SPECIALIZAREA : LIMBA ENGLEZA SI LIMBA SPANIOLA [626868]

UNIVERSITATEA DIN CRAIOVA
FACULTATEA DE LITERE
SPECIALIZAREA : LIMBA ENGLEZA SI LIMBA SPANIOLA

LUCRARE DE LICENTA

ABSOLENT: [anonimizat] : Prof.Universitar Alina Resceanu

CRAIOVA
2017

I . The Evolution Of Language

I think that the evolution of human language is one of the most important
and interesting evolutionary events in t he history of life on our planet. It is
essential to know the how we can speak in nowadays, what language really
means and why are too many languages on earth. The human beings are
amazing creatures , because they can speak , understand and writ e not just their
native language but also many other languages . I studied the origin of the
language and everything that involves its evolution since the first sounds until
the present .
Language, whether spoken or signed, can be viewed as a gestural s ystem,
evolving from the so -called mirror system in the primate brain. In nonhuman
primates the gestural system is well developed for the productions and
perception ofmanual action, especially transitive acts involving the grasping of
objects .
I.1 Th e meaning of language
The meaning of the term language and to what it refers. In DL:DE Jeffries
makes a distinction between language as a system and language use. A language
system refers to an idealised form of the language which is separate from how a
language is actually used, and DL:DE concentrates upon describing language as a
system. In TL:TE Chapman considers ‘language’ from different theoretical
perspectives: as a type of behaviour, as a state of mind and as a form of
communication. A sociolingui stic approach to the study of language considers
language as behaviour, particularly in taking account of the regional and social
situations in which language occurs, and the social as well as linguistic factors
that affect how speakers relate to one anoth er.
Consequently, a sociolinguistic approach to language behaviour, rather than
being concerned with language in a more general or abstract way, asks questions
such as: ‘what is a language?’ and ‘what is language for?’ Language is not just
about communicat ion, but also about identity, a factor which is paramount in
sociolinguistics.
Deciding which criteria to adopt for defining a language, however, is far from
straightforward.
Take the example of the language called ‘English’. Who are the speakers of
Engl ish? Are they the people living in a particular country, England, where the
language is spoken? One popular way of deciding the boundary of a language
and boundaries between languages is to consider their geography. We generally
assume that people living i n a particular geographically defined country speak
the language associated with it: French in France, German in Germany and so on.
‘English’ by this definition is the language spoken by people living in England,

Great Britain (England, Scotland and Wales) and the United Kingdom (England,
Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland).
However, it is not always the case that people living in a geographically defined
area all speak the same language, or that one language is the exclusive ‘property’
of a particular co untry. This is certainly not the case with ‘English’, which is
spoken not only in countries that make up the UK, but is also widely used across
many countries around the globe, including the United States. Another factor
which has to be taken into account is that English today is widely used in many
countries across the globe as the language of business, diplomacy, medicine and
the internet.
The association between language and nation or nationality is a very strong
and powerful one. The association betw een language and identity of all kinds,
regional and social as well as national, is also very powerful. The language,
languages or varieties of a language that we speak form an integral part of who
we are, and attempts at imposing one language or variety o f a language on the
population of a nation are often bound up with issues of power and ideology.
The reasons why one language or one variety of a language becomes associated
with a particular nation are many and varied, resulting from a combination of
historical and social changes. Throughout history, one of the first things an
invading force of another country imposes upon the conquered people is its
language, particularly in terms of political, economic and educational institutions
and suchlike.

I.2. The components of language
There are three components of the human language faculty that current
consensus identifies as crucial: speech (signal),syntax (structure) and semantics
(meaning).
Speech provides the standard signaling modality for the communication
of
language in all world cultures. Despite its reliance on an auditory and vocal
apparatus that is broadly shared among most mammals, speech includes at
least two components which are unusual, namely our reconfigured vocal tract
194 and voca l imitation. These components are crucial in understanding the
evolution of our species’ particular capacity for spoken language (as well as
singing). However, the existence of signed languages among the deaf, and
communication via writing, show that langu age can be conveyed by non -verbal
means. Speech is important as the default signal, particularly because our
primate relatives are unable to produce it, but should not be conflated with two
other key components of language. Syntax or ‘grammar’ is the gener ative system
which allows the parsing and production of hierarchical structures in language;

They follow modern linguists by using this term broadly to denote not only
sentence structure, but also some important structural aspects of phonology,
morphology and semantics. The combinatorial power provided by the rules of
language allows us to efficiently generate an unlimited set of distinguishable
utterances from a limited set of meaningless phonetic units (‘infinite use of finite
means’). This is clearly a p rerequisite for a system that can encode an unlimited
set of concepts. Although syntax is apparently unique among living things, some
of its structural aspects (particularly in phonology) appear analogous to those of
music(another complex universal human b ehavior), and perhaps to music -like
vocalizations among animals (e.g. bird or whale ‘song’) or even motor activities
(e.g. Colonnese et al. 1996). Two aspects of human syntax that seem to be
unique involve recursion (where structures can be iteratively emb edded in
similar structures to generate progressively more complex structures, e.g.
phrases within phrases), and those which interface with reference (e.g.
anaphora).
Finally, the critical component of human language that distinguishes it from
music is our ability to encode and intentionally communicate an unlimited set
of distinct propositional meanings, which I will gloss as ‘semantics’. Animal
communication systems exist which, like speech, generate highly complex
learned vocalizations (e.g. birdsong) . However, our ability to use such signals
to convey an unlimited range of meanings, from concrete (‘there’s a leopard in
the right cave, but fruit in the left one’) to highly abstract (‘John’s refusal to
acknowledge Jim’s plea for help was unethical’), ap pears to be unique. While
other animals communicate meaningfully (e.g. emotionally -charged threat calls
or screams, externally -referential food calls or alarm calls, or the honeybee
‘dance language’ (Hauser 1996)), only humans can communicate virtually any
concept that they can entertain. Chimpanzees can certainly know about leopards,
fruit, caves and much more besides (Tomasello and Call 1997), but are unable to
communicate this propositional knowledge to others. This asymmetry between
what is known and wh at can be said is made even more striking by the fact that,
perceptually, nonhuman primates appear quite skilled at inferring complex
meanings from sound (Bergman et al. 2003), despite their limited productive
ability to encode such meanings.

One way of defining a language is as a group of dialects and accents which
have a certain number of forms and structures in common. Put simply, dialect
refers to words and syntactic structure , whereas accent refers to the sounds
that speakers produce and the inton ation and pitch which accompanies sound. If
a dialect describes the words and syntactic structures used by one person or a
group of speakers, then accent is the word used to describe pronunciation, and

the two often go hand in hand. For example, if someone speaks in a regional
dialect of English such as Scouse in the North West or Black Country in the
Midlands, then her/his pronunciation will also be particular to that area. If you
were to walk north from Land’s End in Cornwall to John O’Groats at the very
north of Scotland, you would hear different accents and dialects of English –
Geordie in the North East, West Country in the South West and Cornish. This a
known as a dialect continuum or a chain of mutual intelligibility; that is, there is
no distinct or complete break from one dialect and accent to another, and
speakers of geographically adjacent dialects can understand one another.
However, the cumulative effect of linguistic differences is such that the greater
the geographical separation, the greater t he difficulty of understanding what
people say. Europe has many dialect continua, an example of which is omance,
stretching across the Iberian peninsula through France and parts of Belgium
down to the southern tip of Italy. In addition to a purely linguist ically descriptive
dimension to accents and dialects, there is also a social one. Chambers and
Trudgill (1980:3) point out that dialects are commonly viewed as: …substandard,
low status, often rustic forms of language, generally associated with the
peasant ry, the working class, or other groups lacking in prestige. DIALECT is also
a term which is often applied to other forms of language, particularly those
spoken in more isolated parts of the world, which have no written form. And
dialects are often regarded as some kind of (often erroneous) deviation from a
norm – as aberrations of a correct or standard form of language.
Trudgill and Chambers found that people speaking with rural accents such as
those of Devon and Cornwall in South West England, for example, are typified as
dim-witted but trusting, whereas people speaking with urban ones such as
Cockney in London are typified as quick -witted but untrustworthy. By contrast,
speakers of standard English with a Received Pronunciation accent (see 1.3.1
below) are generally thought to be more intelligent than speakers of other
dialects and also superior morally as well as socially. Because of such negative
connotations, linguists have come to prefer to use the term variety when
describing variation in language. Thi s has none of the negative connotations
associated with the terms dialect and accent, and fits in with the idea of
descriptive linguistics : that is, basing descriptions of language upon actual use. It
can also be applied across a wider range of language fe atures than the terms
dialect and accent. For example, we can talk of linguistic variation, historical
variation, socialvariation, geographic variation, stylistic variation and so on.
The main reason why there is so much geographical variation in English
throughout the United Kingdom and England especially, and throughout Europe
in general, is historical.
Language operates across two dimensions simultaneously: the horizontal
dimension of space, also called the diachronic axis, and the vertical dimension of

time, called the synchronic axis. In addition, there is also a third, social dimension
to be considered,
which accounts for variation between social classes and cuts across both. The
reason why, for example, there is so much variation in England today and so little
in the USA is historical. Similarly, the negative and prejudicial attitudes commonly
held towards linguistic variation, particularly in the UK, have their roots in history.
Consequently, in order to comprehend variation in English and attitudes held
towards it, it is important to consider the social history of English.

