh: A cross-dialectal study. English Language and Linguistics 17(1). 25–54. Scollins, Richard & John Titford. 2000. Ey up mi duck! Dialect of Derbyshire and the East Midlands. Newbury: Countryside Books. Shorrocks, Graham. 1999. A grammar of the dialect of the Bolton area part 2: Morphology and syntax. Frankfurt Am Main: Peter Lang. Sillitoe, Alan. 1958. Saturday night and Sunday morning. London: W.H. Allen. Sillitoe, D. 2010. ‘Haitch’ or ‘aitch’? How do you pronounce ‘H’? [Online]. http://www.bbc.co.uk/ news/magazine-11642588 (23 May 2016). Smith, Mike. 2013. Derbyshire Dialect. Sheffield: Bradwell Books. Soanes, C. 2012. We were stood at the bar talking about continuous tenses. 3 October. OxfordWords blog. [Online]. http://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2012/10/continuous-tenses/ (23 May 2016). Stennett, Alan & Richard Scollins. 2006. Nobbut a yellerbelly! Newbury: Countryside Books. Stocker, David. 2006. England’s landscape. The East Midlands. London: Collins. Stoddart, Jana, Clive Upton & J.D.A. Widdowson. 1999. Sheffield dialect in the 1990s: re-visiting the concept of NORMs. In Paul Foulkes & Gerard Docherty (eds.), Urban voices, 72–89. London: Arnold. Stuart-Smith, Jane, Claire Timmins & Fiona Tweedie. 2007. ‘Talkin’ Jockney’? Variation and change in Glaswegian accent. Journal of Sociolinguistics 11(2). 221–260. Survey of English Dialects. University of Leeds, UK, rec. 1952–1974 [digital audio files]. British Library, C908. Excerpts available online: http://sounds.bl.uk/Accents-and-dialects/ Survey-of-English-dialects Sylvester-Bradley, P.C. & T.D. Ford. 1968. The geology of the East Midlands. Leicester: University of Leicester Press. Tagliamonte, Sali & Jennifer Smith. 2003. Either it isn’t or it’s not: NEG/AUX contraction in British dialects. English World-Wide 23 (2). 251–281. The Graham Norton Show, Series 21 Episode 3. 2017. BBC 1. 21 April, 22:35. http://www.bbc. co.uk/programmes/b08n91tc The Guardian, 8 December 2006. Airport’s name up in the air [online] http://www.theguardian. com/travel/2006/dec/08/travelnews.nema.namechange (15 May 2017). The Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics (NUTS). Available online http://ec.europa.eu/ eurostat/web/nuts/overview (25 May 2017). The Times, 16 May 2017. Letters to the editor. Thorne, S. 2003. Birmingham English: a sociolinguistic study. Birmingham: University of Birmingham PhD thesis. Tonge, James. 1907. Coal. London: Archibald Constable & Co. tootonica. 2015. ‘Unbroken’ Star Jack O’Connell explains the Derby phrase ‘Ay Up Me Duck’ on Conan. [Online]. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxQcERC1tmk (23 May 2016). Torgersen, Eivind. 2002. Phonological distribution of the FOOT vowel, /ʊ/, in young people’s speech in south-eastern British English. Reading Working Papers in Linguistics 6. 25–38. Townsend, Claire. 2006. Town, county and region: spatial integration in the East Midlands, 1700–1830. Leicester: University of Leicester PhD Thesis. Trudgill, Peter. 1974. The social differentiation of English in Norwich. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

