Annett Michel
Australian English Prosody
and the Conceptualization of the Australian Ethos
Series A: General & Theoretical Papers
ISSN 1435-6473
Essen: LAUD 2006
Paper No. 671
Universität Duisburg-Essen
Annett Michel
(Formerly University of Greifswald (Germany))
Australian English Prosody
and the Conceptualization of the Australian Ethos
Copyright by the author
2006
Series A
General and Theoretical
Paper No. 671
Reproduced by LAUD
Linguistic Agency
University of Duisburg-Essen
FB Geisteswissenschaften
Universitätsstr. 12
D- 45117 Essen
Order LAUD-papers online: http://www.linse.uni-due.de/linse/laud/index.html
Or contact: [email protected]
Annett Michel
Australian English Prosody
and the Conceptualization of the Australian Ethos
Contents
Introduction ...................................................................................................................2
The Project Methodology .............................................................................................2
Australian English Prosody..........................................................................................4
Changes in Prosody.......................................................................................................5
Australian English Ethos ..............................................................................................7
Australian English Prosody and Changes in the Lexicon .........................................8
Monotonous Australian English Speechstyle............................................................14
Results and Implications.............................................................................................17
Bibliography ................................................................................................................19
1
Introduction
Most people intuitively connect language and culture. In this respect, any language would
not only be part of its culture, but would also mirror that culture.
To prove this obviously intuitive argument in a scientific way appears to be rather
complicated. Indeed, science often neglects such problems (Macnamara 1994: 159): “We
describe a proposition as being intuitive when it presents itself to us as true without benefit
of conscious reasoning or proof.“ But is it not the aim of science to try to prove what is just
intuitively understood or even unconsciously accepted by people? Wierzbicka who clearly
stated in numerous studies that there exists a connection between aspects of culture and
language, formulates this as follows: “To many, it is axiomatic that language is a mirror of
culture, as well as being a part of culture” (ibid. 1992: 375). In general, this statement is
regarded as being true, but linguists today argue about its corresponding scientific theory
and linguistic application.
Today, language is studied mostly in connection with other disciplines which are much
easier to define, such as sociology (Sociolinguistics) or psychology (Psycholinguistics).
With regard to culture and aspects of culture, many scientists seem to have real problems in
analysing language in connection to culture, although within the last couple of years there
seems to have been an increasing tendency to bring it into consideration. Still, it seems to be
much easier to think of the relation between language and culture as interesting for
speculation, but seldom for real empirical study. In this sense, it appears true when Fishman
argues (1994: 84): “The whole truth’ about the relationship between language and culture
will probably never be told. The relationship is both subtle and complex and has both
objective and subjective dimensions.”
The Project Methodology
This paper constitutes a part of a larger project which deals with the problem of how human
language displays the ethos of the people who speak that language.
As only one cognitive system regulates all imagination of people, special conventions
in language need to exist to help us differentiate between what is real for us and what is not
real (Palmer 1996: 49). Palmer calls these features empirical protective functions. They are
the particularities any language has. As an example he refers to the Papago language in
Arizona. Here, the speaker uses the word “s”, when he/she describes an event which he/she
does not know first hand. Palmer (1996: 49) concludes: “... virtually all imagery is
structured by culture and personal history.” These kinds of linguistic features let us
differentiate between one language and the other, and not only between languages but also
between variations and varieties of languages.
As Wierzbicka often states in her work, it is the quantity of the usage of features in a
language that is important, not whether they are only present in one language and not in the
other. In other words, the question is how many people use these particularities in their
2
everyday talk so often that you come across it as being prominent in this language. In this
regard, I studied Australian English, taking into account the three varieties: Broad
Australian English, General Australian English and Cultivated Australian English. These
form a continuum: of the three varieties, Broad Australian English can be regarded as being
more on the prototypical “Australian” end and Cultivated Australian English being more
akin to British English.
But why Australian English? I could have also chosen any other variety as subject for
study such as Canadian or African English. Australian English though, is much more
suitable for such an extensive and comprehensive study. Its Anglo-Australian history is
shorter than that of the other varieties. The variety started to develop due to the massive
settlement of British and Irish convicts at the end of the 18th century, the varieties started to
develop. In contrast, American English is about 400 years old. Another factor to be
considered is the relative isolation of Australia itself as a continent, apart from various
waves of immigration, which mostly affected the main cities of Australia such as
Melbourne, Adelaide or Sydney.
Australian English inherits a large whole number of linguistic specifics which sets it
apart from other varieties of English such as British, Irish or American English. These
characteristics might appear in those other varieties as well, but to a much lesser extent than
in Australian English.
As for the linguistic features analysed, I chose very different aspects of the linguistic
system, not focussing strictly on only one level such as lexis or grammar. And as a foreigner
to Australia, it was impossible for me to immediately know what particular features I would
have to look for. After living in Australia for some time, I realized that there are even more
and different features I would like to look at which I have not included in the project yet.
Therefore, I primarily chose the linguistic features according to the classical study by
Sydney Baker (1966), which included analogies, rhyming slang, the word bloody, which is
already discussed in numerous studies, diminutives, particles such as like or sort of, HRT
(High Rising Terminal) in theory and also Australian English prosody.
The underlying method chosen is what Palmer calls Cultural Linguistics. Although
Cultural Linguistics seems to be a rather newly emerging research area within linguistics,
such an approach has been demanded by a number of scholars for some time (Bloch 1990;
Keesing 1994, You 1992). The postulated basis of a merger of rather different scientific
disciplines could lead to more detailed and further reaching insight into linguistic problems
than is already the case.