I.3. Standard English

What is standard English?

The term standard English (SE) is the one most commonly used to label the
language ‘English’. It is the variety of English u sed in public life in England and
other English speaking countries, for example: in education, law, medicine and
government.
Nowadays, it has no geographical boundary, and is used across the whole of
England and other English speaking countries. In England , it also has an accent
associated with it, known as Received Pronunciation: RP for short. Because of
their origins and history, SE and RP are closely associated with the language of
the middle and upper classes in English society, known variously as ‘the Queen’s
English’ or ‘BBC English’. The concept of RP is a peculiarly English one, having no
equivalent in any other part of the English speaking world. For example, there is
no US equivalent of RP . Some linguists have argued that SE is best defined as the
written form of English, on the grounds that standard English is not a matter of
pronunciation and is thus not tied to any particular accent (See: Crystal 1995 and
Trudgill 1999). Rather, it is a matter of grammar, vocabulary and orthography,
that is, spel ling and print face, and not of pronunciation.
Nevertheless, linguists such as Stubbs (1986) argue that accent is involved in
notions of standardness, since people have an idea of what is and is not
‘standard’ in pronunciation. That is, the accent RP is wi dely regarded as the
‘standard’ accent of British English, just as ‘standard English’ is widely regarded as
the standard written form of English, as used in education and other public
institutions such as the law and government.
Indeed, there is much disag reement amongst linguists as to whether or not SE
can be classed as dialect at all. Some, such as Trudgill and Chambers (1980) and
Milroy (1987) argue that it is, pointing out that all speakers speak at least one
dialect, and that standard English is as mu ch a dialect as any other form of
English. Consequently, some speakers may have no other variety than SE, whilst

others may have either a regional variety and/or SE. Other linguists disagree, on
the grounds that standard English differs from other dialects in a number of
ways, especially in the fact that it has its own writing system. Because of this,
they argue that dialects and the study of dialect should concentrate upon speech.
This position, however, ignores the fact that many nonstandard English diale cts
in England such as that found in the Black Country in the English West Midlands
or Geordie in the North East of England have an established tradition of writing.
Also, if standard English is not a dialect, then it is difficult to see what else it could
be.

On any day of any week, we can open an English newspaper and find either
articles on, or letters about, the degeneration and corruption of the English
language. In case we might be tempted to think of such concerns as
symptomatic of modern times, t hen it is worth pointing out that they date back
to at least the fifteenth century and a time when
English was beginning to be standardised. The concept of a standard, unified
form of a language is a relatively new one in historical terms. Very briefly, th e
need for a unified form of a language arose during the late middle ages and the
Renaissance period in history for two main reasons: political and economic.
Communication over greater areas of land than before became a political
necessity for governments, and an economic
necessity for trade. It was during this period that the concept of a national
language began to be linked to notions of national identity, as the nation states
of modern day Europe began to be formed.

Having been selected and elaborated, standard English then began to be codified
in dictionaries and grammars. As social institutions such as the law and printing
came to use English, so the first dictionaries and grammars of English were
written, with the purpose of identifying and disseminat ing the ‘best’ forms of
English. The idea that the ‘best’ English was that spoken by the ‘best’ people as
defined by the nobility gave rise to the notion that therefore, anything else was
not only linguistically but also morally and socially inferior. As a result of
standardisation, all other dialects, Northern, Southern and Western, were
treated as second class and ignored, unless written as poetry. As living dialects
however, they did not fossilise, but continued to be used by the inhabitants of
those are as. Towards the end of the Early Modern English period, arguments
about the establishment of an Academy in England of the kind established in
France (1635) and Italy (1582) continued. This idea found little public sympathy,
since observers noticed that the French still changed their language despite
having an Academy. In England., language was perceived as an embodiment of
the spirit of individual liberty, and of resistance to central regulation.

By the beginning of the Modern English era, from 1800 onwa rds, England was
a linguistically divided nation. It was divided geographically by regional dialect
and accent, and socially by the growing rise and influence of standard English as
a national language, becoming the language not only of government and
admi nistration, but also of a cultural elite. Paradoxically, as standard English
became removed from its regional origins, it served to increase rather than to
decrease class differentiation. During the nineteenth century, the use of
standard English spread th roughout the country and all social classes, especially
after 1870 when compulsory education was introduced in England (1872 in
Scotland). Learning to read and to write standard English was an important part
of the state school curriculum. Spoken as well a s written standard English was
held up as a model of refinement and, with the expansion of the British Empire,
a carrier of political power world -wide.
During the nineteenth century, language, as much as science or any other
discipline, came to be an objec t of study among others. For Max Muller, the first
professor of Philology at Oxford, the object of such study was ‘language’ in
general rather than any specific one. This made it possible to study language as a
science, abstracted from the contexts of its use, a study that was eventually
called linguistics. Attitudes towards language use were validated by claims to
scientificness, fostering the notion that any variation from standard English as a
norm was deviant, and therefore improper and incorrect. Such deviance was a
manifestation not only of improper speech, but improper behaviour. Thus, to
speak the ‘superior’, ‘refined’ language demonstrated that one belonged to a
‘superior’ class, and that speaking a ‘vulgar’ language correspondingly meant that
one b elonged to a ‘vulgar’ one. Smith writes that: The study of universal
grammar at that time stipulated that languages were fundamentally alike in that
they represented the mind, and fundamentally different in the quality of mind
and civilisation that they re presented…By dividing the population into two
extremes, ideas about language firmly distinguished those who were within
the civilised world from those who were entirely outside it Smith (1984:2 -3).
The grammar and dictionaries of English which came to be written and used in
schools during the first half of the twentieth century continued to be based upon
a prescriptive description of the grammar and vocabulary of Standard English.
Grammar continued to be thought of as a unified, universal concept that
described any language, and the degree to which a language fitted grammatical
prescription was a marker of its superiority over all others, which were therefore
deemed ‘imperfect’ and full of errors.
This concept remained unchallenged until the 1950s when t he first modern
grammars of English came to be written, based upon description rather than
prescription, a seismic shift in linguistic grammatical theory that broke with

ong-standing tradition.

There are many species of life that are more than able to c ommunicate, but
humans have a unique form of communication. We are the only species capable
of using language as a form of communication. Think about the first people and
how difficult it would have been for them to communicate without language.
From never having a single word to over hundreds of thousands of words in
modern times, all the words that were created in order for people to
communicate are a part of a complex system. It is a difficult concept to
understand because we've been using language for m ost of our lives and all of
these words have been in place for thousands of years. Language is something
that is constantly changing, it's not an every day change, but it is gradually
evolving. For the most part, language is passed down through generations so
parents and children are able to communicate with one another.

Similarly, modern English has made many advancements in changing our
modern day language. Modern English started in the early sixteenth century, but
this language breaks down into two groups, early modern English and late
modern English. Early modern English lasted three centuries and only had small
scale changes to the English language. The largest change was the Great Vowel
Shift, which caused vowels pronunciation to get shorter and shorter. The
beginning of the printing press started in this time period and mass publishing
resulted in catching on to new words and phrases.
Consequently, the late modern English era was created. Late modern English
started in the nineteenth century and goes all the way up to present day. The
biggest boom in language reform has occurred just recently. The main factor
behind this is the new improvements in technology. Within the last few years
technological advancements have exploded. One of the easiest wa ys to
communicate with people in modern times is to send a quick text. Generally
speaking, a person will change the spelling of words, drop vowels or a repeated
letter, replace words with numbers, and even use made up acronyms while
texting to make things quick and simple. This poor use of grammar, spelling, and
punctuation creates bad habits for the youth. Another form of language change
involved with advancements of technology would be the use of computers.

