title: Standard English in Trinidadian secondary schools: Accent variation and attitudes
Creators: name: Meer, Philipp
Publisher: name: University of Muenster, Institutional Repository MIAMI
Year: 2023
Subjects: subject: 800 Literature (Belles-lettres) and rhetoric

description: Die Studie untersucht die Produktion und Perzeption von gesprochenem Standardenglisch im Sekundarschulkontext in Trinidad. Das zugrunde liegende Ziel besteht darin, einen Beitrag zur Frage zu leisten, ob und in welchem Ausmaß sich in Trinidad ein endonormativer Standard herausbildet. Soziophonetische Variation wurde in der Sprache von 100 Lehrkräften und fortgeschrittenen Schülerinnen und Schülern auf vokalischer, konsonantischer und prosodischer Ebene analysiert und die Einstellungen zu lokalen und nicht-lokalen Akzenten des Standardenglischen unter 485 Schülerinnen und Schülern untersucht. Die Ergebnisse zeigen vielfältige Tendenzen. Die Sprachproduktion zeigt klare und ausgeprägte endonormative Trends. Gleichzeitig zeichnet sie sich durch mehrdimensionale Normorientierungsprozesse aus, die lokale und nicht-lokale Kräfte integrieren. Die soziophonetischen Befunde lassen auch ein erhebliches Maß an systematischer Differenzierung erkennen. Die Sprachperzeption zeigt eine allgemeine Koexistenz verschiedener Standards des Englischen und keine klare Unterscheidung zwischen exo- und endonormativen Akzenten. Zusammenfassend liefert die Studie empirische Belege für Multinormativität in Produktion und Perzeption.
description: The study investigates standard English speech production and perception in the secondary school context in Trinidad. The underlying aim is to contribute to the question of whether and to what degree an endonormative standard is emerging in Trinidad. Sociophonetic variation in the speech of 100 teachers and advanced students is analyzed at the vocalic, consonantal, and prosodic level, and attitudes toward local and non-local accents of standard English among 485 students are investigated. The results reveal multifaceted tendencies. Speech production shows clear and pronounced endonormative trends. At the same time, it is characterized by multidimensional norm orientation processes that integrate local and non-local forces. The sociophonetic findings also reveal a considerable degree of systematic differentiation. With respect to speech perception, there is a general coexistence of different standards of English and no clear-cut distinction between exo- and endonormative accents. In sum, the study provides empirical evidence of multinormativity in production and perception.
description: Table of contents Acknowledgements ..... i List of tables ..... vii List of figures ..... x Abbreviations ..... xv 1. Introduction ..... 1 1.1 Research on English in Trinidad and the Caribbean ..... 1 1.2 Research objectives ..... 6 1.3 Accent variation and attitudes: Aspects and variables under investigation ..... 7 1.4 Outline ..... 9 2. English in Trinidad in context ..... 11 2.1 The sociolinguistic profile of Trinidad.11 2.2 Possible American English influence in Trinidad ..... 16 2.3 Standard English in education in Trinidad ..... 17 2.4 Adolescents and language variation and change ..... 18 2.5 Trinidad and models of World Englishes ..... 19 3. Accent variation in Trinidad, the wider anglophone Caribbean, and related contexts ..... 23 3.1 Vocalic variation ..... 23 3.1.1 NEAR &amp; SQUARE ..... 23 3.1.2 MOUTH ..... 29 3.1.3 DRESS, TRAP, and BATH ..... 30 3.1.4 NURSE(-rhotacization) ..... 33 3.2 Consonantal variation ..... 36 3.2.1 Velarization of the nasal in DOWN ..... 36 3.2.2 (th)-stopping ..... 37 3.3 Covariation ..... 39 3.4 Prosodic variation ..... 40 3.5 Research questions and hypotheses ..... 43 3.5.1 Sociophonetic variation at the vocalic level ..... 43 3.5.2 Sociophonetic variation at the consonantal level ..... 46 3.5.3 Covariation of segmental features ..... 47 3.5.4 Sociophonetic variation at the prosodic level ..... 47 4. Language attitudes in Trinidad, the wider anglophone Caribbean, and other relevant contexts ..... 50 4.1 Attitudes toward Creoles ..... 50 4.2 Attitudes toward standard English(es) ..... .50 4.3 Research questions ..... 52 5. Data and methods I: Sociophonetic analysis ..... 54 5.1 Schools and speakers ..... 54 iv 5.2 Research instruments, types, tokens ..... 57 5.3 Data collection ..... 59 5.4 Recording and transcription ..... 60 5.5 Automatic alignment ..... 61 5.6 Acoustic vowel analysis ..... 68 5.6.1 Automatic formant extraction with TRINI-FAVE ..... 68 5.6.2 Psychoacoustic transformation, normalization, and post-hoc data processing ..... 74 5.6.3 Target-oriented and dynamic acoustic measures ..... 