Palmer (1996) describes his approach to Cultural Linguistics in more detail. He views
it as a synthesis of anthropological disciplines such as Anthropological Linguistics,
Ethnomethodology, Ethnography of Speaking and Cognitive Linguistics (Palmer 1996: 32):
...it [cultural linguistics] assumes neither arbitrary conceptual boundaries nor
sequentially applied algorithms. Rather than neatly inclusive categories, discrete
3
levels of language, and modular processes of phonology, morphology, syntax,
and semantics, it more often structures linguistic concepts as complex and
gradient and as parallel and interrelated processes constituted by patterns of
mutual activations in conceptual networks.
In this sense, Cognitive Linguistics is extended by Cultural Linguistics. Palmer (1996: 273)
includes in this approach suprasegmental elements as well, such as intonation and stress in
the phonological level. He (Palmer 1996: 277f) defines the transition between such
dimensions as tone, syllable, or word stress in traditional phonology as multidimensional
phonology. Therefore, patterns of intonation can be described in detail according to their
different dimensions and the relationship between them (Palmer 1996: 279): “That is, units
on dimensions of intonation, morphology, and phonology correlate to one another in time.”
According to this even phonology seems to be culturally defined. Phonology is therefore
connected as much as lexis to mental images and cognitive models. Palmer writes (1996:
272f):
Contrary to most contemporary views, phonology often reveals a symbolic
dimension that is penetrated by the emotive realm of ethos and world view. (…)
Like other aspects of language, phonology seems intimately connected to imageschemas, cognitive models, and world views. (...) Phonology is cultural.
Taking the above into account, I included the phonological level in the overall project.
Australian English Prosody
Prosody inherits multiple functions on various levels. It can indicate syntax, turn-taking in
conversational interactions, types of utterance such as questions and statements, and
people's attitudes and feelings. The forms (or elements) of prosody are derived from the
acoustic characteristics of speech. They include pitch or frequency, length or duration, and
loudness or intensity. All these forms are present in varying quantities in every spoken
utterance. The varying quantities help determine the function to which listeners orient
themselves in interpreting the utterance. What influences the perception of prosody is the
differences in pitch height of syllables within an utterance.
Mitchell & Delbridge (1965: 6) define the Australian prosody, also called drawl, as
follows: „The drawl is simply slow utterance leading to a leisurely rhythm and accompanied
by some increase in the lengths of sounds.“ And, Burgess (1973: 314) writes about the
differences of the intonation between British English and Australian English:
It would seem that there is a broad similarity in intonatory habits between
speakers of the two varieties of English [British English and Australian English],
Australian English, however, tends to avoid, in general, variation in pitch within
syllables and, in particular, the high - fall accent…
We can conclude therefore that Australian English prosody is somehow different from
British English prosody in terms of the following:
4
1. slower speech
2. lower pitch height
3. a comparatively longer vowel length
Baker (1966: 432) discusses historical data of 1892, but the data he uses are very
incongruent. While some people stated that Australians speak without any accent, others
describe it as being very slow. In this respect, Baker (1966: 432) concludes: „ Obviously
(...) some commentators had either been getting around with their ears closed or had limited
their experience to special social groups.“
In order to understand this discrepancy, we need to ask who are the commentators
discussed by Baker and what does Baker mean when he says that Australian English has no
accent. The answers must be very closely connected. Baker cites commentators who talk
about Australian English as having no accent. The commentators can be regarded as
members of higher social status, such as journalists (Baker 1966: 431). But he also cites
people of this class who refer to the very slow and „bad“ speech (Baker 1966:431). As
Baker already suggests, it seems that various groups in Australia spoke various “Australian”
Englishes, at least Broad Australian English and Cultivated Australian English which differ
in their likeness to British English. Those persons commenting on the accent of Australian
English compared it to British English.
Therefore, the development of this specific intonation corresponds to the development
of the other features which were discussed in the overall paper. It can be stated that the
intonation must have started to develop at the beginning of the Australian English society.
Hence, it can be directly linked to the development of the Australian ethos.
Changes in Prosody
As Mitchell (1970: 5) explains, prosodic changes within one language can be of either
psychological or physiological nature. Physiological changes can be pitch contrasts or the
loudness of an utterance. Therefore, they are not part of the phonological system but
phenomena which vary from person to person (Mitchell 1970: 5):
One may say the sentence, ‘I’m very pleased indeed’, excitedly, loudly, or on a
high general pitch, and another may say it slowly, placidly, softly, and on a
medium pitch, and we regard it as the same sentence said in the same accent.
Such features as loudness, slowness or softness of an utterance are created by the subjective
feeling of a person in a certain situation or context. For instance, aggression can produce
loudness in speech. Therefore, interaction and the special context of the situation are very
important factors that influence prosody.
This is what Palmer (1996: 37) calls the “emergent meaning”. If it is true that language
reflects cognition, then this is most visible in the interaction between people in discourse
(Palmer 1996: 37). The meaning of a word or prosody, as it was already stated, is developed
5
by cultural and social situations. In order to find out about this meaning, it is therefore
necessary to concentrate on the personality and experiences of the people involved. These
individual features define the context of the discourse participants. In contrast to the
“emergent meaning”, there is the “situated meaning” (Palmer 1996: 39), which appears to
be relatively stable. If certain components of a meaning of an utterance can be neglected due
to a certain situation or a certain context, this meaning becomes clear. The boundary
between “situated meaning” and “emergent meaning” is blurred. Therefore, it is the
“situated meaning”, that we have to analyse.
According to Ladd (1978: 98) especially pitch contrast and the stress of syllables are
key elements of an abstract cognitive structure. Psychological – cognitive situations can be
source and condition for the fixed usage of suprasegmental features of a language. Bolinger
(1978: 475) writes: „Pitch range and pitch height are clearly tied to emotional states.“ This
proposition is also supported by Labov when he states: (1963: 43): „Emotion, is often
expressed through peripheral, gradient systems: by prosody, vocal qualifier, and gesture.“
Therefore, he puts prosody on the same level as gesture. Asher (1994: 3575) writes in this
respect about rhythm:
The perception of rhythm is a psychological need, the means whereby
phenomena are made sense of, and sensory stimuli are absorbed as subjective
percepts.
