Christine Mallinson, North Carolina State UniversityBecky Chilrls,University of GeorgiaLAVIS ill - Tuscaloosa,ALApril 17, 2004

AFRICAN AMERICAN WOMEN'S LANGUAGE IN THESMOKY MOUNTAINS OF APPALACIllA*

1. Contextualizing the Study

. Numerous studies have broadly examined African American English (AAE),but only recently has the influenceof regional dialect norms on the languagepractices of African Americans been acknowledged

. Although scholars have recently turned their attention to the role of AfiicanAmerican women's language, it is stillunderrepresented. Few studiesconsider regional variation in the speech of African American women, andfew studies of African American women's language are quantitative in nature

2. Goals of the Study

. To investigate, quantitatively, the influence of regional dialect norms-namely, those of Appalachian English-on African American English

. To provide empirical variationist data on a regional variety of AfiicanAmerican women's language

3. Texana, North Carolina

. Located in Cherokee County, North Carolina; settled in the late 1800s by anAfiican American family

. North Carolina's largest and most longstanding Appalachian AfricanAmerican community; has approximately 150 residents. All residents, butparticularly the Texana women, highly value family, education, andcommunity solidarity

.. The authors gratefully acknowledge NSF Grant BCS-0236838, the William C. Friday Endowment at North CarolinaState University, and the University of Georgia Graduate School Dean's Award for funding this research.

2

4. Morphosyntactic and PhonologicalData for Texana Women by Generation

100

.Older Women

.Middle Women0 Young Women

80

60]"0

§ 40t:j13z'$- 20

Older Middle-Aged YoungWomen Women Women

Morphosyntactic Variables N % N % N %

3fdPI. -s Attachment ('the peoplethat walks') 30/149 20.13 5/61 8.20 1/19 5.26

3rdSg. -s Absence ('he walk') 24/140 17.14 47/108 43.52 6/73 8.22

is Copula Absence ('he the man') 8/132 6.06 38/130 29.23 6/76 7.89

Phonological VariablesPostvocaIic r loss:

unstressed ('mother') 43/181 23.75 9/96 9.38 4/31 12.9

syllable-coda stressed ('car') 13/327 3.97 4/165 2.42 2/85 2.35

nuclear stressed ('hurt') 0/13 0 0/7 0 0/6 0Consonant cluster reduction:

monomorphemic ('mist') 17/45 37.77 9/40 22.5 4/17 23.5

bimo!£hemic ('missed') 8/80 10 2/26 7.690/5 0

0

;; & &U P ;1'§' "'0 I §

CJ CJ

§. .

-.; Ij'.J -§1 'D 9p 8N ;> cJ $ § .4$'

$

3

5. Aggregate AcousticData: Texana Women's Productions of Ii/, /IJ,lul, /UI,lai/, and 101

300

400

500

F1 600

700

aivl

800

900

zm 2000 1000 1Em 1400

. F2

6. Summary of Morphosyntactic and Phonological Data by Generation aDdAggregate Acoustic Data for Texana Women

. The AppalachianEnglish morphosyntactic variable is found mostly in theolder generation ofwome~ whereas the middle-aged women have the highestrates of the AAE morphosyntactic variables

. Phonological variables appear similar across generations, with a somedecrease in rates of AAE variables from the older to the middle generation

. The 17 Texana women residents considered in this study have several vowelcharacteristics of the regional dialect-Iu! fronting, lit fronting, and laiI glidereduction-which do not show any phonetic conditioning

4

7. Morphosyntactic and Phonological Data for 10 Texana Women byCommunity of Practice (CoW)

0 Friendship Group 1

.Friendship Group 2

~

Q & & b bS Q Q ~ ~ a a

~ ~ ~ Q ~ G GQ ~ ~ -~ c.j § ~

~ p '$ .;y 'D iY gp ~ ~ O~ 8 ~ #~ ~ r9 ~ ~ ~ ~~ ? v ~ ~ ~ 0? ~ ~ ~ ~ .§~ ~ § ~

~ ~

Friendship FriendshipGroup 1 Group 2

Morphosyntactic Variables % N % N

3rdPI. -s Attachment ('the people thatwalks') 24.71 21/85 8.7 4/46

3rdSg. -s Absence ('he walk') 5.95 5/84 48.42 46/95

is Copula Absence ('he the man') 1.55 2/129 35.71 40/112

Phonolo2ical VariablesPostvocalic r loss:

unstressed ('mother') 13.82 17/123 13.73 7/51

syllable-coda stressed (' car') 1.77 4/225 3.94 5/127nuclear stressed ('hurt') 0 0/9 0 0/6