Social networking sites such as Myspace, Faceboo k, and Twitter have slowly
reshaped the way people talk with one another.
Language is always evolving and the English language might have gone through
the quickest phase of evolution which can be seen through examples of old
English, middle English, and mo dern English. These changes may be subtle or
drastic as verbal and written methods of communication change with cultures
and societies. Language reform has occurred for centuries now and as long as
societies and cultures evolve, language will continue to c hange to meet the
needs of communication.
The Charles Darwinian Theory of evolution bases its argument on the
evolution of man on the following three principals. The first is the principle of
fight for existence, the principle of natural selection and th e variation in the
complexity and the genes of the people living in a particular ecological setting.
Life at the moment is totally different from the life that Charles Darwin was
talking about. Life is a matter of chance.
I.4. Genetics and Evolution of Lan guage
The ability of spoken language is believed (by many) to be attributed uniquely
to humanity. Despite this evidently phenomenal existence the exact date of
language's birth remains unknown and yet it continues to evolve. (Klein, 2009)
The study of t his ever mutable method of communication has come to be known
as linguistics. However due to the communal and social nature of the human
race the study of sociolinguistics could be said to more accurately represent
language within human societies. Furtherm ore Linguists have known for some
time that differences in language are tied to social class (Ross, 1954)
Sociolinguistics is the study of the way in which language varies and changes in
social groups (communities) of speakers, focusing primarily on the im pacts of
linguistic structures (such as sounds, grammatical forms, intonation features,
words, etc) and social factors (such as a speaker's gender, ethnicity, age, degree
of integration into their community, etc). (Reference)
The study of sociolinguistics has ancestry in dialectology, beginning in the 1960s
(reference) partly due to the existence of inadequate methods associated with
previous approaches to the study of dialect. Sociolinguistics uses recordings of

informal conversations as its data; taking a significantly more scientific approach
relying on quantitative analysis to highlighting dialect differences.
It is not easy to understand language as its processes in the brain are so
complex. Several parts of the brain are directly involved in the proc essing of
information into speech and in the interpretation of syntax. Some of the factors
that affect the faculty of language includes the genes. However much certain
scientists argue against this, there are seemed to have been a selection that
naturally selected a particular gene to have a stronger linguistic ability than the
others. The human brain is a very essential in human language and
communication. On the left hemisphere of the brain is a very specific position
that is responsible for the developme nt of speech. According to Chomsky,
language is a neural organ whose site is that little part of the hemisphere that is
responsible for the very specific structures of human language” He also claims
that the nature of the brain of the human being has funct ions that are very
discrete and in a specific part of the human brain and as such, it can be isolated
in those parts. According to Fisher and Marcus, “Language is a rich
computational system that computation system that simultaneously coordinates
syntactic , semantic, phonological and pragmatic representations with each other,
motor and sensory systems, and both the speaker’s and listener’s knowledge of
the world. As such, tracing the generic knowledge of knowledge will require an
understanding of a great nu mber of sensory, motor and cognitive systems, of
how they have changed individually, and of how the interaction between them
have evolved” (Fisher and Marcus, 2006)
The comparison between the brain and the generic completion that exists
between the Chimpan zee and that of the human beings is a very key step in the
determination of the evolution of language and the understanding of language
on its own. The Genome of the two have been completed and this is not however
the ultimate point. The study of the genot ype mapping to the phenotype is key
in the determining the relation of inheritance and language. Language like any
other character has to deal with the fact that the interactions between the genes
and the environment can result into an effect in the geneti c complexity of any
being. Factors such as the way the genes are arranged, their multiplicity, deletion
or duplication may result into a change in the language capability of different
animals. The genomes of the humans and the chimpanzees are affected by
insertions and substitutions. Insertions and deletions result into a 3% difference

in the genetic arrangement and characteristics of the two animals. Substitutions
result into 1.23% difference of these traits. It results into about thirty five million
alter ations in a single copy of a site on the genomes (Lieberman, 1984 )
Substitutions alter the structures of the proteins as and the enzymes while the
insertions and deletions affect the factors of transcription. These occurred as a
result of the evolution of the modern man from the Chimpanzees. As a result,
speech and language as one of the characteristics of human beings were greatly
affected.
The evolution in the neural genes of the Chimpanzees and the humans
seems to have accelerated so much. However, re search shows that there the
heats and the livers of these two animals are totally quite different. It can be
explained that there exists a very strong stabilization of the neural tissues much
more than any other tissue or parts of the body. The changes in the genomes
might have totally affected the speech. However, we should look at the most
specific gene changes that might have caused a change in the language through
the ages. The genes that might have been most influential in the creation of the
differenc e in the language and its evolution are the genes that are related to the
determination of the brain size. Fisher and Marcus say that, “In our view the
honing of traits such as language probably depended not just on increased “raw
materials” in the form of a more ample cortex, but also on more specific
modification of particular neural pathways” (Fisher and Marcus, 2006).
The language gene called the FOXP2 gene is responsible for the complex
formation of the human cognitive ability, motor and syntax interpr etation and
development. The gene is believed to have undergone a number of mutations
resulting into the formation of the cortex that makes cortical and sub cortical
systems have the ability to learn. The mutations also resulted into the
synchronization of the cognitive pattern generators and the motor. All the
processes that includes dancing, walking and mate selection may have had a
part in the evolution of language and a brain that is capable of interpreting and
analyzing language (Lieberman, 2006)
Anoth er genetic study to determine the language acquisition, development or
impairedness is the twin studies. The study helps to understand if there is any
way that the genetics and environmental factors are factors that might have
resulted into the evolution o f language. The comparison in this case is on the

two types of twins, the fraternal and the identical twins. The expectation of this
study is that the fraternal babies would have a less similar linguistics than the
identical twins. The expectation is due t o the fact that the DNA of fraternal twins
is only similar to a percentage of 50% while that of identical twins is almost 100%
similar. A research carried out by Stromswold on ten twins showed that the
concordance rates that existed in fraternal twins was much less than the rates
for the identical twins. The identical twins were found to share several spoken
and written disorders of linguistics as compared to fraternal twins. The
percentage of this result was 90%. It indicated that only 10% of this study wa s
not true. The study shows that the different people with different genetic
completions, traits or genomes have different behaviors that come up as a result
of these DNAs. Similar DNAs results into the exhibition of similar character traits
as a result of very similar genetic completions. Therefore, for language as one of
the traits that are affected by the genetic variations, we can see the difference
that exists between the primates like the chimpanzees and the modern human
beings. The DNAs of the Neande rthal man and the modern man are so different
as a result of the discussed reasons of insertion (replication) or deletion and
substitution. Therefore it can be proved biologically that there was evolution in
the language of the humans as a result of the ch anges in the DNAs and the
RNAs.
Language is commonly described as a communication tool which allows
humans to express their feelings, thoughts and helps them to understand the
world. It defines the cultural background of a particular society and separat es
human beings from other animals. Therefore, human language is believed to be
a distinguishing factor, which makes our species unique (Anderson, 2004). It is
important to notice that all the other animals also communicate by using
different structures of communication systems that are innate (Hirshon, date
unknown). Animal communication lacks creativity, flexibility and is not as
complex as human communication. This essay will discuss the main features
that distinguish human language from the ways other a nimals communicate, its
origins and finally it will look at different attempts to teach animals to acquire
human language. The essay concludes that no animal is able to create complex
sentences in a language, owing to its different anatomy of vocal tracts and
inability to understand the meaning of words.
The scientists report that there are over 6,900 distinct languages in the modern

world. Nevertheless, David Lightfoot, a linguist at Georgetown University in
Washington, points out that because of human abi lity to speak and our anatomy
of the vocal apparatus, only one language should be considered: human
language (Hirshon, date unknown). It is in organized and complex form,
structured by different sets of grammatical rules. Language is as important as
breath ing. It helps human beings to socialise, learn about past cultures and
progenitors, develop themselves and pass the knowledge through the next
generations. In fact, it is crucially important for speakers to have a knowledge of
the grammar of a spoken langu age.
As far as the nature of language is concerned, many philosophers and scientists
have debated this question for a long time, presenting contrasting ideas and
concepts. Although a number of different theories have been displayed so far,
there is still n o direct evidence which tells us how the language has originated. It
is certain that divine theory is one of the oldest thesis, suggesting the language
as the gift of the God to mankind. Judeo Christians believe that Adam was given
the power to name all th e things that the world consists of. God communicated
with the first people in a language that was easily understood by their brains
(Yule, 2010). In terms of divine creation, many experiments have been carried
out since the Ancient Times. For instance, an Egyptian pharaoh, Psammetichus,
decided to place two infants in the mountains, isolating them from society. They
were only in close contact to mute servants. Surprisingly, after several years they
were able to say a word meaning 'bread' in a language whic h had not existed for
a long time. Another interesting examination was carried out by James IV of
Scotland thousands years after Psammetichus. Indeed, he repeated the same
experiment, getting significant results: isolated children were capable of
speaking Hebrew. Therefore, James IV formulated a thesis that Hebrew was the
language Adam and Eve used in order to communicate in Eden (Fromkin,
Rodman and Hyans, 2003).
On the contrary to divine source, another important thesis of this issue is
evolutionary devel opment. Many scientists suggest that the language has
originated by the evolution of mankind. It resulted in the development of the
speech production and the perception apparatus (Fromkin, Rodman and Hyans,
2003). Stephen Jay Gould (1994), as cited by From kin, Rodman and Hyans (2003,
p.60), said that the language progressed 'step by step and is such an integrated
"all or none" structure'. It is very probable that the brain expanded its size, which