Hence, it seems only possible to determine a relation between prosody and ethos if we look
at the individual person in the individual situation. But, if the individuals within one group
follow the same behavioural patterns and the same ethos, they can be analysed as a group.
Pointing to this phenomenon Bernard (1965: 19) writes:
There is some support in the figures here for the view that a particular dialect of
English does postulate a particular rate of speaking not for the individual but for
the group. Different languages have different stress patterns and so do different
dialects and it is not hard to believe that these force different rhythms and
different rates on their speakers.
In this sense, Agar (1994: 171) explains on the example of American English, especially the
New York dialect in contrast to others: „New Yorkers speak more quickly and shift topics
more rapidly.“ Fixations of this kind can be regarded as a stable intonation pattern of a
group and can therefore be analysed as well.
In this sense, prosody can be regarded as a stable feature of a language when the
situated meaning is abstracted. Therefore, it can be analysed as a group phenomenon, and
by doing so, we can also compare it to ethos.
6
Australian English Ethos
The term “ethos” is very complex to define. Geertz (1957: 421) differentiates between ethos
and the so-called Weltanschauung or Weltsicht. While Weltsicht is described as a picture
people have of the world, their society and themselves, ethos is explained as follows (Geertz
1957: 421):
A people’s ethos is the tone, character, and quality of their life, its moral and
aesthetic style and mood; it is the underlying attitude towards themselves and
their world that life reflects.
And Rozbicki (1985: 7) writes in this sense:
An ethos consists of the fundamental values and ideas which characterize the
orientation of a given culture and uniform attitudes, customs, and practices of a
people; [...] .
In this respect, ethos becomes the dominant aspect of a culture. It can be regarded as the
unconscious regulation of behaviour and feeling for norms. Wallace (1970: 145) defines
ethos similarly. He adds the emotional aspect: „The term ‘ethos’ denotes one particular kind
of ‘object’ to which value is apt to be commonly attached by members of a society.“ The
primary basis for ethos is the emotional experience people have. Emotions are regarded as
complex reactions that help people to behave according to certain conditions and situations.
While emotions appear universal, the reflection of them, meaning the behaviour according
to them, is culturally determined. Therefore, emotions do determine ethos as well.
In short, ethos can be regarded as a cognitive system of values which determines
cultural behaviour. Therefore, ethos can be analysed by exact methodology. Cultural
behaviour can be intrinsic to the individual in so far as it becomes a part of his/her
personality. It becomes part of the characteristics of all individuals in one group. Therefore
all members of this group are to a certain extent similar in their behaviour.
In this respect, we need to look at the social group situation in Australia at the very
beginning of the Australian English settlement. Overall, there existed primarily two
different groups: convicts from the British Isles and British officers. The convict group
could be regarded as a subculture to the dominant British system. As a subculture they
formed a class which was determined by collectivity and loyalty (Ward 1958: 28).
Expressing this using the Natural Semantic Metalanguage (NSM), it read as follows:
I am part of a „group“ of people
The members of this subculture stood in opposition to the dominant culture. The social
situation at the beginning of the settlement could be regarded as a strong polarisation
between convicts and British military, where group ties seemed to be most important.
I think, if someone X is part of the same „group“ of people, it is good
I think, if someone X is not part of the same „group“ of people, it is bad
7
According to Halliday (1978) this development can be described as the development of an
antisociety which is dependent on another society (1978: 164). Analogously there exists an
antilanguage:
An antilanguage is not only parallel to an antisociety; it is in fact generated by it.
(…) The antilanguage arises when the alternative reality is a counter - reality, set
up in opposition to some established norm.
The most important characteristic is its lexicon (Halliday 1978: 165):
The principle is that of same grammar, different vocabulary; but different
vocabulary only in certain areas, typically those who are central to the activities
of the subculture and that set it off most sharply from the established society.
Vocabulary is not only new but also overlexicalized (Halliday 1978: 165) and the border
between the Standard language and the Antilanguage is not clearly definable. Therefore,
both form a continuum (Halliday 1978: 171).
The group of convicts started to develop as a „new“ group with „new“ values.
Therefore, one feature of social life is the focus on the strong group ties that were
necessarily maintained. Still, new status concepts had to develop within the group itself. But
status differences within one group imply a certain amount of mistrust between the
members of the group. According to this social situation, the psychological situation
maintained that the open display of emotions was seen as a disclosure of the self. Emotional
expression was therefore not encouraged:
I am part of one „group“ of people
I feel something towards some person X in this “group” of people
If I say this people know what I feel
If people know what I feel this is bad
Australian English Prosody and Changes in the Lexicon
In order to explain how Australian English in today’s version developed, several theories
exist. One of these theories is dialect mix.
It is often regarded as the source for the changed intonation pattern. Baker (1966: 452)
states: „...given the dialectical influences that have been imported to Australia from Britain,
it is unlikely that the Australian could have developed any other kind of accent.“
Unfortunately, Baker does not go into detail here.
Apart from this explanation, the reason for this change can be seen in the stronger
stress on syllables. In this respect Mitchell and Delbridge (1965a: 54) write that long phases
of unstressed syllables which probably result from a very high number of lexis within one
phrase, are diminished by filling in a full stress or secondary stress. Mitchell and Delbridge
(1965: 54) state: „As a result, the number of stressed syllables that occur in a given sentence
will probably be larger in Australian than in [British] English pronunciation.“ The
8
difference can be seen in the following example, where the first syllable following the
apostrophe is stressed (Mitchell and Delbridge 1965: 54):
British English: ‘Half a pound of ‘butter.
