Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-01T00:00:05.490Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

‘[The Irish] find much difficulty in these auxiliaries . . .putting will for shall with the first person’: the decline of first-person shall in Ireland, 1760–18901

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 October 2014

KEVIN McCAFFERTY  and
CAROLINA P. AMADOR-MORENO
KEVIN McCAFFERTY
Affiliation:
Department of Foreign Languages, University of Bergen, PO Box 7805 N-5020 [email protected]
CAROLINA P. AMADOR-MORENO
Affiliation:
Department of English, Facultad de Filosofía y Letras, Universidad de Extremadura, Avda. Universidad s/n, 10075 Cá[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Among prescriptivists, the Irish have long had a reputation for not following the rule requiring a distinction between shall with first-person and will with other grammatical subjects. Recent shift towards will with all persons in North American English – now also affecting British English – has been attributed to the influence of Irish immigrants. The present study of data from the Corpus of Irish English Correspondence (CORIECOR) finds that Irish English has not always preferred will. Rather, the present-day situation emerged in Irish English between the late eighteenth and late nineteenth centuries. This important period covers the main language shift from Irish to English, and simplification in the acquisition process may account for the Irish English use of will.

In eighteenth-century Irish English, shall predominated. Comparison with other colonial Englishes of the period – US English (Kytö 1991) and Canadian English (Dollinger 2008) – and with north-west British English (Dollinger 2008) shows broadly similar cross-varietal distributions of first-person shall and will. Irish English shifted rapidly towards will by the 1880s, but was not unusual in this respect; a similar development took place at the same time in Canadian English, which may indicate a more general trend, at least in colonial Englishes. It is thus doubtful that Irish English influence drove the change towards first-person will.

We suggest the change might be associated with increasing literacy and accompanying colloquialisation (Mair 1997; Biber 2003; Leech et al. 2009: 239ff.). As Rissanen (1999: 212) observes, and Dollinger corroborates for north-west British English, will persisted in regional Englishes after the rise of first-person shall in the standard language. Increased use of will might have been an outcome of wider literacy leading to more written texts, like letters, being produced by members of lower social strata, whose more nonstandard/vernacular usage was thus recorded in writing. There are currently few regional letter corpora for testing this hypothesis more widely. However, we suggest that, in nineteenth-century Ireland, increasing literacy may have helped spread first-person will as a change from below. The shift to first-person will that is apparent in CORIECOR would then result from greater lower-class literacy, and this might be a key to understanding this change in other Englishes too.

Type
Research Article
Information
English Language & Linguistics , Volume 18 , Issue 3 , November 2014 , pp. 407 - 429
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

1

Title from Fogg (1796, vol. II: 129; cited in Sundby, Bjørge & Haugland 1991: 191). This view is also reflected in the title of Molloy (1897): The Irish difficulty, shall and will (1897). This work was previously funded by the University of Bergen's Meltzer Foundation (Grant No. 9334, 2008–09) and is currently funded by the Research Council of Norway (Grant No. 213245, 2012–15).