Consonant cluster reduction:monomorphemic ('mist') 64.92 87/134 61.54 48/78bimorphemic ('missed') 24.61 32/130 21.43 12/56

100

--0 80;;--0la 60+-c:Il§ 40Z

20

0

5

8. Individual Acoustic Data: Two Texana Women's Productions of Ii/, /IJ, lu/,/UI, lail, and 10/,by Community of Practice

,~ ~MSi. ZAilf'

MS1 ZAI..

MBu.." ..

ZAu -=--ZAU

~BU~I ~o I,

ilMBo

~ ,ZAa1vi:. '

ZA.lI

d ',:alv .I,, ,I ,

,: IIrv1sai vi

II,

II

~aivd

2400 2200 2000 14001800 1600 1200

Vowel Plot for Core Members of the Communities of PracticeZA- Friendship Group 1; MB- Friendship Group 2

9. Summary of Morphosyntactic, Phonological, and Acoustic Data byCommunity of Practice

. Morphosyntactic variables clearly pattern by CotP, whereas phonologicalvariables are similaracross communities of practice to the point thatmembership in one mendship group or the other does not correlate withproduction of any of the phonological variables (Mallinson and Childs fc)

. Acoustic analysis indicates subtle differences in vowel production in terms ofhow the two core CotP members make use of their vowel space

300

400

500

600

F1 700

800

900

1000

1100

6

10. Conclusions

. These Aftican American women show dialect patterning that is sensitive toboth -regional(AppalachianEnglish) and ethnic (Afiican American English)norms

. Data by CofP indicate that speakers position themselves within groups andalign themselves linguisticallyalong multiple social axes. Linguistic variationby CofP is shown to exist on morphosyntactic, phonological, and phoneticlevels

. These quantitative data on Afiican American women's language in anAppalachian community reveal considerable subgroup variation-even in thissmall group of speakers who have similar demographic characteristics

. Further research should continue to investigate the contextualizing andmediating factors that might distinguish the language of Afiican Americanwomen in unique regional contexts

11. References

Anderson, Bridget. 2003. An Acoustic Study of Southeastern Michigan Appalachian and AfricanAmerican Southern Vowel Systems. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Michigan: Ann Arbor.

Childs, Becky, and Christine Mallinson. 2003. The Regional Alignment of African American Englishin the Smoky Mountains. Paper presented at the American Dialect Society Annual Meeting.Atlanta: Georgia.

Eckert, Penelope. 2000. Linguistic Variation as Social Practice. MaIden, MA: Blackwell.Fridland, Valerie. 2003. Patterns of Fronting in the Boot, Book, and Boat Classes. Paper presented at

the SouthEastern Conference on Linguistics. Washington, D.C.Labov, William. 1998. Coexistent Systems in African -AmericanVernacularEnglish. In Salikoko

Mufwene, John R. Rickford, Guy Bailey, and John Baugh (OOs.),African American English:Structure, History, and Use, 110-53. London: Routledge.

Lanehart, Sonja. 2002. Sista, Speak! Black Women Kinfolk Talk about Language and Literacy.Austin: University of Texas Press.

Mallinson, Christine, and Walt Wolfram. 2002. Dialect Accommodation in a Bi-Ethnic MountainEnclave Community: More Evidence on the Development of African American English.Language in Society 31: 743-775.

-, and Becky Childs. Forthcoming. Communities of Practice in Sociolinguistic Description:African American Women's Language in Appalachia. Penn Working Papers in Linguistics 10.2.

Nichols, Patricia. 1983. Linguistic Options and Choices for Black Women in the Rural South. InBarrie Thorne, Cheris Kramerae, and Nancy Henley (eds.), Language, Gender, and Society, 54-68.Boston: Heinle and Heinle.

-. 1998. Black Women in the Rural South: ConserVative and Innovative. In Jennifer Coates(ed.), Language and Gender: A Reader, 55-63. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Schilling-Estes, Natalie. 2002. American English Social Dialect Variation and Gender. Journal ofEnglish Linguistics 30(2): 122-137.

Thomas, Erik. 2001. An Acoustic Analysis of Vowel Variation in New World English. PADS 85.Durham: Duke University Press.