Australian English: ‘Half a ‘pound of ‘butter.
Analogous to that, Baker (1966: 452) highlights it as being the reasons for the monotone
intonation. Like Mitchell and Delbridge, he explains the change of the stress within phrases
and sentences, even within single words, in the same fashion.
The intonation change within one sentence is based on the strong lexicalization.
Therefore, it defines the rhythmic pattern of an utterance as well as the low pitch in
Australian English compared to British English. Monotony is created by the combination of
the length of vowels, the pattern of stress and the reduction of pitch contrasts. So far we can
state that Australian English people must have put more words into one phrase than British
English people. If the accent driven speech rhythm of British English is mapped on
Australian English then the utterance would be expanded as well. The hearer would then be
faced by a slow speech.
As a result it can be stated that a change in the lexicon of Australian English strongly
influenced the prosody and therefore intonation. Turner (1966: 107) extends this even
further when he states about the developing diphthongization of phonemes in Australian
English: „A slow and deliberate speech will encourage diphthongizations, and the partial
equalization of stress favoured such developments as the lengthening of the final vowel of
city.“ Australian English would therefore be phased by a process of diphthongization.
According to Mitchell and Delbridge, in all three variants, vowels are more closed
than in Received Pronunciation. The main difference seems to be the realization of the
diphthongs. Bernard (1963: 347) writes:
There are many differing degrees of length to be heard as between the shortest
[ae] of [a], say, rapid pronunciation of [baek] to the longest [ae:] of a protracted
and derisive [bae:g]. We have a continuum.
Therefore, we can state that at least one other linguistic feature in Australian English must
have contributed to the change in the Australian English prosodic pattern. Therefore, we
need to look as well at lexical features, analogies and rhyming slang and how they reflect
Australian ethos. Both features were prominent at the very beginning of the settlement of
Anglo-Australian people in Australia.
Analogies
Analogies are part of any language. Within the overall paper, they were dealt with
separately as they seem to appear in Australian English more often than in other varieties of
English. Ramson states about analogies in Australian English (1970: 52): ”Colloquial
phrases using vivid but sometimes nonsensical journalistic similes seem more popular with
9
Australians than other English speakers,....” Analogies like necks on them like blanky emus,
as safe as a koala in a reserve are often cited (Baker 1966).
One particular feature of these analogies is its humour. Therefore, they can be
regarded as a face saving strategy. Indeed, humour inherits a regulating character in
discourse. To show this more clearly, the main function of humour as a socio-psychological
phenomenon needs to be discussed. Humour serves in a number of complex functions. The
main function would be that it helps to show positive emotions (Holmes 1998). It can be
seen as a „face-saving-strategy“, where the speaker’s utterance cannot be taken directly
(Brown/Levinson 1987). This produces a feeling of solidarity. In this sense, it might also be
used to indirectly criticize or cloak aggressive statements of the speaker toward the hearer
(Kane, et al. 1977: 14):
...humour serves as a rather safe way of self-disclosing taboo interests or values
and to probe the values, intentions, and/or motives of others, is a decommitment
tactic allowing the source to dissociate himself from responsibility for
performing a prior action, is a face-saving device that helps preserve a person’s
identity after an embarrassing incident, is an unmasking tactic that reveals the
hypocrisy and pretensions of persons, groups, institutions, and nations, provides
a basis for forming positive and long-standing relationships with others, and
allows for safe practice of ingratiation of powerful others.
Tannen (1990: 139, cited in Danesi 1994: 122) states that it seems to be a male feature of
communication in order to deal with the status of each person in a group. It seems therefore,
that analogies are rather hearer-oriented. The speaker seems to try to regulate the emotional
contents of an utterance in order to hold back his/her own feelings. Using NSM as a tertium
comparationes it would read like this:
I am part of one „group“ of people
I feel something good/bad
If I say this people know what I feel
If people know what I feel this is bad
At the same time the solidarity among the group must not be endangered.
I am part of one „group“ of people
I think, if someone X is part of the same „group“ of people, it is good
I think, if someone X is not part of the same „group“ of people, it is bad
This meaning supports what could be said about the development of the early Australian
English ethos. In short, the relationship between the convicts was determined by a strong
solidarity and loyalty within the group but also by a high degree of mistrust among each
other. That included as well the taboo of expressing emotions verbally. A direct expression
of emotions of any kind was regarded as negative for the self. It was seen as a disruption of
the personality.
10
Returning to analogies, they serve two functions. In terms of verbal communication,
they help to hold up one’s self-defence. As soon as the relationship between two people
changes to a more intimate manner, the linguistic use of words and word connections
changes. McMullen describes familiarity resulting from an intimate relationship as follows
(1986: 52): ”...as friendship develops into intimacy, familiarity may tend to be
characterised by presumptuousness and directiveness in addition to informativeness.”
Therefore, the use of analogies strengthens group ties and allows emotions to go
unrecognized.
The third function would be that analogies are generally regarded as helping people to
conceptualize by visualizing mostly with the help of the word “like”. In English “like” is
the most versatile particle next to the conjunction as ... as as a symmetrical construction.
Wierzbicka (1996: 71ff) who also deals with like as a primitive in the NSM defines for it the
allolex as.
Considering the pragmatic function of this word in discourse and therefore also in
interjections, it seems that the speaker is unable to find the adequate words or phrases in
his/her mind for what he/she wants to express (Ross and Cooper 1979; Östman 1981: 34).
