Variable rhoticity in Glasgow English: Sociolinguistic factors and abstractions vs. exemplars

Kamil Kaźmierski
Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań, Poland

ICPhS 2023 Prague :: August 7-11, 2023

kamil.kazmierski@amu.edu.pl
Slides available at: kazmierski-icphs2023.netlify.app

\(~\)

Photo credit: Rajmund Matuszkiewicz

1 / 22

Introduction: Presence of post-vocalic /r/

Scottish English is rhotic, and most or all vowels can occur before tautosyllabic /r/.

—Wells 1982: 407

2 / 22

Introduction: Presence of post-vocalic /r/

Scottish English is rhotic, and most or all vowels can occur before tautosyllabic /r/.

—Wells 1982: 407

Most Scottish speech is firmly rhotic, with /r/ retained in all positions where it occurred historically

—Wells 1982: 410

2 / 22

Introduction: Presence of post-vocalic /r/

Scottish English is rhotic, and most or all vowels can occur before tautosyllabic /r/.

—Wells 1982: 407

Most Scottish speech is firmly rhotic, with /r/ retained in all positions where it occurred historically

—Wells 1982: 410

Scottish English remains rhotic [...], although loss of post-vocalic R is reported in the speech of [working-class] Edinburgh children by Romaine (1978) and in Glaswegian [my emphasis] by Macafee (1983: 32). R-loss is also found in the 1997 data, mainly in the speech of [working-class] children.

—Stuart-Smith 1999: 210

2 / 22

Introduction

3 / 22

Is rise in non-rhoticity local?Glasgow
Working-class
Change from below
Independent innovation
Local
Sources: Macafee (1983), Stuart-Smith (1999)

4 / 22

Is rise in non-rhoticity local?Glasgow
Working-class
Change from below
Independent innovation
Local
Sources: Macafee (1983), Stuart-Smith (1999)

"Standard Scottish English"
Middle-class
Change from above
Influence of English English
Supra-local
Source: Schützler (2010)

4 / 22

Phonological Question

Does the variation in the presence of pre-consonantal /r/ in Glaswegian point to abstractions or phonetically rich exemplars in phonological storage?

5 / 22

Phonological Question

Does the variation in the presence of pre-consonantal /r/ in Glaswegian point to abstractions or phonetically rich exemplars in phonological storage?

Effect of class of vowels

⬇️

Abstractions

5 / 22

Phonological Question

Does the variation in the presence of pre-consonantal /r/ in Glaswegian point to abstractions or phonetically rich exemplars in phonological storage?

Effect of class of vowels

⬇️

Abstractions

Word-specific effects

⬇️

Exemplars

5 / 22

Method

Data: HCRC Map Task Corpus (Anderson et al. 1991)
- Speakers from Glasgow (N = 29)
- Interacting with familiar and unfamiliar participants
- Word-level time-aligned transcriptions (HCRC 2001)
Analysis:
- Corpus querying in Labb-CAT (Fromont & Hay 2012)
- 5,330 word tokens with pre-consonantal /r/ retrieved
- Manual annotation based on audition: vocalized, approximant, tap, or trill
- Mixed-effects Binomial Logistic Regresion Modeling with lme4 (Bates et al. 2015) in R (R Core Team 2022)

6 / 22

Example #1: Vocalized (male, 17, Glasgow)

7 / 22

Example #2: Approximant (female, 19, Glasgow)

8 / 22

Example #3: Tap (male, 30, Glasgow)

9 / 22

Example #4: Trill (male, 18, Glasgow)

10 / 22

Results11 / 22

Overall distribution

12 / 22

Results by rhoticity (excl. trills)

13 / 22

Individual variation

14 / 22

Rhoticity: familiarity by gender (empirical)

\(\chi^2(2) = 7.775, p < 0.05\)

15 / 22

Effect of vowel classBack vowels favor non-rhoticity (Dickson and Hall-Lew 2017)NORTH > FORCE > START > NEAR > SQUARE >> NURSE > lettER: back > front > central

16 / 22

Effect of vowel classBack vowels favor non-rhoticity (Dickson and Hall-Lew 2017)NORTH > FORCE > START > NEAR > SQUARE >> NURSE > lettER: back > front > central

vowel
class

a
back

ɔ
back

ʉ
central

ɜ
central

ə
central

e
front

ɪ
front

16 / 22

Effect of `vowel class`

Back vowels favor non-rhoticity (Dickson and Hall-Lew 2017)
- NORTH > FORCE > START > NEAR > SQUARE >> NURSE > lettER: back > front > central

vowel	class
a	back
ɔ	back
ʉ	central
ɜ	central
ə	central
e	front
ɪ	front

\(\chi^2(2) = 3.5951, p = 0.17\)

16 / 22

Effect of `(1|word)` beyond frequency

\(\chi^2(1) = 557.53, p < 0.05\)

17 / 22

Thank you!