References

Alford, Henry. 1866. A plea for the Queen's English: Stray notes on speaking and spelling, 2nd edn.London: Alexander Strahan.Google Scholar
Amador-Moreno, Carolina P. 2010a. An introduction to Irish English. London: Equinox.Google Scholar
Amador-Moreno, Carolina P. 2010b. Writing from the margins: Donegal English invented/imagined. In Robert McColl Millar (ed.), Marginal dialects: Scotland, Ireland and beyond. Special issue of Forum for Research on the Languages of Scotland and Ireland 1, 52–69.Google Scholar
Arnaud, Réné. 1998. The development of the progressive in nineteenth century English: A quantitative survey. Language Variation and Change 10, 123–52.Google Scholar
Beal, Joan C. 2004. English in modern times 1700–1945. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Bell, Allan. 1991. The language of news media. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas. 2003. Compressed noun-phrase structures in newspaper discourse: The competing demands of popularization vs economy. In Aitchison, Jean & Lewis, Diana M. (eds.), News media language, 169–81. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Biggar, F. J. 1897. Our Ulster accent and Ulster provincialisms. Belfast: Religious Tract and Book Depot.Google Scholar
Bliss, Alan J. 1979. Spoken English in Ireland 1600–1740. Dublin: Dolmen Press.Google Scholar
Burridge, Kate & Kortmann, Bernd (eds.). 2008. Varieties of English, vol. 3: The Pacific and Australia. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Collins, Peter & Peters, Pam. 2008. Australian English: Morphology and syntax. In Burridge & Kortmann (eds.), 341–61.Google Scholar
Corrigan, Karen P. 2000. ‘What bees to be maun be’: Aspects of deontic and epistemic modality in a northern dialect of Irish-English. English World-Wide 21, 25–62.Google Scholar
Corrigan, Karen P. 2010. Irish English, vol. 1: Northern Ireland. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Cusack, Bridget. 1998. Everyday English 1500–1700. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Dolan, Terence P. 2006. A dictionary of Hiberno-English, 2nd edn.Dublin: Gill & Macmillan.Google Scholar
Dollinger, Stefan. 2008. New-dialect formation in Canada: Evidence from the English modal auxiliaries. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Dossena, Marina & Camiciotti, Gabriella Del Lungo (eds.). 2012. Letter writing in Late Modern Europe. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Elsness, Johan. 2009. The present perfect and the preterite. In Rohdenburg, Günter & Schlüter, Julia (eds.), One language, two grammars? Differences between British and American English, 228–45. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Elspaß, Stephan. 2005. Sprachgeschichte von unten: Untersuchungen zum geschriebenen Alltagsdeutsch im 19. Jahrhundert. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Facchinetti, Roberta. 2000. The modal verb shall between grammar and usage in the nineteenth century. In Kastovsky, Dieter & Mettinger, Arthur (eds.), The history of English in a social context: A contribution to historical sociolinguistics, 115–33. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Filppula, Markku. 1999. The grammar of Irish English: Language in Hibernian style. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Fitzgerald, Garret. 1984. Estimates for baronies of minimum level of Irish-speaking among successive decennial cohorts: 1771–1781 to 1861–1871. Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy, Section C, 84, 117–55.Google Scholar
Fitzgerald, Patrick & Lambkin, Brian. 2008. Irish migration 1607–2007. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fitzpatrick, David. 1990. ‘A share of the honeycomb’: Education, emigration and Irishwomen. In Daly, Mary & Dickson, David (eds.), The origins of popular literacy in Ireland: Language change and educational development 1700–1920, 167–87. Dublin: Department of Modern History, Trinity College Dublin/Department of Modern Irish History, University College Dublin.Google Scholar
Fitzpatrick, David. 1994. Oceans of consolation: Personal accounts of Irish migration to Australia. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Fitzpatrick, David. 2006. Irish emigration and the art of letter-writing. In Elliott, Bruce S., Gerber, David A. & Sinke, Suzanne M. (eds.), Letters across borders: The epistolary practices of international migrants, 97–106. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Fries, Charles C. 1925. The periphrastic future with shall and will in Modern English. PMLA 40, 963–1024.Google Scholar