Using analogies allows the speaker to visualize the intention of his/her utterance with only a
small cognitive effort. As Miller (1979) points out, a linguistic analogy need less cognitive
effort by the hearer than the metaphor. Schourop (1985: 42) states according to that:
...like in this use can be seen as a device available to speakers to provide for a
loose fit between their chosen words and the conceptual material their words are
meant to reflect.
Danesi (1994: 99) hints as well to the speech style of adolescents, which he calls „hesitation
mannerism“:
Hesitation mannerism, such as the constant use of ‘like’ throughout their
sentences, indicates that they have, in fact, a hard time relating factual
experiences.
Analogies are therefore used to reduce the cognitive effort of the speaker and the hearer.
Using analogies the speaker speculates on shared knowledge. In the case of Australia,
where the environment was completely new for the arriving settlers and very different to
Britain, this sharing of knowledge was highly important. It was important to use shared
knowledge to explain new concepts. Misunderstandings are reduced when the speaker has a
differing concept from the hearer. In this sense, Ross and Cooper’s (1979: 416) explanation
fits, when they say that like in discourse is used by the speaker as an aid for the hearer. They
write (Ross and Cooper 1979: 416):
Like’s occurrence in such instances might produce a momentary heightening of
attention in listeners, enabling them to process the focused element more
efficiently...
11
Goddard (1986: 53) writes, that the word like indicates, that the speaker compares one with
the other to show similarities. It shows that he/she has dealt with the topic mentally and
extents his/her knowledge.
Boroditsky’s (2001) studies concerning analogies highlight their role in how people
develop knowledge. She could show that her informants would call similar objects even
more similar as they really are. The phenomenon could be shown in an even more explicit
way, when the informants were asked to actually say what both objects had in common.
After the listing of common features the objects were regarded as very similar, although this
had not been the case before. Boroditsky (2001: 2) writes in this sense:
...comparison may play a special role in partitioning bits of experience into
categories, sharpening categorical boundaries, and otherwise helping us create
conceptual structure above and beyond that offered by the world.
General cognitive processes, such as the development of analogies can produce systematic
differences in the cognitive representation of the world in each individual (Boroditsky 2001:
3). Therefore, they play a central role in the development of cognitive structures. Boroditsky
(2001: 3) states:
Explanation of categorization, induction, learning, and memory all rely on the
construct of similarity. Things that are similar are likely to end up in the same
categories, are likely to support inductive inferences for each other, will aid in
the learning of other similar things, and serve as good reminders for one another
in memory.
As concepts in Australian English are not the same as those of British English or American
English, they had to be built with the help of analogies according to Australian reality.
Today, both features, analogies and rhyming slang, are not as relevant anymore,
largely confined to myth by townies or said to be existing in the outback regions.
Looking at the historical descriptions of the language of the first settlers, the change in
intonation has coincided with the extended use of these two features. Both features display
to a large degree the early ethos of the convicts. This ethos was determined on the social
level by strong group ties as well as a strong mistrust between the members of the convict
group on the individual level, which resulted on the one hand in a strong group behaviour
and on the other hand in a strong suppression of emotions in public. If we say that the
special intonation pattern of Australian English is based on the elaborate use of these lexical
features, then we can state that it also displays the early ethos of the convicts.
Shortening of Words
As explained above, long utterances had to be pushed between two stressed syllables. In this
respect, it is possible that a tendency of assimilation could have occurred as the speech
rhythm is always independent of the number of syllables within one utterance (Scollon
1982: 339). If we assume that after the original elaborated usage of lexis, which was pushed
12
between two stressed syllables, a reduction of word syllables occurred, it is logical that this
change must have produced an even slower speech tempo.
Over and over again traditional descriptions about Australian English refer to its
tendency to shorten words such as for instance dile for crocodile as well as the addition of
various diminutives such as ie/y or o as in mushies for mushrooms, jarmies for pyjamas,
footy for football or arvo for afternoon. The suffix o denotes as special form of Australian
English and is only seldom heard in British or American English (Dabke 1976:44).
Considering the usage of shortened words and the added suffixes in Australian English
Hornadge (1986: 36) writes:
Australians have been accused of pure laziness in shortening words, but whatever
the reason for this verbal shorthand, the use of diminutives certainly is
widespread.
Baker too defines shortened words in Australian English as typical (Baker 1966: 374):
In Australia, the shorter word is generally chosen in popular use when an
alternative is available – even if, in the process, we part with a well-established
Australian term.
The following paragraph will deal more closely with this phenomenon. Why are words with
more than two syllables often shortened to words with just one syllable? Eble (1996: 35)
describes the process as such: ”...sounds are eliminated from words without an immediate
change in meaning.” Morphemes can be reduced at the beginning of a word and at its end.
And, it seems to be common to shorten words which are in general use. In this sense, Baker
(1966: 27) writes: ”Simply many new words came to be used with great frequency, they
underwent changes - always in the direction of shortening.” In short, words are reduced to
one syllable when the speaker is used to its meaning.
According to Eble (1996) shortened words highlight informality between speaker and
hearer. She adds (Eble 1996: 35): ”...[truncations] can convey a casual and sometimes
sardonic attitude toward the subject.” According to Vygotsky (1939, cited in: Bernstein
1964) shortening of words results from an intense relationship between the speaker and the
hearer. As soon as the object talked about is identified as well-known to all members of the
group, it can be given a so-called short name or even nickname. In this regard, if a speaker
uses the word dile instead of crocodile in discourse, he/she implies that the hearer is familiar
with the shortened word too. It is implied that both discourse partners are members of one
group of people. Trust among the members of one group is demonstrated by using this
method.
I am part of one „group“ of people
I think, if someone X is part of the same „group“ of people, it is good
People who are not members of this group do not know the meaning of these shortened
words and are therefore not really able to follow conversation and understand what is said.