Rhoticity rate: around 70%
- Most common realizations: [ɹ] > [ɾ], almost no [r]
gender:familiarity - non-rhoticity supra-local?
Word-specific effects: support for exemplars ✅
No effect of vowel class: no support for abstractions ❌

This research was supported by an NCN grant no. 2017/26/D/HS2/00027

kamil.kazmierski@amu.edu.pl
Photo credit: Rajmund Matuszkiewicz

18 / 22

Extras19 / 22

Margaret, 18, female :: Most non-rhotic speaker

20 / 22

Janie, 18, female :: Most rhotic speaker

21 / 22

Instruction giver

22 / 22

Instruction giver

Instruction follower

22 / 22

Help

Keyboard shortcuts

↑, ←, Pg Up, k

Go to previous slide

↓, →, Pg Dn, Space, j

Go to next slide

Home

Go to first slide

End

Go to last slide

Number + Return

Go to specific slide

b / m / f

Toggle blackout / mirrored / fullscreen mode

Clone slideshow

Toggle presenter mode

Restart the presentation timer

?, h

Toggle this help

Tile View: Overview of Slides

Toggle scribble toolbox

Variable rhoticity in Glasgow English: Sociolinguistic factors and abstractions vs. exemplars

Kamil Kaźmierski
Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań, Poland

ICPhS 2023 Prague :: August 7-11, 2023

kamil.kazmierski@amu.edu.pl
Slides available at: kazmierski-icphs2023.netlify.app

\(~\)

Photo credit: Rajmund Matuszkiewicz

1 / 22

Introduction: Presence of post-vocalic /r/

Scottish English is rhotic, and most or all vowels can occur before tautosyllabic /r/.

—Wells 1982: 407

2 / 22

Introduction: Presence of post-vocalic /r/

Scottish English is rhotic, and most or all vowels can occur before tautosyllabic /r/.

—Wells 1982: 407

Most Scottish speech is firmly rhotic, with /r/ retained in all positions where it occurred historically

—Wells 1982: 410

2 / 22

Introduction: Presence of post-vocalic /r/

Scottish English is rhotic, and most or all vowels can occur before tautosyllabic /r/.

—Wells 1982: 407

Most Scottish speech is firmly rhotic, with /r/ retained in all positions where it occurred historically

—Wells 1982: 410

Scottish English remains rhotic [...], although loss of post-vocalic R is reported in the speech of [working-class] Edinburgh children by Romaine (1978) and in Glaswegian [my emphasis] by Macafee (1983: 32). R-loss is also found in the 1997 data, mainly in the speech of [working-class] children.

—Stuart-Smith 1999: 210

2 / 22

Introduction

3 / 22

Is rise in non-rhoticity local?Glasgow
Working-class
Change from below
Independent innovation
Local
Sources: Macafee (1983), Stuart-Smith (1999)

4 / 22

Is rise in non-rhoticity local?Glasgow
Working-class
Change from below
Independent innovation
Local
Sources: Macafee (1983), Stuart-Smith (1999)

"Standard Scottish English"
Middle-class
Change from above
Influence of English English
Supra-local
Source: Schützler (2010)

4 / 22

Phonological Question

Does the variation in the presence of pre-consonantal /r/ in Glaswegian point to abstractions or phonetically rich exemplars in phonological storage?

5 / 22

Phonological Question

Does the variation in the presence of pre-consonantal /r/ in Glaswegian point to abstractions or phonetically rich exemplars in phonological storage?

Effect of class of vowels

⬇️

Abstractions

5 / 22

Phonological Question

Does the variation in the presence of pre-consonantal /r/ in Glaswegian point to abstractions or phonetically rich exemplars in phonological storage?

Effect of class of vowels

⬇️

Abstractions

Word-specific effects

⬇️

Exemplars

5 / 22

Method

Data: HCRC Map Task Corpus (Anderson et al. 1991)
- Speakers from Glasgow (N = 29)
- Interacting with familiar and unfamiliar participants
- Word-level time-aligned transcriptions (HCRC 2001)
Analysis:
- Corpus querying in Labb-CAT (Fromont & Hay 2012)
- 5,330 word tokens with pre-consonantal /r/ retrieved
- Manual annotation based on audition: vocalized, approximant, tap, or trill
- Mixed-effects Binomial Logistic Regresion Modeling with lme4 (Bates et al. 2015) in R (R Core Team 2022)

6 / 22

Example #1: Vocalized (male, 17, Glasgow)

7 / 22

Example #2: Approximant (female, 19, Glasgow)