Fritz, Clemens W. A. 2007. From English in Australia to Australian English, 1788–1900. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Harris, John. 1993. The grammar of Irish English. In Milroy, James & Milroy, Lesley (eds.), Real English: The grammar of English dialects in the British Isles, 139–86. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Hickey, Raymond. 2003. Corpus Presenter: Software for language analysis with a manual and ‘A Corpus of Irish English’ as sample data. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Hickey, Raymond. 2004. Development and diffusion of Irish English. In Hickey, Raymond (ed.), Legacies of colonial English: Studies in transported dialects, 82–117. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hickey, Raymond. 2005. Dublin English: Evolution and change. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Hickey, Raymond. 2007. Irish English: History and present-day forms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hulbert, J. R. 1947. The origin of rules for ‘shall’ and ‘will’. PMLA 62, 1178–82.Google Scholar
Hundt, Marianne, Hay, Jennifer & Gordon, Elizabeth. 2008. New Zealand English: morphosyntax. In Burridge & Kortmann (eds.), 305–40.Google Scholar
Jespersen, Otto. 1909–49. A Modern English grammar on historical principles. Copenhagen: Ejnar Munksgaard.Google Scholar
Joyce, Patrick W. 1988 [1910]. English as we speak it in Ireland. Ed. and introduction Terence Dolan. Dublin: Wolfhound Press.Google Scholar
Kallen, Jeffrey L. & Kirk, John M.. 2001. Convergence and divergence in the verb phrase in Irish Standard English: a corpus-based approach. In Kirk, John M. & Baoill, Dónall P. Ó (eds.), Language links: The languages of Scotland and Ireland, 59–79. Belfast: Cló Ollscoil na Banríona.Google Scholar
Kytö, Merja. 1991. Variation and diachrony, with Early American English in focus: Studies on CAN/MAY and SHALL/WILL. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Labov, William. 1972a. The study of language in its social context. In Labov 1972c, 183–259.Google Scholar
Labov, William. 1972b. The social stratification of (r) in New York City department stores. In Labov 1972c, 43–69.Google Scholar
Labov, William. 1972c. Sociolinguistic patterns. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey, Hundt, Marianne, Mair, Christian & Smith, Nicholas. 2009. Change in contemporary English: A grammatical study. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mair, Christian. 1997. The spread of the going-to-future in written English: A corpus-based investigation into language change in progress. In Raymond Hickey & Stanislaw Puppel (eds.), Language history and linguistic modelling: A festschrift for Jacek Fisiak, 1537–43. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Mair, Christian. 2006. Twentieth-century English: History, variation and standardization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mason, George. 1905 [1622]. Grammaire Angloise: Nach den Drucken von 1622 und 1633, ed. Brotanek, R.. Halle: Max Niemeyer.Google Scholar
McCafferty, Kevin. 2001. Ethnicity and language change: English in (London)Derry, Northern Ireland. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
McCafferty, Kevin. 2003. The Northern Subject Rule in Ulster: How Scots, how English? Language Variation and Change 15, 105–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCafferty, Kevin. 2004a. Innovation in language contact: Be after V-ing as a future gram in Irish English, 1670 to the present. Diachronica 31, 113–61.Google Scholar
McCafferty, Kevin. 2004b. ‘[T]hunder storms is verry dangese in this countrey they come in less than a minnits notice . . .’: The Northern Subject Rule in Southern Irish English. English World-Wide 25, 51–79.Google Scholar
McCafferty, Kevin. 2010. ‘[H]ushed and lulled full chimes for pushed and pulled’: Writing Ulster English. In Hickey, Raymond (ed.), Varieties of English in writing: The written word as linguistic evidence, 139–62. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCafferty, Kevin. 2011. Victories fastened in grammar: Historical documentation of Irish English. In Raymond Hickey (ed.), Irish English in today's world. Special issue of English Today 27 (2), 17–24.Google Scholar
McCafferty, Kevin & Amador-Moreno, Carolina P.. 2012a. ‘I will be expecting a letter from you before this reaches you’: Studying the evolution of a new-dialect using a Corpus of Irish English Correspondence (CORIECOR). In Dossena & Del Lungo Camiciotti (eds.), 179–204.Google Scholar
McCafferty, Kevin & Amador-Moreno, Carolina P.. 2012b. CORIECOR: A Corpus of Irish English Correspondence. Compiling and using a diachronic corpus to study the evolution of Irish English. In Migge, Bettina & Chiosáin, Máire Ní (eds.), New perspectives on Irish English, 265–287. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCafferty, Kevin & Amador-Moreno, Carolina P.. In preparation. CORIECOR: The Corpus of Irish English Correspondence. Bergen and Cáceres: University of Bergen and University of Extremadura.Google Scholar
Mencken, Henry L. 1936. The American language, 4th edn.New York: Alfred A. Knopf.Google Scholar