79 5.6.4 Acoustic-auditory analysis of NURSE-rhotacization ..... 86 5.7 Acoustic sibilant analysis ..... 90 5.8 Auditory and visual spectrographic consonant analysis ..... 93 5.9 Acoustic analysis of prosodic variation ..... 99 5.9.1 Data for cross-varietal comparison and sociolinguistic analysis ..... 100 5.9.2 F0 extraction and parameters ..... 102 5.10 Sociolinguistic and language-internal factors ..... 103 5.11 Statistical modeling ..... 105 6. Data and methods II: Analysis of language attitudes ..... 108 6.1 Schools and participants ..... 108 6.2 Research instrument ..... 109 6.3 Accent variation in the vocal stimuli ..... 111 6.4 Data collection ..... 113 6.5 Statistical Modeling ..... 114 7. Sociophonetic variation at the vocalic level ..... 115 7.1 Vowel space overall ..... 115 7.2 NEAR &amp; SQUARE ..... 121 7.2.1 Specific (statistical) analysis procedure ..... 121 7.2.2 Target-oriented perspective on merger status ..... 123 7.2.3 Dynamic perspective on merger status ..... 128 7.2.4 Sociolinguistic variation of merger status ..... 130 7.2.5 Realizational differences of the (merged) vowels ..... 132 7.3 Vowel variation in MOUTH and the subset DOWN ..... 140 7.3.1 General realization of MOUTH and (non-)velarized DOWN ..... 140 7.3.2 Variation in the position of the vowel onset in MOUTH and DOWN ..... 141 7.3.3 Variation in the spectral dynamics of MOUTH and DOWN ..... 145 7.4 DRESS, TRAP, and BATH ..... 149 7.4.1 General realizations and overall patterns of variation of DRESS, TRAP, and BATH ..... 149 7.4.2 Variation in DRESS-lowering ..... 150 7.4.3 Variation in TRAP-raising ..... 152 7.4.4 Spectral overlap of BATH-TRAP and BATH-START ..... 153 7.4.5 Variation in BATH-backing ..... 154 7.5 NURSE: Variation and rhotacization ..... 155 7.5.1 Specific (statistical) analysis procedure ..... 155 v 7.5.2 (Non-)rhotacized NURSE in the acoustic vowel space ..... 156 7.5.3 Variation in NURSE-rhotacization ..... 158 7.5.4 Variation in acoustic correlates of NURSE-rhotacization ..... 163 8. Sociophonetic variation at the consonantal level ..... 166 8.1 Velarization of the nasal in DOWN ..... 166 8.1.1 Overall pattern of variation ..... 166 8.1.2 Statistical modeling ..... 166 8.2 (th)-stopping ..... 170 8.2.1 Specific (statistical) analysis procedure ..... 170 8.2.2 Overall pattern of variation ..... 170 8.2.3 Statistical modeling ..... 171 9. Covariation of segmental features ..... 175 9.1 Specific (statistical) analysis procedure ..... 175 9.2 Covariation patterns ..... 176 10. Sociophonetic variation at the prosodic level ..... 182 10.1 Specific (statistical) analysis procedure ..... 182 10.2 Cross-varietal comparison ..... 184 10.3 Sociolinguistic variation in Trinidadian English prosody ..... 190 10.3.1 Statistical modeling ..... 190 10.3.2 Gender ..... 191 10.3.3 Age ..... 191 10.3.4 Rurality ..... 193 10.3.5 Ethnicity ..... 193 10.3.6 Gender and ethnicity ..... 196 10.3.7 Age and ethnicity ..... 196 11. Attitudes toward standard varieties of English ..... 198 11.1 Overall evaluation differences ..... 198 11.2 Principal components analysis ..... 200 11.3 Analysis of extracted components ..... 201 11.4 Accent recognition ..... 203 12. Discussion ..... 205 12.1 Vocalic variation in Trinidadian English ..... 205 12.1.1 NEAR &amp; SQUARE ..... 205 12.1.2 Vowel variation in MOUTH and the subset DOWN ..... 206 12.1.3 DRESS, TRAP, and BATH ..... 208 12.1.4 NURSE: Variation and rhotacization ..... 209 12.2 Consonantal variation in Trinidadian English ..... 211 12.2.1 Velarization of the nasal in DOWN ..... 211 12.2.2 (th)-stopping ..... 211 12.3 Covariation of segmental features in Trinidadian English ..... 213 12.4 Prosodic variation in Trinidadian English ..... 214 12.5 Attitudes toward standard varieties of English ..... 218 vi 13. Conclusion ..... 221 13.1 The question of normativity ..... 221 13.2 Implications for World Englishes models ..... 225 13.2.1 Applying the Dynamic Model ..... 225 13.2.2 Implications for the Dynamic Model ..... 226 13.2.3 Applying the EIF Model ..... 227 13.2.4 Implications for the EIF Model ..... 227 13.3 Outlook for future research ..... 231 14. References ..... 233 15. Appendices ..... 260 15.1 Fieldwork material: Sociophonetic variation ..... 260 15.1.1 Word list ..... 260 15.1.2 Reading passage ..... 260 15.1.3 Keywords used to elicit tips on how to give a good presentation ..... 261 15.1.4 Material for picture description task ..... 261 15.1.5 Material for map task ..... 262 15.2 Fieldwork material: Language attitudes ..... 262 15.2.1 Questionnaire: Main part ..... 262 15.2.2 Orthographic transcripts of vocal stimuli ..... 264 15.3 Supplementary material ..... 267