8 / 22

Example #3: Tap (male, 30, Glasgow)

9 / 22

Example #4: Trill (male, 18, Glasgow)

10 / 22

Results11 / 22

Overall distribution

12 / 22

Results by rhoticity (excl. trills)

13 / 22

Individual variation

14 / 22

Rhoticity: familiarity by gender (empirical)

\(\chi^2(2) = 7.775, p < 0.05\)

15 / 22

Effect of vowel classBack vowels favor non-rhoticity (Dickson and Hall-Lew 2017)NORTH > FORCE > START > NEAR > SQUARE >> NURSE > lettER: back > front > central

16 / 22

Effect of vowel classBack vowels favor non-rhoticity (Dickson and Hall-Lew 2017)NORTH > FORCE > START > NEAR > SQUARE >> NURSE > lettER: back > front > central

vowel
class

a
back

ɔ
back

ʉ
central

ɜ
central

ə
central

e
front

ɪ
front

16 / 22

Effect of `vowel class`

Back vowels favor non-rhoticity (Dickson and Hall-Lew 2017)
- NORTH > FORCE > START > NEAR > SQUARE >> NURSE > lettER: back > front > central

vowel	class
a	back
ɔ	back
ʉ	central
ɜ	central
ə	central
e	front
ɪ	front

\(\chi^2(2) = 3.5951, p = 0.17\)

16 / 22

Effect of (1|word) beyond frequency
\(\chi^2(1) = 557.53, p < 0.05\)
17 / 22

Thank you!

Rhoticity rate: around 70%
- Most common realizations: [ɹ] > [ɾ], almost no [r]
gender:familiarity - non-rhoticity supra-local?
Word-specific effects: support for exemplars ✅
No effect of vowel class: no support for abstractions ❌

This research was supported by an NCN grant no. 2017/26/D/HS2/00027

kamil.kazmierski@amu.edu.pl
Photo credit: Rajmund Matuszkiewicz

18 / 22

Extras19 / 22

Margaret, 18, female :: Most non-rhotic speaker

20 / 22

Janie, 18, female :: Most rhotic speaker

21 / 22

Instruction giver

22 / 22

Instruction giver

Instruction follower

22 / 22

Introduction: Presence of post-vocalic /r/

Introduction: Presence of post-vocalic /r/

Introduction: Presence of post-vocalic /r/

Introduction

Is rise in non-rhoticity local?

Glasgow

Is rise in non-rhoticity local?

Glasgow

"Standard Scottish English"

Phonological Question

Phonological Question

Effect of class of vowels

⬇️

Abstractions

Phonological Question

Effect of class of vowels

⬇️

Abstractions

Word-specific effects

⬇️

Exemplars

Method

Example #1: Vocalized (male, 17, Glasgow)

Example #2: Approximant (female, 19, Glasgow)

Example #3: Tap (male, 30, Glasgow)

Example #4: Trill (male, 18, Glasgow)

Results

Overall distribution

Results by rhoticity (excl. trills)

Individual variation

Rhoticity: familiarity by gender (empirical)

Effect of vowel class

Effect of vowel class

Effect of vowel class

Effect of (1|word) beyond frequency

\(\chi^2(1) = 557.53, p < 0.05\)

Thank you!

Extras

Margaret, 18, female :: Most non-rhotic speaker

Janie, 18, female :: Most rhotic speaker

Instruction giver

Instruction giver

Instruction follower

Introduction: Presence of post-vocalic /r/

Help

“Glasgow English preconsonantal /r/”

Introduction: Presence of post-vocalic /r/

Introduction: Presence of post-vocalic /r/

Introduction: Presence of post-vocalic /r/

Introduction

Is rise in non-rhoticity local?

Glasgow

Is rise in non-rhoticity local?

Glasgow

"Standard Scottish English"

Phonological Question

Phonological Question

Effect of class of vowels

⬇️

Abstractions

Phonological Question

Effect of class of vowels

⬇️

Abstractions

Word-specific effects

⬇️

Exemplars

Method

Example #1: Vocalized (male, 17, Glasgow)

Example #2: Approximant (female, 19, Glasgow)

Example #3: Tap (male, 30, Glasgow)

Example #4: Trill (male, 18, Glasgow)

Results

Overall distribution

Results by rhoticity (excl. trills)

Individual variation

Rhoticity: familiarity by gender (empirical)

Effect of vowel class

Effect of vowel class

Effect of vowel class

Effect of `vowel class`

Effect of `vowel class`

Effect of `vowel class`

Effect of `(1|word)` beyond frequency

Effect of `vowel class`

Effect of `vowel class`

Effect of `vowel class`

Effect of `(1|word)` beyond frequency