6.5 References cited in this text 

 179

Trudgill, P. (ed.) 1978. Sociolinguistic Patterns in British English. London: Edward Arnold. Trudgill, Peter. 1999a. Norwich: endogenous and exogenous linguistic change. In Paul Foulkes, & Gerard Docherty (eds.), Urban voices, 124–140. London: Arnold. Trudgill, Peter. 1999b. The dialects of England. 2nd edition. Oxford: Blackwell. University of Leeds. 2003. Incidental Material Documents (SED). [Online]. https://library.leeds. ac.uk/specialcollections/collection/61/the_leeds_archive_of_vernacular_culture/74/ incidental_material_documents_sed (12 July 2016). Upton, Clive. 1995. Mixing and fudging in Midland and Southern Dialects of England: The cup and foot vowels. In J. Windsor Lewis (ed.), Studies in general and English phonetics, 385–394. London: Routledge. Upton, Clive. 2012. The Importance of Being Janus. In Manfred Markus, Yoko Iyeiri, Reinhard Henberger & Emil Chamson (eds.), Middle and Modern English corpus linguistics, 257–268. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Upton, Clive. 2013. Blurred boundaries: the dialect word from the BBC. In Clive Upton & Bethan Davies (eds.), Analysing 21st Century British English. Conceptual and Methodological Aspects of the Voices Project, 124–140. London: Arnold. Upton, Clive & Bethan Davies (eds.). 2013. Analysing 21st century British English. Conceptual and methodological aspects of the Voices project. London: Arnold. Upton, Clive & J.D.A. Widdowson. 1999. An atlas of English dialects. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Waddington, David; Chas Critcher; Bella Dicks and David Parry. 2001. Out of the ashes? The social impact of industrial contraction and regeneration on Britain’s mining communities. London: The Stationery Office. Wales, Katie. 2000. North and South: An English linguistic divide? English Today 16(1). 4–15. Wales, Katie. 2002. ‘North of the Watford Gap’. A cultural history of Northern English (from 1700). London: Routledge. Wallechinsky, David & Jaime Loucky (eds.). 2012. The Complete Book of the Olympics. London: Aurum. Watt, Dominic & Lesley Milroy. 1999. Patterns of variation and change in three Newcastle vowels: is this dialect levelling? In Paul Foulkes & Gerard Docherty (eds.), Urban voices, 25–46. London: Arnold. Wells, J.C. 1982. Accents of English: An introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Wells, J.C. 1986. Accents of English 2: The British Isles. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Wells, J.C. 2008. Longman pronunciation dictionary. 3rd edition. Harlow: Longman. Williams, Anne & Paul Kerswill. 1999. Dialect levelling: change and continuity in Milton Keynes, Reading and Hull: In Paul Foulkes & Gerard Docherty (eds.), Urban voices, 141–162. London: Arnold. Williams, Angie, Peter Garrett & Nikolas Coupland. 1999. Dialect recognition. In Dennis Preston (ed.), The handbook of perceptual dialectology, volume 1, 345–358. Philadelphia: Benjamins. Women’s British Basketball League. [Online] http://wbbl.org.uk/history/competition-history/ (2 May 2017). World Snooker. [Online] http://www.worldsnooker.com/players/mark-selby-2/ (2 May 2017). Wright, Peter. 1975. Derbyshire drawl: How it is spoke. Skipton: Dalesman Publishing. Wright, Peter. 1979. Notts natter: How it is spoke. Skipton: Dalesman Publishing.

Index Adlington, Rebecca 14 adverbs – comparative so as 109 – complementiser as 109 – complementiser so 109 – emphatic that 103 – unmarked adverb 102, 156 agriculture 21, 123, 126 Amber Valley 36 Anderson, Vivian (Viv) 11 Anglo-Saxon influence 116–117 Animals 124, 126–130, 163 Arnesby 18, 58 Arnold 41, 42, 45, 46, 50, 56, 57, 74, 78, 80, 84, 85, 92 Ashbourne 33, 34, 36, 39, 55, 93, 104, 117, 138 Ashby-de-la-Zouch 21 Bacon, Richard 24, 157 Bamford 16, 84 Barlestone 34, 41, 42, 46, 51, 87 BATH 22–26, 29, 34, 72, 73, 80 – master 23 BBC Voices Recordings 19, 21, 23, 24, 28, 37, 38, 104, 113, 136, 139, 140 be – bePASTNEG 94, 96, 97, 110 – bePRESNEG 85, 96, 98 – was generalisation 87 – was-weren’t split 87 – were generalisation 86, 87 Beal, Joan 7, 10, 15, 23, 53, 79, 111, 112, 132 Beckett, J.V. 1, 4, 7, 9, 15 Beeston Hockey Club 13 Beeton, John 6, 114 Belper 31, 35, 36, 41, 42, 46, 52, 58, 60, 82, 86, 92, 93, 101, 102, 105, 120, 140 birds 87, 127, 128, 130 Braber, Natalie 1, 6, 7, 10, 15, 21, 29, 39, 53, 61, 62, 76, 79, 83, 96, 104, 110, 115, 121, 123, 133, 135, 136 Britain, David 3, 6, 56, 59, 116, 117, 119, 121, 126 Burbage 16 https://doi.org/10.1515/9781501502354-007