enabled the processing of different kinds of things. Thus, t he evolution of human
language must have been a long – lasting movement. The evolutionary thesis
also claims that the development of human language was linked to the
alterations in the brain and nervous system. However, when it comes to vocal
tracts, there is no doubt that some species, such as talking parrots and mynah
birds, have also experienced the development of vocal apparatus. As a result,
these animals are able to distinguish different sound patterns, but they cannot
acquire human language. It may b e the case that vocal tracts are not so
necessary in terms of human language development (Fromkin, Rodman and
Hyans, 2003).
Another aspect of scientific research is the role of the brain lateralization (a
concept, suggesting that the two halves of the brai n`s cortex are responsible for
different functions), which is closely related to the tool -making source. Yule (2010)
indicates that making tools by early humans had a great influence on the
development of the language since functions, controlling both spea king and
object manipulation, are located in the left hemisphere of the brain.
An additional theory is the natural sound source. Its main idea is that natural
sounds may have been imitated by unsophisticated words, which human
ancestors heard around them. Certainly there are numbers of onomatopoeic
words in every language, but considering, how most of the soundless things and
abstract concepts in the world could not refer to natural sounds, make the
scholars be sceptical about that theory (Yule, 2010).
The last possible thesis, discussed in the essay, will be the genetic source. In fact,
many scientists believe that human offspring are born with an innate and unique
capacity for language. In other words, any normal child, independently on its
race, place of birth or economic heritage, is able to acquire a language to which
he or she is exposed (Fromkin, Rodman and Hyans, 2003).
Regardless how much effort we make to discover the nature of human language,
there is still no direct evidence that would prove any o f the theories mentioned
above. However, as Chomsky (1972, p.67, 68) says, 'human language appears to
be a unique phenomenon, without significant analogue in the animal world'.
Thus, what are the special features of the language which set humans apart from
the other animals? The first uniqueness of human language is infinity capacity.
Lightfoot claims that it enables humans to produce short sentences as well as

long and complex ones. What is more, once the human learns a language, he is
able to create new p hrases and sentences. It is possible, only if he knows the
rules of the grammar. In contrast, animals are not capable of this. Birds, for
instance, can only sing on the basis of 'genetic programming', or what they have
heard before (Hirshon, date unknown).
Furthermore, human beings are stimulus – independent, which means that they
can talk about different situations without being determined to do so. This
feature is closely related to displacement. Yule (2010) points out that human
beings can talk about pas t, future and some imaginary situations. Animal
communication is just a response in the immediate environment, connected with
stimulus feeling of pain, the sight of predator or a desire of mate. A small
exception for this are honeybees. In fact, they are a ble to inform the other bees
about the location of nectar by performing a dance. However, it must be the
most recent food source and they cannot relate to vertical distance.
Another difference between human and animal communication is creativity that
enabl es human beings to produce new words, phrases and expressions. It is true
that animals are born with a limited number of communication signals and
cannot expand them in any way. As well as this, human language is culturally
transmitted, acquired by close c ontact with a particular society and passed
through generations, whereas animal communication represents biological
transmission. It means that they are 'genetically programmed' to instinctively use
a limited set of specific signals (Yule, 2010).
An imp ortant factor that separates human beings from other animals is also
arbitrariness. Human language has signifier and signified. The meaning of
particular words may change through the distance of time, but the point is that a
word is a relationship between an image and its meaning (Anderson, 2004).
Human beings communicate with each other, using language as the main tool.
However, the language should not only be considered as speech. Indeed, it also
includes body gestures, verbal communication, facial expres sions and
sometimes specialised signs, especially when it comes to sign language that
enables deaf people to communicate. It is a proven fact that these forms of
communication are also common for animals. Although animals do not use
sophisticated expressio ns and phrases to show their feelings and simply cannot
talk in a way that humans do, they use different structures of communication

systems that are innate. These systems usually involve distinct sounds, ranging
from roars to whines, gestures and signals, such as alarm calls. It is said that
communication allows animals to find food, avoid predators, mate as well as
carry for their young (Castaldo, 1992).
Throughout the years, many scholars have tried to teach particular animal
species to use human languag e as a tool of communication between humans
and animals. Most of the projects involved apes that were taught by using
different methods. Viki was one of the first apes that took part in the process of
teaching the human language. The examination was carrie d out in the 1940s by
scientist couple, Catherine and Keith Hayes, who raised Viki as if she had been
their own child. The aim of this experiment was to make an ape say English
words by shaping her mouth, while she was creating sounds. As a result, she
could utter some poorly articulated words. In fact, the project brought a clear
evidence that non -human primates are able to produce complex human sounds
since they have different anatomy of vocal apparatus (Yule, 2010). The next
investigation, aimed at disco vering if an ape is able to learn one or more
grammar rules, was carried out by Herbert Terrace in the 1970s. The
psychologist involved an ape, called Nim Chimpsky, which was taught a version
of American Sign Language. As Holmberg (date unknown) highlights , Terrace
tried to compare Nim`s ability of communication with a two -year -old human
child. He reached a conclusion that Nim acquired the basic linguistic knowledge,
being able to use signs with their meanings and create new messages with
regard to the rule s he had learnt. However, Nim`s utterances were significantly
different from that produced by human children. In fact, the ape constantly
reversed the word order rules without any alteration in the meaning, whereas
human children tend to follow the word or der rules of adult language. Nim`s
utterances were never longer than two words in terms of its meaning. Additional
words, which seemed to be in an unplanned order, were always added to
emphasise. Thus, Nim was able to learn many new words, but did not acqu ire
grammar. He always created sentences that were related to requests for items of
favours from humans (Holmberg, date unknown). Not only did the scholars
teach apes to articulate human sounds correctly and use the sign language, but
also to communicate u sing plastic shapes. Such an experiment was conducted by
Ann and David Premack, who taught a chimpanzee, called Sarah, to use a set of
plastic shapes and relate them to objects and actions. In the final stage she was

able to request for some items, showing the understanding of the meaning of
particular words (Yule, 2010).
Furthermore, when it comes to imitating human speech, scientists have proved
that some parrots are able to produce noises, which may be heard as human
sentences, but they cannot refer any word to its meaning. Anderson (2004)
presents parrot Alex as an evidence for this thesis. Alex was raised by Irene
Pepperberg and through the distance of time, he has learnt a vocabulary to
name objects, shapes and numbers. Indeed, the communication system Alex has
acquired could be characterised as 'an inventory of individually meaningful
words rather than a set of holistically interpreted utterances' (Anderson, 2004,
p.302). It cannot be said that the parrot has possessed human language as it
could not un derstand the meaning of words it has uttered.
In terms of teaching animals to acquire human language, the research at the
Dolphin Institute in Hawaii, involving bottlenose dolphins, should also be
considered. Despite the fact dolphins lack vocal cords and cannot vocally imitate
human language, the research has shown that they can understand the language
semantically and syntactically (Herman, 2009).
This paper has discussed the reasons why the human language is so unique that
it separates human beings from other animals. However, the language is just a
tool used by humans to communicate and the communication is universal
among all the species in the world. It should be noted that any of the scientific
research, which has already been conducted, has not answe red the question on
the nature of human language, but it has been proved that no animal is able to
possess human language. On the other hand, animal communicative skills may
help humans to understand their behaviour. In the essay I focused on reviewing
a number of different examinations on animals, aimed at teaching them to use
human language. The question is if humans could possess the language of a
particular animal species and would they be able to communicate with the
animals using that language?
Americ an English is one of the most influential dialects of the English language,
to the extent that it now influences the vocabulary of British English. In itself it
consists of a variety of different accents and dialects, many of which stem from
the original s ettlers of various regions. Like all languages there is a large amount
of social and ethnic variation within the language, but there is also a great deal

of variation from British English. It has been shaped by its colonial history in both
linguistic and c ultural aspects, but the physical separation from England has
caused the language to evolve separately. Regional dialects in the United States
generally reflect the elements of the language of the nationality of the original
settlers, or those who have con sisted of a large percentage of immigration to the
area since then, particularly in regard to vernacular lexis and pronunciation.
The first successful English colony was Jamestown, established in 1607, on a
small river near Chesapeake Bay. The venture was financed and coordinated by
the London Virginia Company, a joint stock company looking for gold. Despite
conflicts with the Native Americans of the area, a permanent settlement was
soon established. This lead to multiple colonies being set up by English -speaking
settlers along the South Atlantic coast. Many of these settlers originated from
south -eastern England, and maintain a socio -political link with their mother
country for many years after. This in turn resulted in some distinctive features of
language that are still present today, such as the non -realization of a postvocalic
/r/ sound.
In the seventeenth century there was an influx of settlers from Northern and
Western Britain. These settlers were mainly working -class people, and their
dialects formed a large part of the foundation for American English. Instances
where the word "Mom" rather than "Mum" or "pants" rather than "trousers" can
be found in the north -west of England in vernacular speech, although it is
unclear whether these distinctions origin ated in America or England.
Throughout the next few centuries settlers travelled from all over Europe. This
resulted in a variety of new customs, ideas and influences in different areas of
America, such as French influence in South Carolina and German infl uences in
the Mid -Atlantic. They maintained contact with their home countries, which again
provided aspects of dialect to become dominant in their communities. The
colonies were all part of the British Empire, which lead to English quickly
becoming the dom inant language.
However, this was not without opposition. Before British settlers arrived, there
were over 1000 indigenous languages and dialects found in various parts of
America. To this date only about 200 of those languages survive, and they are in
the minority. One of the most established is Navajo, which currently had about
178,000 speakers. Navajo was spoken by Native Americans, mainly in the