Miller, Jim. 2008. Scottish English: Morphology and syntax. In Kortmann, Bernd & Upton, Clive (eds.), Varieties of English, vol. 1: The British Isles, 299–327. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Miller, Kerby A. 2008. Ireland and Irish America: Culture, class, and transatlantic migration. Dublin: Field Day.Google Scholar
Miller, Kerby A., Schrier, Arnold, Boling, Bruce & Doyle, David N.. 2003. Irish immigrants in the land of Canaan: Letters and memoirs from colonial and revolutionary America, 1675–1815. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Molloy, Gerald. 1897. The Irish difficulty, shall and will. London: Blackie.Google Scholar
Montgomery, Michael. 1995. The linguistic value of Ulster emigrant letters. Ulster Folklife 45, 26–41.Google Scholar
Montgomery, Michael B. 2001a. British and Irish antecedents. In Algeo, John (ed.), The Cambridge history of the English language, vol. VI: English in North America, 86–153. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Montgomery, Michael B. 2001b. On the trail of early Ulster emigrant letters. In Fitzgerald, Patrick & Ickringill, Steve (eds.), Atlantic crossroads: Historical connections between Scotland, Ulster and North America, 13–26. Newtonards: Colourpoint Books.Google Scholar
Moody, Patricia A. 1974. Shall and will: The grammatical tradition and dialectology. American Speech 49, 67–78.Google Scholar
Nevalainen, Terttu & Raumolin-Brunberg, Helena. 2003. Historical sociolinguistics: Language change in Tudor and Stuart England. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Nikolaisen, Lena H. 2011. The use of shall and will in Irish English: A corpus-based diachronic socio-linguistic variation study. Master's Thesis, University of Bergen.Google Scholar
Nurmi, Arja. 2003. Youe shall see I will conclude in it: Sociolinguistic variation of will/would and shall/should in the sixteenth century. In Hart, David (ed.), English modality in context: Diachronic perspectives, 89–107. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Ó Ciosáin, Niall. 1997. Print and popular culture in Ireland 1750–1850. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Ó Siadhail, Mícheál. 1989. Modern Irish: Grammatical structure and dialectal variation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pietsch, Lukas. 2008. Prepositional aspect constructions in Hiberno-English. In Siemund, Peter & Kintana, Noemi (eds.), Language contact and contact languages, 213–36. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Pietsch, Lukas. 2009. Hiberno-English medial-object perfects reconsidered: A case of contact-induced grammaticalisation. Studies in Language 33, 528–68.Google Scholar
Rissanen, Matti. 1999. Syntax. In Lass, Roger (ed.), The Cambridge history of the English language, vol. III: 1476–1776, 187–331. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sankoff, David, Tagliamonte, Sali A. & Smith, Eric. 2005. Goldvarb X. Toronto and Ottawa: University of Toronto and University of Ottawa. www.individual.utoronto.ca/tagliamonte/Goldvarb/GV_index.htm (22 April 2010)Google Scholar
Schneider, Edgar W. 2002. Investigating variation and change in written documents. In Chambers, J. K., Trudgill, Peter & Schilling-Estes, Natalie (eds.), The handbook of language variation and change, 67–96. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Schrier, Arnold. 1997 [1958]. Ireland and the American emigration 1850–1900, 2nd edn.Chester Springs, PA: Dufour Editions.Google Scholar
Scott, Mike. 2009. Wordsmith tools 5.0. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Strang, Barbara M. H. 1982. Some aspects of the history of the be +ing construction. In Anderson, John M. (ed.), Language form and linguistic variation: Papers dedicated to Angus McIntosh, 427–74. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Sullivan, James P. 1980. The validity of literary dialect: Evidence from theatrical portrayal of Irish English forms. Language in Society 9, 195–219.Google Scholar
Sundby, Bertil, Bjørge, Anna Karin & Haugland, Kari E.. 1991. A dictionary of English normative grammar 1700–1800. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Taglicht, Josef. 1970. The genesis of the conventional rules for the use of shall and will. English Studies 51, 193–213.Google Scholar
Taniguchi, Jiro. 1972 [1956]. A grammatical analysis of artistic representation of Irish English with a brief discussion of sounds and spellings. Revised and enlarged edn. Tokyo: Shinozaki Shorin.Google Scholar
Tieken-Boon van Ostade, Ingrid. 2009. An introduction to Late Modern English. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Trudgill, Peter & Hannah, Jean. 2008. International English: A guide to the varieties of standard English, 5th edn.London: Hodder Education.Google Scholar
Wallis, John. 1972 [1653]. Grammar of the English language, with translation and commentary by J. A. Kemp. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Whitney, William D. 1877. Essentials of English grammmar. Boston, MA: Ginn and Heath.Google Scholar