Carlton Curlieu 16, 86 Celtic influence 115–116 Charlesworth 29, 31, 32, 34, 47, 51, 55, 58, 65, 77, 79, 81, 82, 84, 85, 88, 92, 94, 97, 103, 105 CHOICE 47, 147, 151, 155, 159, 162, 166 CLOTH 29–30, 48, 147, 151, 155, 158, 162, 166 – wash 30 Clough, Brian 11 coal industry 9, 10 Coalville 28, 37, 42, 44, 78, 80, 82–86, 89, 92, 99, 100, 103, 104, 140 cob 25, 112, 133, 142 Coe, Baron Sebastian (Seb) 14 commA 38, 40, 48, 51, 52, 147, 152, 156, 159, 162, 166 commodification 75, 132, 133 Coplow Dale 29, 33–35, 41, 46, 47, 52, 69, 78, 85, 88 Crich 37, 40, 41, 46, 50, 52, 69, 71, 85, 87, 94, 95, 100, 103 Cuckney 16 Culpeper, Jonathan 4, 5 CURE 47–49, 147, 152, 156, 159, 162, 166 Daly, Helen Elizabeth (Tess) 55 Davies, Diane 21, 39, 53, 61, 88, 115, 116, 118, 119 definite article – definite article reduction (DAR) 63–64, 78, 139 – the premodification 80 – zero definite article 79, 80 demonstratives – demonstrative them 108 – determiner them 152, 156, 160 – here-there reinforcement 77 – yon 77 Derby – Derby County 11 – Derbyshire County Cricket Club 12 dialect levelling 111 Docherty, Gerard and Paul Foulkes 6–7, 21, 23, 26, 28, 32–38, 40–41, 43, 45–46, 49–50, 54, 56, 60–61, 79

182 

 Index

Donington Park 15 DRESS 38, 44, 146, 151, 155, 158, 162, 165 – get-never-yes 31 – very 32 duck 104, 108–109, 112, 133, 136–137 Dukki 74, 132–135, 137 Eastwood 3, 18, 25, 42, 46, 52, 102, 104, 140 elision 64–68 – consonant cluster reduction 67 – definite article reduction (DAR) 63 – give-have 66 – it reduction 66–67 – preposition reduction 64–66 – syllable deletion 66–67 – them contraction 66 epenthesis 70–71 Erewash Valley 76, 115 Evans, A.B. 21, 76, 83–84, 96, 99, 103–104, 110, 160 Evolving English (British Library exhibition)  52, 110, 113, 169 FACE 43–44 – again-break-make-say-take 44 –  43–44 – they 44 farming 126–131 Field, John 116–119 FLEECE 32, 35–36, 47, 147, 151, 155, 159, 162, 166 – been-seen-week 36 – freeze-he-meat-she-three-we 36 FOOT 26–29, 146, 151, 155, 158, 162, 165 – FOOT-fronting 27 –  29 FORCE 34–35, 147, 152, 156, 159, 162, 166 Forster, W. 121 Foulkes, Paul and Gerard Docherty 6–7, 21, 23, 26, 28, 32–38, 40–41, 43, 45–46, 49–50, 54, 56, 60–61, 79 Franks, Angela 121 Froch, Carl 13 Goadby 16–17, 28, 31, 35, 60, 77, 84 GOAT 30, 35, 40–43, 61, 72, 120, 147, 151, 155, 159, 162, 166