south -west of America, and was one of the main languages at the time of
colonization. However, it was never e stablished as the main language of America.
After colonization the political power lay with the settlers, who were mainly
English speakers. Many settlers wanted to maintain the link with their home
country. As America was at this time largely a part of the British Empire, English
was necessary to communicate with the government and ruling forces.
Eventually there were more settlers than natives, and the language evolved from
there. The Navajo language has since declined, with only 57% of Navajo youths
aged 5-17 speaking the language.
The evolution of American English has lead to many distinct differences from
British English. For example, many aspects of pronunciation are drastically
altered.
There are also many instances of vocabulary and lexis that are a ltered when
British and American English are compared.
There are several reasons for these differences. After the political differences in
America in the late 1700s, the citizens formed a new sense of national pride. This
could have led to an inclination t o diverge from Standard British English in hopes
of forming a new national identity. Also, despite the fact that American English
shares the same origin as British English in many ways, it has also been exposed
to many more external influences in more rece nt years. When America was first
being colonised settlers travelled from many different cultures, and each
contributed to the new language that was born.
Another reason relates to the Sapir -Whorf hypothesis. In colonising new lands,
settlers would have fou nd flora and fauna that they were previously unfamiliar
with, and therefore were required to invent entirely new words with which to
refer to them. These words were often formed using existing words or phrases,
such as 'bull frog'. A great deal of differen ces in lexis stem from the late 19th
century period, a time of much technological advancement, when Britain and
America formed new inventions and industrializations separately. For this reason
a great deal of motoring or railroad terms are different betwee n the two dialects,
as new terms for these inventions were coined separately, such as 'gearbox' and
'transmission'.
In American English the word 'fag' or 'faggot' is a pejorative reference for a

homosexual male, but in British English it is also a vernacul ar term for a cigarette
or someone who smokes, or an archaic term meaning a bundle of wood. The
phrase a 'public school' also has opposite meanings in each dialect. In the
majority of America this is a government -funded and organised institution
supported by taxpayers' money. In most of Britain the term refers to a group of
prestigious private or independent schools funded by students' fees, although it
is often also used to refer to any independent school.
However, David Crystal states "We have to allow fo r words which have at least
one [shared] meaning and one or more additional meanings that are specific to
either American English or British English: an example is caravan, which in the
sense of 'group of travellers in the desert' is common to both varieti es; but in the
sense of 'vehicle towed by a car' it is British English (=American English trailer)"
For this reason classifications of differences between the two dialects may be
unreliable. Moreover, much of the differences are now familiar to the inhabit ants
of both regions, due to media influences such as films and music, to the extent
that both dialects have influence on the other.
As well as the familiar vocabulary differences, there are also differences
between spelling regulations and punctuation between the two dialects. When
Britain first colonized America there was no such thing as standardized spelling.
This lead to a divergent evolution in some aspects of spelling. For example, the
use of "z" instead of "s" in words such as 'patronizing' (patr onizing). In Britain
both of these spellings are often permitted, whereas in America it is considered
an error to use the 's' version. Another example is the ommitance of the letter 'u'
in circumstances where it follow 'o'. For example, 'colour' and 'color '. Webster's
1828 dictionary featured only ' -or' and is generally given much of the credit for
the adoption of this form in the United States, as one of the first influences on
standardised spelling in America. Another visible difference is that British En glish
often prefers hyphenated compounds, such as 'counter -attack', whereas
American English discourages the use of hyphens in compounds where there is
no compelling reason, so 'counterattack' is much more common.
Despite the separate evolutions of the lan guage there can be said to be very few
major differences between American English and British English. Due to its
historical status as a member of the British Empire, and its modern status as a
worldwide center of trade, media focus and political influence , America remains

a majorly influential part of world commerce, and as such it would be
detrimental to stray from a version of English that is similar to what is known as
Standard English. The minor differences between British and American English
are main ly due to America's multicultural influences throughout the course of its
colonization, and its physical distance from settlers' homelands. These
differences do not make the language unintelligible to other dialects, but can
lead to miscommunication.

I.5. Anatomy and Evolution
The anatomy that is used in the production of speech has been used by
several people and scholars to try and make it clear the understanding of the
evolution of speech. Important and worth noting point is the fact that the
evolu tion of the language that is used now has a lot to do with the evolution of
speech. It is clear to everyone that vocal communication is an important part to
pass a message too people. Several parts of the anatomy of the human beings is
used in the producti on of speech and in language or linguistics. An example is
the oral and the pharyngeal cavities that contract and relax in a rhythmic manner
to cause sound production. In the lungs, air pressure is produced to make the
production of sound very possible. Th e resonance of the sounds produced is
done in the nasal cavity. The most talked about feature in the vocal anatomical
feature is the larynx and has been used just like the others to explain the theory
of evolution of language. The adult modern humans have very long larynx that
rest very low in their throats. As a result, the humans have very long pharyngeal
capacity. In the Neanderthal man, the lowered larynx is not present at all. The
lowered larynx is at the same way not found present in the chimpanzees. The
larynx is found in the Homo habilis and is descended only so slightly. Five year
old Homo sapiens are the only ones possess such a feature. The lowered larynx
comes with its advantage and disadvantages. There is a very low efficiency in the
respiratory system as a result of the lowered larynx therefore chocking is quite
easy. However, its advantage far much outweigh the disadvantages. The
advantage is that the modern man is capable to have speech. (Lieberman et al.
1972) Late researches have however rea lized that the low larynx is not an
attribute of only the humans since other mammals like the deer also possess the
lowered larynx and yet they cannot speak. The fact is that the lowered larynx has

very much influenced speech and language in the modern man but is clearly not
the only thing that has resulted into speech in the modern humans (Fitch et al.
2001)
The relationship between the morphology of the skeletal and the vocal soft
tissues are attributed to cause speech. The human skull has developed ov er the
ages ever since the evolution of man began. I is quite clear that the Neanderthal
skull morphology was very incapable of supporting the very supralaryngeal
human vocal tract and code. The palate length of the modern man and that of
the Neanderthal m an are not equal anatomically. The palate for the Neanderthal
beings were much less than the palate of the modern man. Therefore there is no
way that the vocal tract of the Neanderthal man could fit into that of the palate
of the modern man. Therefore spee ch and language could not be possible for
the Neanderthals. There are however critics who argue that the vocal tracks of
the Neanderthal man were as normal as those of the modern man. Lieberman
set out to see if the claims were true. He began by placing a La Chapelle Skull on
the vertebral column of a normal of the modern man. The observations made
were that there was an upward posture (Strauss et al. 1963). They found out that
during his life, La Chapelle had suffered arthritis. In a study, Boule had not m ade
any considerations of this therefore he reconstructed the posture of the
Neanderthal very wrongly. Crelin made an observation that the vertebral of the
Neanderthal and that of the normal modern man were not the same at all but
this difference could hav e led into the stoop. The conclusions that were come up
with were that the frequency of the sounds that are generated by the
Supralaryngeal Vocal Tract (SVT) depend totally on the length of the SVT and its
area function. Tubes and pipes were used in the pa st to re construct the SVT of
the La Chapelle. Most recently in the new developed world, the modernized
computers that have graphics that are very precise and accurate are being used
and have been used to determine and to reconstruct the SVT of the Neander thal
man.
To understand the evolution of the Vocal track of the human being that has also
led to the evolution of language, it is very important to also consider the tongue
and its positioning in the system for both the the early man and the modern
man. Th e tongue of an adult is of no doubt circular in nature. It has two
segments, the vertical pharyngeal and the horizontal oral cavity that are placed
at right angles with each other. The two segments have a proportion that is

