It's black and white: the FUTURE of English in rural Nova Scotia

Shana Poplack & Sali Tagliamonte

Fri. 2:00-4:05 B

Where varieties share the same inventory of forms, the inference is generally that their functions are shared as well. But the coexistence of surface forms can disguise differences in distribution and conditioning. The future time reference sector provides a particularly illustrative case in point, due to its hospitality to variant expression, as illustrated in (1-2).

(1) I'm goin' to China again this year. ...I go to China in September. (WGYE/113/N1B 19.52)

(2) She said "I think I'll have a little ice cream." So, I said "Granny, you gonna have a lunch tonight?" (BNPE/057/879)

Traditional explanations for the viability of multiple forms for the future invoke differences in the range of uses to which each may be put (e.g. Bybee et al., 1994). But, in contrast to the vast documentation on many other variables of the tense/mood/aspect system, with the exception of Sankoff & Laberge (1980) and Myhill (1994a, 1994b), little is known about what constrains their selection. Moreover, there is no consensus as to whether the forms are to be considered variants of the same variable (as per Palmer, 1987; Visser, 1970); Wekker, 1976) or whether they are differentiated according to mood, attitude, probability of the event taking place, or other factors (e.g. Leech, 1971; Myhill, 1994b; Quirk et al., 1972)

In this paper we address these questions with a comparative study of variable future time expression in two varieties of African Nova Scotian English spoken in the hamlets of North Preston and Guysborough, and the white vernacular with which the latter coexists. Comparisons between black and white varieties have suffered from the inescapable fact that most of the structures of interest in the former are either too sparse to permit quantitative analysis in the latter or lacking altogether. The fact that virtually none of the variant expressions of future is stigmatized as non-standard obviates this problem, permitting full-scale comparison of the behavior of apparently shared linguistic forms. Making use of standard variationist methodology, we incorporate as factors into a Goldvarb analysis features claimed to influence the occurrence of different future variants. These include temporal factors like PROXIMITY IN THE FUTURE, TEMPORAL SPECIFICATION, AND TYPE OF REFERENCE (scheduled, immutable, calendar); syntactic factors like TYPE OF PHRASE (negative, affirmative, conditional), TYPE OF CLAUSE (main vs. subordinate), PERSON, NUMBER AND TYPE OF SUBJECT, STATIVITY and other lexico-semantic factors.

Inspection of nearly 2,000 future reference contexts reveals that the variant inventories, featuring some 15 morphosyntactic constructions, are virtually the same across varieties. Focusing on gonna and will, the most robust of these, we find that the constraints conditioning their appearance are remarkably similar for both African Nova-Scotian communities, despite a clear perception that Guysborough blacks use a distinct and more standard variety. None of them was selected for white Guysborough English, with the lone exception of the factor of PROXIMITY IN THE FUTURE. And here the hierarchy of constraints is diametrically opposed in black and white speech. In the latter, gonna is favored for immediate future reference, consistent with prescriptive characterizations, while will is preferred for remote time. In the African Nova Scotian varieties, on the other hand, gonna shows no temporal specialization, as evidenced by its distribution across temporal contexts.

The parallels between the black varieties on the one hand and their joint differences from white Guysborough English on the other, are particularly striking in view of the geographic distance separating the black communities and the physical and psychological proximity of whites and blacks in the Guysborough area over the past 150 years. They suggest that the conditioning of variability is not due to factors of a universal or regional nature, but rather to the perseverance of a grammatical system inherited from an earlier form of the language passed on by the American input settlers.

References

Bybee, J., R. Perkins, and W. Pagliuca. 1994. The evolution of grammar: Tense, aspect, and modality in the languages of the world. Chicago: Univesity of Chicago Press.

Leech, G.N. 1971. Meaning and the English verb. London: Longman Group Ltd.

Myhill, J. (1994a) Change and continuity in the functions of the American English modals. Manuscript. University of Michigan.

Myhill, J. (1994b) Intuitive meanings and technical definitions: An analysis of will and gonna. Manuscript. University of Michigan.

Palmer, F.R. (1987) The English verb. Singapore: Longman Group UK Ltd.

Quirk, R., S. Greenbaum, G. Leech, & J. Svartvik. 1972. A grammar of contemporary English. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc.

Sankoff, G. & Laberge, S. (1980) On the acquisition of native speakers by a language. In G. Sankoff (ed.), The Social life of language. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. 195-209.

Visser, F.T. 1970. An historical syntax of the English language. Leiden: E.J. Brill.

Wekker, H.C. 1976. The expression of future time in contemporary British English. Amsterdam: North Holland.