– broke-home-froze-only-open-over 42 – doPRESNEG 43 – go-goes-going 41 – GOAL 41, 43, 45 –  40 – so 43 – willPRESNEG 43 GOOSE 38–41, 49, 61–62, 127, 147, 151, 155, 159, 162, 166 – GHOUL 39 – GOOSE-fronting 38–39 – too-you 39–40 Great Dalby 25, 37, 63, 79, 91, 100 Groby 16–17, 25, 37, 63, 79, 91, 100 H 58–59 – H-dropping 58 – hypercorrection 58 happY 49–51 –  50 Harby 16–17, 29, 31, 37, 77, 79, 92, 97–98, 101–102, 107 Hathern 16–17, 25, 28–29, 31, 48, 54, 60, 63, 79, 84, 98, 102, 105 have 87–89 – enclitic have 88 – full verb have 87–88 – hae-han 88 – has generalisation 88 – have generalisation 86–87 – havePASTNEG 70 – havePRESNEG 70, 85 Heanor 18, 25, 27–29, 31, 33–37, 39–50, 52, 54–55, 57–58, 62–63, 65–67, 69–71, 74, 78, 80–82, 85, 88–93, 95, 97–98, 100, 103, 105–106, 133, 138, 140 Hinckley 18, 27, 33, 38, 41, 46, 52, 54, 70, 86 Hoon, Geoffrey (Geoff) 24, 119 horsES 35, 54, 63, 71–72, 79, 147, 152, 156, 159, 162, 166 Hughes, Arthur, Peter Trudgill and Dominic Watt 6–7, 21, 23, 26, 32, 40, 43, 45, 54, 61 Ilkeston 21, 76, 79, 96, 116, 120 indefinite article – a-an distinction 58 – zero indefinite article 79, 152

Index 

Industrial Revolution 9 insects 130 intensifiers 101–102 – dead 101 – right 101 – well 102 Johnson, Martin 14 Kimberley 18, 33, 35–37, 39, 41–43, 46, 57, 71, 78, 84–85, 90, 92, 100 Kirkby-in-Ashfield 18, 33, 35, 37, 41–42, 46, 50, 52, 63, 65, 78, 85, 95, 98, 140 KIT 54–55, 146, 151, 155, 158, 162, 165 – gie-give 30–31 – mister 30–31 knitting frame 9 Kniveton 16–17, 25, 28, 31, 34, 48, 65–66, 69, 81, 88, 93–94, 96–97, 100, 103, 105, 117, 138, 145–149 Kortmann, Bernd and Clive Upton 6–7, 20, 76, 98 L – clear L 60 – dark L 60 – L-deletion 61 – L-vocalisation 61 Larwood, Harold 12–13 Lawrence, D.H. 10, 108, 122, 134, 142 Leicester – Leicester City 11, 18 – Leicester Hockey Club 13 – Leicester Riders 13 – Leicestershire County Cricket Club 11–12 – Leicester Tigers 14 lettER 38, 40, 51–53, 72, 133, 140, 147, 152, 156, 159, 162, 166 –  52 like – discourse like 105–107 – quotative be like 105 Lineker, Gary 11 ‘local’ vocabulary 114–115, 127, 131, 133, 143 LOT 42 – LOT-CLOTH split 29 – wasp 30

 183

Loughborough – Loughborough Lightning 14 – Loughborough University 14 Lutterworth 18, 41, 44, 46, 51, 91 Mansfield 14, 18, 24–25, 30–31, 33–35, 37–50, 54, 56, 60–68, 70–71, 78, 80, 82–88, 90–92, 94–98, 100–104, 106, 110, 116, 138 mardy 33, 50–51, 112, 133–136 Markfield 16–17, 25, 30–31, 38, 55, 62, 78, 88, 97, 100, 102, 128 McClure, Vicky 73 Meden Vale 18, 30, 39, 41, 43, 45, 85, 90–91, 93, 99, 105 media representation 3, 10, 15, 22, 111, 131 Meighan, Thomas (Tom) 73 Millennium Memory Bank (MMB) 17, 157, 160, 163 Milroy, J. and L. Milroy 6, 46, 76 mining 120–125 mornING 34, 54, 152, 156, 159, 163, 166 MOUTH 35, 39, 44–45, 72, 127, 147, 151, 155, 159, 162, 166 –  45 – our 45 NEAR 38, 47–49 – there-where 48–49 negation 69, 94–98 – ain’t 97–98 – auxiliary contraction 94–95 – bePASTNEG 97 – bePRESNEG 97 – canPASTNEG 97 – canPRESNEG 97 – dialectal  96–97 – doPASTNEG 97 – doPRESNEG 97 – havePASTNEG 97 – havePRESNEG 97 – invariant don’t 98 – multiple negation 97–98, 109, 148, 156 – secondary contraction 95–96 – willPASTNEG 97 – willPRESNEG 97 nesh 140–141