almost in a ratio of 1:1. The st udy of the vocalizations of primates that are not
human go hand in hand with studies that involve modeling. The tongues of the
monkeys and the chimpanzees cover almost the whole mouth. The arrangement
affects the vocalization of different vowels. A single monkey species may be in a
position to produce different frequencies of the same vowel that resemble the
human vowel -a. (Riede, et al. 2005). There is however a missing formant in these
vocalizations. This third formant is responsible for the production of a SVT that is
a- like. The a -like sound is as a result of the laryngeal air sacs. These air sacs act
as resonators. An example of an animal that does not have these air sacs is the
Diana Monkey (Lieberman, 2006). Research conducted by Lieberman on the
ability of pronunciation of the vowels [a], [i] and [u] have shown that the
presence of the larynx together with the oral cavity has far much affected the
pronunciation of these vowels. The results that were come up with indicated that
the adult human being i s capable of producing all the three sounds so clearly,
the infant human can produce [a] and [i] only and not [u] a similar case is the
Chimpanzee that can also produce only the two sounds [a] and [i]. The
Neanderthal man is however found very incapable of the production of these
sounds. An important point that is very worth a note is that the ability of the
chimpanzees to produce these sounds does not guarantee them a place in
speech because they do not even respond to such sounds. The reason might be
due to the fact that they do not have the perception capability of these sounds.
The evolution of man from the chimpanzee is a prime reason for the change in
the language. In the case of discussing the effects of the evolution language, it is
quite obvious tha t there was an evolution that took place in the SVT of the
primates. The lengths of the SVT and their symmetry are quite different.
Therefore it is quite obvious that language developed all the way from the
Neanderthal man all the way to the modern man. Th e reason for the
development and the evolvement of the STV can so much be attributed to the
need to speech, the survival for the fittest and the need for a mate.
The deaf cannot be left out in the evolution of language since there is a language
of signs. T he evolution of the language of signs follows the evolution of the use
of gestures as a form of communication. It is of great importance to realize that
the left hemisphere of the brain is still dominant in this mode of communication.
The science of the us e of gestures has no big difference with that of uttering the
words. The language of the deaf and those who are not deaf but use these signs

to communicate is the same as that of the linguists who produce sound. The
language also possesses the syntax, morp hology and phonology like the spoken
language. Therefore as the spoken word is adapted to the brain, so is the
language of gestures and evolution of the brain has much affected this art of
language much as it has affected the spoken language. As indicated, the brain of
the modern man has a lot of improvements that have not the brains of the
Chimps and therefore language is believed and is actually true to have evolved
with the brain evolvement.
The evolution of humans and the language has come a long way. H owever, the
anatomical, the genetic and the brain evolution are intertwined together and the
evolution of these three factors have all together resulted into language. The
chimps for example have the ability to produce the sounds [a] and [i] but cannot
do it as a result of the fact that they are incapable of perceiving these sounds. It
means that the SVT is needed developed for the production of these sounds but
also the perception of the brain is required in order to produce the sounds. Had
the SVT of the modern man change and the brain capacity and neurology
remained the same as that of the Neanderthal man, there would have been no
speech due to the simple fact that there would have been no perception of these
sounds. The genes have also developed and evol ved with ages from the
Neanderthal man and had there been no evolution of the genetic complexions
of the human DNA, there could have never been the development of speech. It is
as a result of the fact that the neurological complexion of the modern man
deve loped as a result of the improvement of the genetic characteristics of man.
Therefore from this point, the brain also developed and since the anatomy of
humans was also evolving, language also evolved.

The english language is part of the Germanic branch of the Indo -European
Family of languages. These Indo -European languages originate from Old Norse
and Saxon. English originated from a fusion of languages and dialects, now
called Old English :
It all started when the Germanic tribes arrived in Britain and invaded the country
during the 5th century AD. Before the Germanic invasions in Britain, Britain was
populated by various Celtic tribes. These Celtic tribes were united by customs,
religion and common speech. But the celtic tribes lacked political unity a nd that

made them vulnerable. During the first century, Britain was conquered by Rome.
When Britain finally gained independence from Rome in the year 410 AD, the
Roman legions had withdrawn from Britain and this left the country vulnerable
to invaders. Inh abitants from the north began attacking the inhabitants of Britain.
A lot of different Germanic tribes started to migrate to Britain, but a few stood
out amongst the rest, such as the Saxons, the Angles,the Jutes, the Franks and
the Frisians. They came fro m different parts of what is nowadays northwest
Germany, Denmark and the Netherlands.
The original inhabitants of Britain spoke a Celtic language. But most of the
original inhabitants were driven to the west and north by the invaders. They
mainly migrated to what is now Wales, Scotland and Cornwall. The Saxons called
the native Britons, 'wealas' and wealas meant foreigner or slave, this is where the
modern word Welsh came from.
The germanic tribes were constantly fighting over power. But as time passed the
different germanic cultures gradually became similar to each other until they
eventually stopped seeing themselves as their individual origin but collectively as
either Anglo -Saxon or English. The germanic tribes already spoke similar
languages that now de veloped into what we now call Old English. The words
England and English are derived from Engla -land ("land of the Angles") and
englisc (the language the Angles spoke).
I.6.The history of English language
How did the english language evolve?
The history of the english language is split up into three periods that are
normally called Old English (or Anglo -Saxon), Middle English and Modern English.
Old English was the first form of English.It did not look or sound like the English
we know today. The native English speakers nowadays would find it very difficult
to understand Old English. But still, about half of the most commonly used
words in Modern English originate from Old English. Some fun words that are
derived from Old english are: axode(asked), habbaà ° (have), rihtlice (rightly),
engla (angels), heofonum (heaven), swilcum (such), hu (how) and beon (be). Old
English was spoken from 450 AD until around 1100 AD.
Middle English (1100 -1500)

In 1066 AD William the Conqueror, the Duke of Normandy (Normandy is part of
modern France), invaded and then conquered England. The Normans spoke a
dialect of Old French that is known as Anglo -Norman. This became the language
of the Royal Court, the ruling classes and business classes. There was a sort of
linguistic class division in this period. French was the language the upper classes
spoke, and English was the language the lower classes spoke. But later in 1204
AD, King John lost the province of Normandy to the King of France. Because of
this, the Norman nobles of Engl and started to take more distance from the
French Normans. England became the main concern of the Norman nobles.
From 1349 -1350 The black death killed around one -third of the English
population. Because of these deaths the labouring classes grew in social and
economical importance. Along with the rise of the importance of the labouring
classes English became more important compared to Anglo -Norman as well. The
nobility soon used a modified English as their native tongue. By 1362, the
linguistic division bet ween the nobility and the commoners was pretty much
over.
In Britain English was the dominant language again,but many French words were
added to the vocabulary. This mixture of languages is called Middle English.
Middle English opposed to Old English, can be read, but it would still be difficult
for modern English -speaking people. The Middle English period ended around
1500 AD with the rise of Modern English.
Early Modern English (1500 -1800)
There were a few major factors that influenced Middle English and helped
separate Middle and Modern English.
– The first major factor was the Great Vowel Shift. This was as sudden and big
change in pronunciation that began around 1400 towards the end of the Middle
English period. Vowels were being pronounced shorter and shorter. Modern
English shifted into something that was more understandable for modern
English speaking people.
– Another major factor was that since the 16th Century the British started to get
in contact with many people from all around the world.These ne w contacts, and
the Renaissance period of Classical learning, are the reasons that many new
phrases and words were added to the language. English has been constantly

adopting foreign words, especially from Latin and Greek.
– The last major factor that help ed with the development of Modern English was
the invention of printing. In 1476, William Caxton has brought the printing press
to England in. Since then books became less expensive and literature that is
written in English opposed to Latin, became more co mmon. Now everything was
printed in a common language, and that brought standardization to English.
Most publishing houses were located in London so the dialect of London became
the printing standard. Rules were made for spelling and grammar, and the first
English dictionary was published in 1604.
Late Modern English (1800 -Present)
The difference between early modern English and late modern English is mainly
vocabulary. Grammar, pronunciation and spelling are mostly the same as before,
but late modern Engli sh has a lot more words than early modern English. There
are a few explanations for the huge expansion in words. In the first place,
technology and the Industrial Revolution created the need for new words so
people could describe the new creations and disc overies that were made.
For this, people created many words with Latin and Greek roots. For example,
words like protein,nuclear,oxygen and vaccine did not exist before, but they were
made with Greek and Latin influences. Not all the new words were created from
classical roots though, English words that already existed were also combined for
terms like typewriter, airplane and horsepower. Secondly, at one point
one-quarter of the countries on earth belonged to the British Empire, and that's
why the English l anuage took over foreign words from many different
countries.The britain empire was a maritime empire so phrases that were
created onboard ships were a big influence on the english language. Finally,
during the last half of the 20th century the military in fluence on the english
language was significant. Before the Great War, both Britain and the United
States had small, volunteer militaries. English military slang existed, but this
barely had an impact on standard English. However, during the mid -20th centu ry,
a big number of British and American men joined the military. Because the
military started to play a bigger role in a lot of people's lives, military slang had a
big impact on standard English. Military terms like landing strip, camouflage,
spearhead, blockbuster, roadblock and nose dive started massively entering the
standard English language.