13
They can be excluded from the group. Exactly this can be accomplished by using shortened
words.
I think, if someone X is not part of the same „group“ of people, it is bad
The membership in the group is reinforced. The main focus of shortened words can be seen
in their function to strengthen the informality between the speaker and the hearer. Again, it
seems that this tendency reflects early Australian English ethos.
Monotonous Australian English Speechstyle
Whereas the stress of a word seems to be relatively stable, the stress within one long
utterance such as a phrase or sentence may also vary according to context and attitude of the
speaker:
•
•
towards the hearer or
towards the content of the utterance
Sole - Sabater (1991: 151) writes: „Sentence stress emphasizes the portion of the utterance
that is more important for the speaker or that the speaker wants the listener to concentrate
on.“ In other words, the speaker decides which part of an utterance he/she regards as
important for the hearer. This is highlighted by a special intonation pattern (Brazil 1982:
279). The Australian English intonation pattern is marked by its rather monotonous speech
style.
In western culture, „monotony“ is generally regarded as a very unvaried behaviour and
conception. Effects of long lasting monotonous situations are a general decline in activity
and a relatively insensitivity towards various sensations (FWP 1997: 280).
If we follow this explanation, then the convicts of early Australian English times did
not express emotions by using a monotonous speech style. Whether this was intended or not
remains undefined. Within an interaction the speaker shows the hearer that he/she has no
emotions towards him/her or with regard to the topic. He/she remains relatively
emotionless. The following is expressed:
I do not feel something
or
If I feel something
I don’t want to show it
Fairbanks and Pronovist (1939: 104) write in their analysis of voice characteristics about
displaying indifference within certain situations when emotions are displayed:
[1] The lowest median pitch level, [2] The narrowest total pitch range. [3] The
smallest difference between the mean extents of downward and upward
inflections. [4] The slowest rate of pitch range in upward inflections. [5] The
narrowest mean extent of all shifts and of upward shifts within phrases. [6] The
14
greatest number of pauses [proportionately] at which shifts of pitch were not
made, both within and between phrases. [7] Upward shifts with phrases equal in
extent to downward shifts, the former being greater in all other emotions. [8] The
smallest number per second during phonation of changes one semi- tone or
greater in extent.
Regarding the use of emotions of the Anglo-Australians at the beginning of the Australian
settlement, we can clearly determine a tendency of strongly differentiating rational and
emotional thought processes. The convicts developed a concept of themselves which
ensured their psychological survival within the group. Their life was determined by
relationships which were characterized by loyalty but also mistrust of one another. Empathy
was dismissed. Feelings were seldom if ever communicated. Only the status of the person
within the group was relevant, by using lexis. The emotional distance remained untouched.
Therefore, monotonous intonation mirrors the early Australian English ethos. The
social life and the resulting psychological aspects of the convicts can be regarded as the
reason for this development.
I am part of a „group“ of people
I feel something towards some person X
if I say this people know what I feel
if people know what I feel this is bad
because of this I do something
The Emphasis Marker bloody
Only the individual variation of this general pattern of intonation defines the individual
display of emotions. The emphasis marker bloody takes on the role of intonation patterns as
they are used in British or American English. As Turner (1966: 93) states, the use of bloody
compensates for the loss of the affective intonational pattern in Australian English. The
speaker demonstrates that he/she is emotionally involved. In the overall paper, bloody was
studied as a special feature of Australian English as well.
Differences in Perception
As we could see, the development of the specific intonation corresponds to the development
of the other linguistic features. It can be stated that the intonation must have started to
develop at the beginning of the Australian English society. Hence, it can be directly linked
to the development of the Australian English ethos.
We need to consider as well the fact that most of the early Australian English
population were men. Terango (1978: 547) states that men who differ between a number of
varying pitches and change them often are regarded as being female. McConnell - Ginet
(1978: 550) writes: „...the male pitch range is narrower than the female/effeminate and
15
shows slower and less frequent pitch shifts.“ In this respect the intonation of men is less
dynamic than the intonation of women.
Again, the categorisation of male and female behaviour seems to be prevalent. The
open display of emotions is put aside to female behaviour in Western society. Monotonous
intonation suppresses this successfully. Therefore, it could be said that the intonation pattern
of Australian English is formed by men.
In 1956 Bernard studied the suprasegmental features of the three varieties of
Australian English. He analysed whether it was true to say that Australian English is truly so
slow as it appears to be due to its monotonous style.
Bernard’s analysis showed that Cultivated speakers speak more fluently than Broad
speakers, because Broad speakers tend to have more interruptions in their speech flow. The
articulation rate of male Broad speakers displayed a higher number of pauses and longer
ones (bursts):
[...] [Speech] which is characterised by a series of short, quickly articulated
bursts isolated from one another by awkward pauses, rather than because they are
more verbally dextrous than the rest of the population.
This group (male and speaker of Broad) displayed according to Bernard the highest number
of pauses within shortest utterances. The articulation rate of male speakers of Broad had
been higher than with speakers of Cultivated in spite of the very low rate of utterance. This
means as well that speakers of Broad use more syllables in one utterance than speakers of
Cultivated. In other words, counted in the same time frame, speakers of Broad utter more
syllables than speakers of Cultivated.
This result is coherent with the explanation so far. Still, Bernard (1965: 19) suggested
that speakers of Broad could actually not have been responsible for the slowness of the
language. They displayed due to substracted pauses an even higher articulation rate and had
to speak very fast. Therefore, Bernard (1965: 17f) writes about this group:
Thus what evidence there is supports the high figure of the Articulation Rate for
Broad males and points them out as unfluent speakers given to very short isolated
bursts probably heavily assimilated.
In contrast to the traditional knowledge, as also suggested above, the Broad variety would
be rather fast than slow.