184 

 Index

New Houghton 18, 39, 42, 45, 54, 62, 85, 87–88, 93, 130 New Mills 55 NG 57–58 – NG-fronting 159, 163, 166 –  57 – velar nasal plus 57–58 Norman influence 119–120 NORTH 20, 24, 31, 34–35, 47, 49, 71–72, 88, 101 northern subject rule 87–88 north-south divide 23 North Wheatley 16–17, 25, 31, 62, 77–78, 81, 84, 99, 102 Nottingham – Nottingham Forest 11 – Nottingham Panthers 14 – Nottinghamshire County Cricket Club 12 – Nottingham Wildcats 13 – Notts County 11 nouns 57–58, 77, 80–85, 100 – irregular plural 160 – zero plural 148, 152, 167 nowt 34, –35, 55, 69, 86, 96, 98, 109, 145–146, 148, 154–156 NURSE 36–38, 75, 147, 151, 155, 159, 162, 166 – bePASTNEG 37 – first-worse 37 – girl 37–38 O’Connell, Jack 72, 104 Orton, H, W. Halliday, M. Barry, P. Tilling and M. Wakelin 6, 16, 76, 113 Otiose do 163 Otiose what 103–104 owt 31, 34–35, 70, 97, 109, 114, 149–150, 152–153 Oxton 16–17, 25, 28, 31–32, 35, 37, 42, 55, 66, 79, 88, 92, 98, 100–101, 105, 128, 130, 149–150 Packington 16, 32 PALM 32–34, 37, 52, 72, 147, 151, 155, 159, 162, 166 – aunt 34 – canPRESNEG 33–34 – father-half 33 Peak District 10, 33, 69, 96

Pearce, Michael 10, 15 Pit Talk 121–122, 125, 130–131, 137, 139–140, 142 place names 3, 50, 99, 111, 115–120, 132 Potteries 29, 33, 69, 96 pre-lateral breaking 43, 45 prepositions 45, 64–65, 68, 77, 99–101, 109, 114, 116 – double preposition 101 – in reduction 65, 152, 156 – of reduction 148, 152, 156, 160, 163, 166 – over reduction 65 – preposition deletion 99 – preposition substitution 100 – to reduction 65 – with reduction 65 – zero habitual to 65 PRICE 45–47, 147, 151, 155, 157, 159, 162, 166 –  47 – my 46 – PRIZE 46 pronouns 36, 44, 57–58, 66, 68, 77, 107–108, 110 – historic hoo 82 – personal pronouns 81–82 – possessive pronouns 82–83 – possessive us 83, 107, 156, 163 – pronoun exchange 46, 81–83, 107, 148 – reflexive pronouns 83–84 – relative as 148, 156 – relative pronouns 84–85 – second person forms 81, 107 – singular object us 160 Queen of the Midlands 9 Quorn 18, 44, 46, 51 R 59–60 – intrusive R 68 – labiodental R 60 – linking R 68 – tapped R 56 Received Pronunciation (RP) 23 rhoticity 32, 34, 47, 51, 68 Robinson, Jonathan (Jonnie) 21, 77, 88, 93, 114, 136, 138 Roman influence 116