Why did the english language become so important?
When England started trading, exploring and conquering lands, it took the
language with it. The rise of th e British Empire is one of the main reasons why
English spread across the world. The British Empire was expanding
dramatically,during the 1700s. European settlers quickly outnumbered the
original population and so English was established as the dominant la nguage in
most colonies. By the late 19th century the empire's reach was truly global and
the language was also becoming global. Great Britain held colonies on every
continent of the world and the trade language in those areas was English,which
meant that knowing English was important. (!nog beetje eigen woorden)
After the British colonization of North America, English became the dominant
language in the United States and in Canada. The growing cultural and
economical influence of the US and its status as a global superpower since World
War II have significantly increased the language's spread across the world. Today,
American English is predominantly influential, because of the USA's dominance
in television, popular music,cinema, trade and technology (inclu ding the Internet).
Most website's on the internet are in English. Popular American movies and tv
programmes which people watch all over the world are in English. People listen
to American music and English is the language mostly used for business. So the
world has been exposed to english in many ways and that's why most people
know the english language and would like to study it.
Right now it has been stated by experts that around one -third of the world's
population has english as their native language and even more study English as a
second language. A working knowledge of English has become a necessity in a
number of area's. It is the international language of communications, science,
technology, business, medicine, aviation, maritime activities and many more.
Because of that over a Billion people speak English to at least a basic level.
II . Linguistic variation
II. 1. The meaning of linguistic variation
The term linguistic variation (or simply variation ) refers to regional, social, or
contextual differe nces in the ways that a particular language is used.
Variation between languages, dialects , and speakers is known as interspeaker

variation . Variation within the language of a single speaker is called intraspeaker
variation .
Since the rise of sociolinguistics in the 1960s, interest in linguistic variation (also
called linguistic variability ) has developed rapidly.
WHAT IS GRAMMAR?
R.L. Trask notes that "variation, far from being peripheral and inconsequential, is
a vita l part of ordinary linguistic behavior" ( Key Concepts in Language and
Linguistics , 2007). The formal study of variation is known as variationist
(socio)linguistics .
All aspects of language (including phonemes , morphemes , syntactic structures ,
and meanings ) are subject to variation.
II. 2 . EXAMPLES AND OBSERVATIONS
 "Linguistic variation is central to the study of language use. In fact it is
impossible to study the language forms used in natural texts without
being confronted with the issue o f linguistic variability. Variability is
inherent in human language: a single speaker will use different linguistic
forms on different occasions, and different speakers of a la nguage will
express the same meanings using different forms. Most of this variation is
highly systematic: speakers of a language make choices
in pronunciation , morphology , word choice , and grammar depending on a
number of non -linguistic factors. These factors include the speaker's
purpose in communication , the relationship between speaker and hearer,
the production circumstances, and various demographic affiliations th at a
speaker can have."
(Randi Reppen et al., Using Corpora to Explore Linguistic Variation . John
Benjamins, 2002)
 Linguistic Variation and Sociolinguistic Variation
"There are two types of language variation : linguistic and sociolinguistic .
With linguist ic variation, the alternation between elements is categorically
constrained by the linguistic context in which they occur. With
sociolinguistic variation, speakers can choose between elements in the
same linguistic context and, hence the alternation is pro babilistic.
Furthermore, the probability of one form being chosen over another is
also affected in a probabilistic way by a range of extra -linguistic factors
[e.g. the degree of (in)formality of the topic under discussion, the social

status of the speaker and of the interlocutor, the setting in which
communication takes place, etc.]"
(Raymond Mougeon et al., The Sociolinguistic Competence of Immersion
Students . Multilingual Matters, 2010)
 Dialectal Variation
"A dialect is variation in grammar and vocabulary in addition to sound
variations. For example, if one person utters the sentence 'John is a
farmer' and another says the same thing except pronounces the word
farmer as 'fahmuh,' then t he difference is one of accent . But if one person
says something like 'You should not do that' and another says 'Ya hadn't
oughta do that,' then this is a dialect difference because the variation is
greater. The extent of dialect differences is a continuum. Some dialects
are extremely different and others less so."
(Donald G. Ellis, From Language to Communication . Routl edge, 1999)
 Types of Variation
"[R]egional variation is only one of many possible types of differences
among speakers of the same language. For example, there are
occupational dialects (the word bugs means something quite different to a
computer programme r and an exterminator), sexual dialects (women are
far more likely than men to call a new house adorable ), and educational
dialects (the more education people have, the less likely they are to
use double negatives ). There are dialects of age (teenagers have their
own slang , and even the phonology of older sp eakers is likely to differ
from that of young speakers in the same geographical region) and
dialects of social context (we do not talk the same way to our intimate
friends as we do to new acquaintances, to the paperboy, or to our
employer). . . . [R]egiona l dialects are only one of many types of linguistic
variation ."
(C. M. Millward and Mary Hayes, A Biography of the English Language , 3rd
ed. Wadsworth, 2012)
 Linguistic Variables
– "[T]he introduction of the quantitative approach to language description
has revealed important patterns of linguistic behaviour which were
previously invisible. The concept of a sociolinguistic variable has become
central to the description of speech . A variable is some point of usage for
which two or more competing forms are available in a community , with
speakers showin g interesting and significant differences in the frequency
with which they use one or another of these competing forms.

"Furthermore, it has been discovered that variation is typically the vehicle
of language change."
(R.L. Trask, Key Concepts in Language and Linguistics . Routledge, 1999/2005)

– "Lexical variables are fairly straightforward, as long as we can show that
the two variants –such as the choice between soda and pop for a
carb onated beverage in American English –refer to the same entity. Thus,
in the case of soda and pop, we need to take into account that for many
U.S. southerners, Coke (when used to refer to a beverage and not the
steel -making fuel or the illicit narcotic) has the same referent as soda ,
whereas in other parts of the U.S., Coke refers to a single brand/flavour of
the beverage . . .."
(Scott F. Kiesling, Linguistic Variation and Change . Edinburgh University
Press, 2011)

II. 3 . How language changes (meme Theory)
One possible reason for this change and transition of language through
social groups may be attributed to a unit of cultural evolution, the Meme. A
meme is defined as "an idea, behaviour or style that spreads from person to
person within a culture." (Dawkins,) By this definition a Meme acts as an
'evolutionary/replicatory' unit for carrying cultural ideas, symbols or p ractices,
allowing transmission from one mind to another through an act of imitation
such as writing, speech, gestures or rituals.
This description of the Meme and its transmission can be applied to the Learning
of language. Such learning requires, at its foundation, the ability to imitate
sounds (Tomasello, Kruger, & Ratner, 1993). One may be uncomfortable in
describing something as complex as language as „imitation,'' however,
language clearly fit the evolutionary theory in regards to Memes. Information is
copied from person to person, variation is introduced both by degradation (due
to failures of human memory and communication) and by the creative
recombination of different memes. Selection of this variation is then a potential
result of limitations on time, memory, transmission rates and other kinds of
storage space.

II. 4. Variation between Social Classes
As described sociolinguistics is built on the foundations the presence
dialect variation is from random, but are determined by what Weinreich, L abov
and Herzog (1968) defined as 'orderly heterogeneity' – structured variation. This
'structure' can be shown in a number of ways, particularly interesting from the
sociolinguist perspective is the correlation often exhibited between linguistic
structure and social status.
Varieties of English can be identified into two groups referring to the changes of
the variable (Figure 1). The variable (t) refers to the use of a glottal stop instead
of [t], such as in the word bottle, which can be written bot'le to represent the
changed pronunciation of the medial (middle) [t]. Most English speakers appear
to glottalise final [t] in words such as cat, with no/little correlation to social class.
This is not the case however for the use of glottal stops in the medial p osition,
e.g., bottle (bot'le), butter (but'er). This variant is associated with a social stigma.
Table 1 shows the occurrence of glottal stops corresponding to social class in
Glasgow for all positions within a word (including the final [t]) compared with
that occurring only in medial position (Macaulay 1977). Upper class
(Professionals) is represented by Class I whilst the working class is represented
by Class III (unskilled workers). When considering the glottal stop in the medial
position, the highest s ocial class show zero occurrences, while the lowest class
uses 68.8%.
The above linguistic variation is not isolated in its relation to social classes;
there are of course many other variables in English which show similar
sociolinguistically significant distributions. Trudgill (1974) showed the
relationship for variables (ing) and (h) in a Norwich based urban dialect study
(Table 2). Once gain the values show the percentage of variant forms used by
different classes. The variable (ing) refers to variatio ns of alveolar [n] and a velar
nasal [ng] in words ending with -ing for example breeding and cooling. Once
again a lower social status is associated a higher percentage of nonstandard
variation (alveolar) rather than standard (velar nasal) endings. In comm on terms
this variants is known as `dropping one's g's,' and is a commonly recognised
marker of social status over the English -speaking world.
The variable (h) refers to the presence between [h] and lack of [h] at the
beginning of for example heart ('ea rt) and hand ('and). This particular variation is