Reeve (1989: 115) bases this conflict between suggested slow speech and these results
in the fact that the listeners react to different parameters. He differentiates between a too fast
group and a slow group of listeners: „...the ‘too fast’ group [react] to the high articulation
rate characteristic of Broad male speakers; the ‘drawl’ group to the slower, more even
rhythm of Broad speakers.“ In other words, the articulation rate and the rhythm are rated
differently, but are defined as speech intonation (Christenfeld 1994). Coulthard and Brazil
(1982: 97) state about this phenomenon:
16
Intensity and durational features regularly cooccur with the pitch choices, and it
may well turn out that the choices we describe as being realised by pitch
phenomena are being identified by hearers through associated intensity and
durational phenomena...
As a second point, Bernard highlights the high number of pauses and punctuations that set
Broad speakers apart from Cultivated speakers. It seems that pauses can be regarded as one
feature which actually determines speech style.
In this regard we also need to refer to Christenfeld (1994). He pointed out that
especially students who were afraid used more pauses than other students. In order to
understand this feeling better it must be explained in the light of Western psychology. To be
afraid of something includes general emotional conditions which are reactions to
expectations about physical danger or psychological danger (FWP: 57, 3).
Specific neurotic fears are declared as being „personal characteristics“. It seems to be
important, that the individual perceives a kind of loss of self worthiness (FWP: 57). In order
to compensate this loss, the person expresses a relative loss of emotions.
Especially these factors define the early Australian ethos (being afraid of expressing
any feelings towards other people of the group.)
I am part of one „group“ of people
I feel something towards some person X
if I say this people know what I feel
if people know what I feel this is bad
and at the same time the reaction
because of this I do/say something
Results and Implications
As it could be shown, in Australian English prosody is clearly related to the early Australian
English ethos. It could be demonstrated that phonology inherits a symbolic dimension as
Palmer (1996) stated. As language is isomorphic, each level complements and forms the
basis for the next level, where prosody is just one part of that level.
Language forms a complementary part of the culture of a people and cannot be
regarded as separate from it, just as the ethos of a people is an integrated part of that culture.
By using prosody we express without words and people understand. We anticipate other
people's behaviour and empathise. While words are a merely human manner of
communication, we share with all animals the reception of rhythm and prosody.
The study of Australian English prosody shows clearly how interwoven all linguistic
levels are. There are no discrete levels at all. Words combine to certain structures in order to
reflect certain new concepts; social and psychological aspects determine how they are
linked together, and how they are expressed vocally. In other words, as it is through words
17
we communicate conceptual thinking and feeling, they seem to be the root for change in
syntax, grammar or even prosody due to the influence of the ethos of a people. What is
special in human communication are therefore the words that for themselves can stand for
certain concepts and which we put together to stand for certain concepts.
Prosody is based on our ability to produce sounds and on the way we structure words
into sentences. And in this respect it mostly displays this part of our ethos that is more or
less connected to our emotions. Thus prosody is the music to our words and even if we do
not understand the words, we do understand the music and what is communicated by it.
That is why babies, who are musical, understand some meaning of what their parents say by
listening to the sound. And also animals can even be shown to react to it. Music or prosody
in language is therefore a basic quality and can be regarded as universal.
The reference to music on this matter shows that even though Cultural Linguistics
provides a far greater framework for language study by including all these diverse areas, it
seems that linguistics needs to look even further to other areas that are used for
communicating ideas or feelings, such as music or dancing, etc., to get insight into the
nature of language and especially human language.
Words are the specifics that make out human language. But words consist of vocals
which are part of music and sound. It is now possible to see continuities between the
capacities that humans have that make language possible, and the capacities possessed by
other species.
It was suggested by Seyfarth et at. (1980) in one of the original reports of the studies
with vervet monkeys, that this showed that the monkeys can use different kinds of calls to
make reference to different kinds of objects in the external world. They suggested that this
is an example of a use of vocalization not unlike what we may observe in human language.
They went so far as to claim that vervet monkeys are naming different kinds of predators.
Experiments with chimpanzees showed that they mostly react to actions. What determines
our world view is our thinking in terms of time and space.
18
Bibliography
Agar, M. H. (1994). Language Shock/Understanding the Culture of Conversation. New
York: William Morrow and Company.
Asher, R.E. and J.M.Y. Simpson (1994). The Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics.
Oxford/New York/ Seoul/ Tokyo.
Baker, S. J. (1966). The Influence of American Slang on Australia. The Australian
Language. Sydney: Angus & Robertson, 2. ed.
Bernard, J.R.L. (1963). An extra phoneme of Australian English. AUMLA 20, pp. 346- 352;
(1965) The Rates of Utterance in Australian Dialect Groups. Occasional Papers, 7,
pp. 1-19.
Bernstein, B. (1964). Social Class, Linguistic Codes, and Grammatical Elements. Language
and Speech 5, pp. 221- 240.
Bloch, M. (1990). Language, Anthropology and Cognitive Science. Man, 26, pp. 183- 198.
Bolinger, D. (1972). Degree Words. The Hague: Mouton de Gruyter.
Boroditsky; L. (2001). Comparison and the development of knowledge. MIT. Homepage
MIT, pp. 1 - 19.
Boroditsky, L. and M. Ramscar (2002). The Roles of Body and Mind in Abstract Thought.
Psychological Science. 13, 2, 185 - 189.
Brazil, D. (1982). Impromptuness and Intonation. In: Nils Erik Enkvist (ed.), Impromptu
Speech. A Symposium. Abo: Abo Akademi.
Brown, T. (1994). Affective Dimensions of Meaning. In: Willis F. von Overton and David
S. Palermo (eds.), The Nature and Ontogenesis of Meaning. Hillsdale: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Burgess, O.N. (1973). Intonation Patterns in Australian English. Language and Speech 16:
4, pp. 314 - 326.