Index 

Scollins, Richard and John Titford 6, 21, 38, 76, 79, 82, 96, 101, 104, 111, 115, 119–120, 127, 130, 136, 138, 141–142 Seagrave 16–17, 49, 55, 62, 84–85, 100, 103, 107 Selby, Mark 14 Sheepy Magna 16–17, 25, 48, 57, 63, 65–66, 70, 78–79, 81, 83, 89, 94, 97, 99–100, 105, 107 Sillitoe, Alan 10, 28, 40, 59, 108, 134, 136, 142 Smith, Mike 21, 76, 79, 83, 95–96, 102, 104, 115, 127–129, 131, 138–139, 141–142 smoothing 46–48 snap 122 Socha, Lauren 53, 73 Sounds (sounds.bl.uk website) 17, 21, 76–77, 113, 145, 149, 153, 157, 160, 163 South Clifton 16–17, 25, 31, 84, 86, 98–99, 105, 127–128 SQUARE 47–49, 147, 151, 156, 159, 162, 166 Standard English 89, 93, 99–100, 102, 114, 133 Stoke on Trent 20–21, 36, 57 Stonebroom 16–17, 28, 37, 55, 57, 78, 88, 103 START 34, 72, 147, 151–152, 156, 159, 162, 166 startED 54, 56, 72, 147, 152, 156, 159, 163, 166 STRUT 26–29, 57, 72, 146, 149, 151, 155, 158, 162, 165 – bugger-mother-tongue 28 – once-one-none-nothing 27 – STRUT-FOOT split 26–27, 29 style shifting 54 Survey of English Dialects (SED) – Basic material 16, 25, 27–32, 34–35, 39–42, 45, 51, 54–55, 71, 76, 81 – Incidental material 16, 25, 63, 79, 137 Sutton-in-Ashfield 45 Sutton on the Hill 16–17, 25, 81–82, 89, 99, 110, 138 Swadlincote 18, 25, 27–29, 31, 33–37, 39–49, 52–54, 56–57, 62–72, 77–78, 82–83, 85, 88–97, 99–104, 106, 133, 138, 140, 157–160 T – T-glottaling 55–56, 59, 159, 166 – T-tapping 55–56, 152 – T-voicing 55–56 – T to R 56, 132, 148, 159

 185

TH – TH-fronting 59 THOUGHT 34–35 – alter-false-fault-salt 35 –  35 – water 35 Tilton-on-the-Hill 27, 46, 51, 62 Tonge 18, 31, 4, 55, 62, 67, 120 TRAP 22–25, 129, 146, 151, 155, 158, 162, 165 – hae-have 25 – man 25 – TRAP-BATH split 23, 29 Trent, The 9, 12, 17, 77, 120, 126, 149 Trent Bridge 12 triphthongs 39, 41, 45–46 – pre-lateral breaking 45 Trudgill, Peter 5–7, 26, 57, 62, 95 Two Dales 18, 27, 35, 39–40, 43, 46–50, 52, 54, 56, 60–61, 63, 65–72, 78, 82, 84, 88, 95, 97, 103, 128, 140 Ullesthorpe 16–17, 25, 28, 31, 37, 63, 79, 83, 86, 99, 102, 118, 143, 153–158 Upton, Clive and Bethan Davies 6–7, 19–20, 23, 26, 76, 113 verbs 85–94 – bare infinitive 89, 91–93 – for to infinitive 92 – generalised simple past 152 – generalised past participle 89 – historic present 105, 148, 152 – regularised past 42, 90, 156 – to infinitive 65, 91–92, 148, 160 – zero past 90, 109, 148, 160 Viking influence 115, 117–119 VoiceBank 52, 110, 113, 169 Voices of the UK (VoUK) 21 voicing – voicing contrast 70 Wales, Katie 6–7, 10, 15 weak-strong contrast 71–72 –  71 –  71 – them 72 Wellow 18, 30

186 

 Index

Wells, J.C. 7, 20–23, 26, 29–30, 32, 41, 47, 49, 56–57, 68 West Stockwith 18, 32–33, 37, 39, 42–43, 45, 71, 88 Westwood, Lee 13 wildlife 18, 130 Wirksworth 18, 29, 33, 41–42, 45–46, 50, 60, 65, 67–68, 70, 83–84, 86, 90 Woodward, Sir Clive 14

WordBank 111, 114, 131–133, 135, 139–143 Wright, Peter 6, 9, 21, 81, 96, 113–114, 116–117, 119–120, 129–131, 141–142 yod – yod coalescence 61–62, 160 – yod dropping 62, 75, 160, 163 Youlgreave 16–17, 32, 42, 51, 91, 98–99, 101