slightly more complicated as most urban accents in England do not have initial
[h]and as such no variable of it. However in regions that do represent both
variants (present of and lack of initial [h]) a sim ilar pattern is shown. The lower
the individual's social status, the more likely he/she is to drop h's.
As shown in all the examples above a common pattern appears to form
(these cases have dealt with stable linguistic features) this can be plotted
affectively as an s -shape curve. Figure 2 shows the correlation for the absence of
present tense markers ('she play' rather than 'she plays') with social classes
(Trudgill 1974) once again the 'lower' the social class, the higher the variation
from standard.
As shown in figure 2 the data represents a continuum (s -shaped curve) despite
differences between classes, this can be consider once again in a broadly
'evolutionary' sense. Just as the transmission of linguistic features (memes) may
be stopped by physical geographical barriers (i.e. mountain ranges, oceans), it
may also be hindered by social class. This limitation results in boundaries
between social dialects that tend not to be perfect. As such sociolinguistics has
should be considered a quantitative appro ach not a qualitative method.
II. 5 . Future Developments
The above approach outlined for analysing language variation has been
popular, being used across many speaking communities worldwide. However,
whilst these studies have accepted the basic guidanc e (the linguistic variable),
some have suggested (reference) that sociolinguistic studies have been naive by
correlating social facts about the subject in isolation (gender, ethnicity and social
class), rather than observing how social groups come to be an d change over time,
and subsequently analysing the variants that emerge as a result. As a result
some studies have become to approach studies form a bottom up perspective,
examining self -forming social groups and see linguistic structure reflect these
grou ping rather than starting with a broad social category, and look at the
language use within it (a top -down approach).

Types of linguistic observation
 prescriptive

 descriptive
 empirical
Correlation between linguistic and social variables
Linguistic variabl e:
 water versus wa?er
 often versus of(t)en
 fishing versus fishin'
 right rait versus reit
 fourth floor versus fouth floo
 thing versus ting
 etc.
Social variable:
 class
 gender
 ethnicity
 age grouping
 group identity
Free variation versus structured heteroge neity.
 Free variation:
 The random use of alternate forms within a particular dialect.
 Often versus of(t)en
 Structured heterogeneity:
 Language variation is patterned according to social class.
Assumptions
 If you had to do a sociolinguistic study, what would be some hypotheses
 Does our society have social classes?
 How would you operationalize "social class" as a variable?
 Do we speak the "same" all the time?
 Will men/women and people of different ethnic groups all be the same?
 Does everyone want to speak as s tandard as possible?
Early variations theory

 Society is stratified in terms of class.
 Social class = education, income, and so on.
 Linguistic variation correlates with social class.
 Speech style goes from less formal to more formal.
 Speech style variables correlate with social variables.
Sociolinguist John Fischer conducted the first case study, Children in New
England, in 1958. Fisher attempted to find a correlation between the use of the
two present participles -in and -ing which were used by twenty -one of the
twenty -four children he observed. Fisher interviewed the children in settings
ranging from informal to moderately formal and concluded that the decision to
say -in rather than -ing appeared to be related to sex, class, personality and
mood. Accordin g to Fisher, girls are more likely to use -ing than boys are and
boys can be categorised into two groups, the "'[m]odel' boys" used -ing and the
"'typical' boys" were more prone to use -in. The second case study is set on the
island of Martha's Vineyard, a research by linguist William Labov in 1963, where
he studied "the significance of social patterns in understanding language
variation and change". The study focuses on the linguistic variable (a) in the
lexical sets: white, right and kind, which is pronou nced [a] coinciding with the
surrounding mainland and as the centralizing diphthong. Labov made a
centralisation index based on sixty -nine tape -recorded interviews, which he
divided into age groups. The index scores illustrate an increase of the
pronunciat ion of diphthong, which can be explained by defensive attitude
towards the visiting tourists and the desire to belong to the community.
The third case study, Sociolinguistic Variation in New York City, another
research by Labov, consist of two studies. T he first is a pilot survey done in three
department stores of different social status where Labov believed that the
employees would imitate the speech of their customers focusing on the use of
postvocalic [r];the analysis of data confirmed that the most pr estige department
store employees used the postvocalic [r] the most frequently. Secondly, the
larger New York City study, to establish a "more representative sample" of the
city than retailers, is divided into the two variables (th) and (r). Labov intervie wed
158 people, who also had participated in a former sociological survey, and
concluded that the people who pronounced [θ] were of higher social status than
who pronounced (th) as [tθ] or [t]. Furthermore, the higher classes also used the
postvocalic [r] more often than the lower classes.

When comparing and contrasting, differences are found in the manner of
conducting the interviews and assessing the results and similarities in results,
which coincides with structured heterogeneity. The method of c onducting the
research is diverse in all studies; Fischer interviewed the children briefly in
various settings varying from informal to formal, where the most formal entails
"classroom story recitation". Labov made use of three different approaches in
gath ering data. Firstly, he tape -recorded sixty -nine interviews and the
interviewees had variation in "ethnicity, occupation and geographical location" on
Martha's Vineyard. Secondly, Labov pretended to be a customer and asked the
salespeople something where t he answer certainly would be 'fourth floor', in
order to note the use of 'r', moreover, he asked the salesperson to repeat it so
that he could obtain "the tokens in a careful, stressed style". Finally, Labov
conducted interviews with four categories: conti nuous speech, reading a short
passage, reading a word list "containing instances of pertinent variables", and
reading word -pairs concerning "key variables". Additionally, there is a difference
in assessing the results, John Fischer counted the use of the t wo present
participles and divided them into three categories: girls, 'model' boys, 'typical
boys', whereas Labov uses in the Martha's Vineyard case study a scoring system
ranging from zero to three; he separated the groups according to age and
calculated the average per age group. In his New York case study, Labov also
uses a scoring system and is the group divided into socioeconomic groups such
as lower class, working class, lower middle class, and upper middle class.
Nevertheless, the results of all stud ies are similar since it coincides with the
structured heterogeneity, which means that language variation is patterned
according to social class and speech style variables correlate with social
variables.
The disadvantages are mostly in the manner o f conducting the research
and advantages of the three researches are that they broke new ground in
further researches. The disadvantage of the first research is that the presence of
the interviewer could influence the outcome of the case, perhaps the child ren
adopt his manner of speaking in some way. Another problem is that, Fischer did
not look at the influence of parents or the influence of peers. However, he
observed that "people adopt a variant not because it is easier to pronounce
(which is most freque ntly is, but not always), but because it expresses how they
feel about their relative status versus other conversant". An advantage is that

Fischer established the basic methods in variationist studies, which was an
essential tool in helping linguist Labov in breaking new ground in understanding
language in its social context. The disadvantage of the Martha's Vineyard study is
also the influence of the interviewer and moreover, since the interviewer is not a
speaker of the variety on Martha's Vineyard, the interviewees could be more
probable to speak as if they are not tourist but habitants of the island, and
emphasis their variety opposite the one on the mainland. The advantage of
Labov's study in Martha's Vineyard is the he achieved to develop an empirical
approach to the study of language and illustrated "the interplay between
linguistic and social factors in a relatively simple setting", which is quite an
accomplishment. The disadvantage of the third study is that the pilot survey in
the department store is not recorded, but later transcribed which could make
the evidence of postvocalic [r] tainted and slightly unreliable. Furthermore, in the
larger New York City study the participants know that they are being interviewed,
which could influence the manner of speaking since it does not have to be the
way the normally speak. The advantage is that this study showed that
"socioeconomic differentiation cannot be ignored in studies of language
structure".
To conclude, John Fischer and William Labov managed to establish social
stratification empirically with the use of these three case studies. The results
demonstrate that 'free variation', "the random use of alternate forms within a
particular dialect", is not highly apparent, however, language variation is
patterned according to social class, which is the 'structured heterogeneity' theory.
The researches illustrate, despite the problems caused by manner of conducting,
that linguistic variables correlate with social variables, which is a breakthrough
for fut ure linguist and other case studies.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Origin and Evolution of Language – W. Tecumseh Fitch – Cambridge University
Press , 2010
2. Linguistic Variation and Change Scott F. Kiesling. Edinburgh University Press,
2011
3. Variation and linguis tic theory Patrick Honeybone University of Edinburgh

CONTENT

INTRODUCTION
Chapter I . The evolution of language
I.1. The meaning of language

I.2. The components of language

I.3. Standard Engl ish

I.5. Anatomy and Evolution. Genetics and Evolution of Language
Chapter II . Linguistic variation
II. 1. The meaning of linguistic variation
II. 2 . EXAMPLES AND OBSERVATIONS
II. 3 . How language changes (meme Theory)
II. 4. Variation between Social Classes
II. 5 . Future Developments
BIBLIOGRAPHY