Christenfeld, N. (1994). Options and Ums. Journal of Language and Social Psychology.
13/2, pp. 192-199.
Collins, H.E. (1975). The sources of Australian Pronunciation. Working Papers of the
Speech and Language Research Centre. Sydney: School of English, Macquarie
University.
Coulthard, M. and D. Brazil (1982). The Place of Intonation in the Description of
Interaction. In: Deborah Tannen (ed.), Analysing Discourse: Text and Talk.
Washington: Georgetown University Press.
Dabke, R. (1976). Morphology of Australian English. Munich: Wilhelm Finck Verlag.
Danesi, M. (1994). Cool: The Signs and Meanings of Adolescence. Toronto: University of
Toronto Press.
Eble, C. (1996). Slang and Sociability. In- Group Language among College Students.
Chapel Hill/London: The University of Carolina Press.
19
Fishman, J. A. (1994). The Truth about Language and Culture. Journal of the Sociology of
Language, 109, pp. 83- 95.
Geertz, G. (1957). Ethos, World- View and the Analysis of Sacred Symbols. Antioch
Review 17, pp. 421- 437.
Goddard, C. (1986). The Natural Semantics of ‘too’. Journal of Pragmatics 10, pp. 635 644.
Halliday, M.A.K. (1978). Language as a Social Semiotic: The Social Interpretation of
Language and Meaning. London: Edward Arnold.
Holmes, J. (1998). No Joking Matter! The Functions of Humour in the Workplace.
http://www.cltr.uq.edu.au/als98/
Hornadge, B. (1986). The Australian Slanguage. A Look at What we Say and How we Say
it. Sydney: Bacchus Books.
Kane, T.R. et al (1977). Humour as a Tool of Social Interaction. In: Anthony J. Chapman
and H. C. Foot (eds.), It’s a Funny Thing, Humour. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Keesing, R. M (1994). Radical Cultural Difference; Anthropology’s Myth? In: Martin Pütz
(eds.), Language Contact and Language Conflict. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John
Benjamins.
Labov, W. (1963). The Social Motivation of a Sound Change. In: Word 19, pp. 273- 309.
Ladd, R. Jr. (1987). The Structure of Intonational Meaning. Evidence from English.
London: Indiana University Press.
Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, Fire and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the
Mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Macnamara, J. (1994). The Foundations of Logic and the Foundations of Cognition. In:
Willis F. von Overton and David S. Palermo (eds.), The Nature and Ontogenesis of
Meaning. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
McConnell-Ginet, S. ( 1978). Intonation in a Man’s World. Signs: Journal of Women in
Culture and Society, 3:3, pp. 541- 59.
Mitchell, A.G. and A. Delbridge (1965). The Pronunciation of English in Australia. Sydney:
Angus & Robertson.
Mitchell, A.G. (1970). The Australian Accent. In: Ramson, W.S. (ed.), English Transported,
pp. 1-14.
Östman, J.- O. (1981). You Know: A Discourse Functional Approach. Amsterdam: John
Benjamins.
Ramson, W.S. (1970). Nineteenth-Century Australian English. In: W.S. Ramson (ed.),
English Transported, pp. 32-48.
Reeve, J. (1989). Community Attitudes to Australian English. In: P. Collins and D. Blair
(eds.), Australian English: the Language of a New Society. St. Lucia: The University
of Queensland Press.
20
Ross, J. R. and Cooper, W. E. (1979). Like Syntax. In: W. E. Cooper (ed.), Sentence
Processing: Psycholinguistic Studies Presented to Merrill Garrett. London: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
Rozbicki, M. (1985). Transformation of the English Cultural Ethos in Colonial America.
Maryland 1634 - 1720. Warsaw.
Seyfarth, R. M. (1980). The distribution of grooming and related behaviors among adult
female vervet monkeys. Animal Behaviour. 28, pp. 798-813.
Schourup, L. C. (1985). Common Discourse Particles in English Conversation. New York/
London:Garland Publishing.
Scollon, R. (1982). The Rhythmic Integration of Ordinary Talk. In: D. Tannen (ed.),
Analyzing Discourse: Text and Talk. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University
Press.
Sharwood, J. and J. Horton (1966). Phoneme Frequencies in Australian English: A Regional
Study. In: AUMLA 26, pp. 272- 302.
Slobin, D. (1996). From ‚Thought and Language’ to ‚Thinking for Speaking’. In: J.
Gumperz and S. Levinson (eds.), Rethinking Linguistic Relativity. Cambridge, MA:
Cambridge University Press.
Sole- Sabater, M.-J. (1991). Stress and Rhythm in English. Revista Alicantina de Estudios
Ingleses, 4, pp. 145- 162.
Turner, G. W. (1991). Australian English and General Studies of English. Linguistics in
Australia. Trends in Research. Hrsg. von M. Clyne.
Wallace, A. F. C. (1970). Culture and Personality. 2nd ed., NY: Random House.
Ward, R. (1958). The Australian Legend. Melbourne: Oxford University Press.
Wierzbicka, A. (1992). Particles and Linguistic Relativity. International Review of Slavic
Linguistics Semantics, Culture, and Cognition. Universal Human Concepts in Culture
-Specific Configurations. NY/ Oxford: OUP.
Wierzbicka, A. (1996). Contrastive Sociolinguistics and the Theory of ´Cultural Scripts´:
Chinese vs. English. In: M. Hellinger and U. Ammon (eds.), Contrastive
Sociolinguistics. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
You, Rujie (1992). The History and Meaning of Cultural Linguistics. Journal of
Macrolinguistics, Dec., 2, pp. 9-16.
21