Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T17:57:41.391Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Be like and the Constant Rate Effect: from the bottom to the top of the S-curve

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 April 2020

MATT HUNT GARDNER Open the ORCID record for MATT HUNT GARDNER [Opens in a new window] ,
DEREK DENIS Open the ORCID record for DEREK DENIS [Opens in a new window] ,
MARISA BROOK Open the ORCID record for MARISA BROOK [Opens in a new window]  and
SALI A. TAGLIAMONTE Open the ORCID record for SALI A. TAGLIAMONTE [Opens in a new window]
MATT HUNT GARDNER
Affiliation:
Quantitative Lexicology and Variational Linguistics (QLVL), Linguistics Research Unit, KU Leuven, Blijde-Inkomststraat 21, Box 3308, 3000Leuven, [email protected]
DEREK DENIS
Affiliation:
Department of Language Studies, University of Toronto Mississauga, Maanjiwe nendamowinan 4162, 3359 Mississauga Road, MississaugaONL5L [email protected]
MARISA BROOK
Affiliation:
Department of Linguistics, University of Toronto, Sidney Smith Hall, Room 4055, 100 St George Street, TorontoONM5S 3G3, [email protected]
SALI A. TAGLIAMONTE
Affiliation:
Department of Linguistics, University of Toronto, Sidney Smith Hall, Room 4075, 100 St George Street, TorontoONM5S 3G3, [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The be like quotative emerged rapidly around the English-speaking world and has quickly saturated the quotative systems of young speakers in multiple countries. We study be like (and its covariants) in two communities – Toronto, Canada, and York, United Kingdom – in apparent time and at two separate points in real time. We trace the apparent-time trajectory of be like and its covariants from inception to saturation. We take advantage of the prodigious size of our dataset to examine understudied aspects of the linguistic factors that condition quotative variation. Building on earlier suggestions (Cukor-Avila 2002; Durham et al.2012) that be like might show patterning over time consistent with the Constant Rate Effect (or CRE, Kroch 1989), we argue that the CRE does indeed apply to the rise of be like, but needs to be handled with care. Logistic modelling assumes that the top of the S-curve is located at 100 per cent of a given variable context. In the case of be like, the saturation point is nearer 75–85 per cent, with minor variants retaining small semantic footholds in the system. In conjunction with our analysis, we suggest how to adapt the predictions of the CRE to changes likely to lead to saturation but not categorical use.

Keywords

quotativeslanguage variation and changebe likeconstant rate effectcomparative sociolinguistics
Type
Research Article
Information
English Language & Linguistics , Volume 25 , Issue 2 , June 2021 , pp. 281 - 324
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2020 Published by Cambridge University Press

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

We are indebted to Bill Haddican, Mercedes Durham, and their collaborators for kindly allowing us to use the data from Durham et al. (2012); the Faculty of Arts and Science at the University of Toronto and its International Course Module programme for sponsoring the data-collection in York in 2013; the University of York, particularly Sam Hellmuth; York St John University, especially Andrew Merrison; the Killam Trusts; the Economic and Social Research Council of the United Kingdom (ESRC) for research grants between 1996 and 2003; the Social Science and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC) for research grants from 2001 to the present; our audiences at Change and Variation in Canada 7 (Toronto, ON, 4-5 May 2013), NWAV 42 (Pittsburgh, PA, 4-5 October 2013) and the 2016 Annual Meeting of the Linguistic Society of America (Washington, DC, 7-10 January 2016). Specifically, we would like to thank Laura Wright, Alexandra D'Arcy and three anonymous reviewers for their comments, as well as the Language Variation and Change Group at the University of Toronto. We also acknowledge the following undergraduate students for collecting new data in 2013: Al-Hawra Al-Saad, Shakeera Baker, Matthew Barozzino, Anjanie Brijpaul, Sarah Cao, Kwan Chan, Judy Chau, Jasmine Po Yan Choi, Suekyoung Choi, Annita Chow, Yeogai Choy, Leif Conti-Groome, Susana Coto, Naomi Cui, Joel Dearden, Alice Dutheil, Younghoon Eom, Izzy Erlich, Neil Fletcher Hoving, Dylan Fotiadis, Samantha Fowler, Leor Freedman, Paula Garces, Francesca Granata, Norhan Haroun, Jangho Hong, Rong Huang, Yanling Huang, Sherry Hucklebridge, Chia-Tzu Juan, Yerbol Kerimov, Sherina Khan, Parisa Khosraviani, Caroline Kramer, Ophelia Kwong, Brian Lang, Victor LeFort, Jian Li, Shengnan Li, Jennifer Li, Yayun Liang, Samantha Pei-Hsuan Lu, Grace Lui, Kit Lui, Hanna Lyle, Julienne Mackay, Vanessa Mak, Eula Mangantulao, Bianca Masalin-Basi, Jonathan Mastrogiacomo, Robin McLeod, Denise Medina, Trista Mueller, Anoja Nagarajah, Diana Nicholls, Jungwook Park, Tae Park, Victoria Peter, Jennifer Pratt, Monty Preston, Assad Quraishi, Philipp Rechtberger, Maria Recto, Heather Regasz-Rethy, Kristen Santos, Louise Shen, Maksym Shkvorets, Brianna Stein, Patricia Thompson, Stephanie Travassos, Khoa Tu, Yi Wang, Luke West, Ravi Wood, Jessica Yeung, and Sung-Jun Yoon.

References

Baayen, R. Harald. 2008. Analyzing linguistic data: A practical introduction to statistics using R. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bailey, Charles J. N. 1973. Variation and linguistic theory. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
Bailey, Guy, Wikle, Tom, Tillery, Jan & Sand, Lori. 1993. Some patterns of linguistic diffusion. Language Variation and Change 5(3), 359–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barbieri, Federica. 2005. Quotative use in American English: A corpus-based, cross-register comparison. Journal of English Linguistics 33(3), 222–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barbieri, Federica. 2007. Older men and younger women: A corpus-based study of quotative use in American English. English World-Wide 28(1), 23–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartón, Kamil. 2019. MuMIn: Multi-Modal Inference. R package version 1.43.15. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=MuMIn.Google Scholar
Bates, Douglas M., Maechler, Martin, Bolker, Ben & Walker, Steve. 2015. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software 67(1), 1–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blyth, Carl Jr., Recktenwald, Sigrid & Wang, Jenny. 1990. I'm like ‘say what?!’ A new quotative in American oral narrative. American Speech 65(3), 215–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buchstaller, Isabelle. 2011. Quotations across the generations: A multivariate analysis of speech and thought introducers across 5 decades of Tyneside speech. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 7(1), 59–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buchstaller, Isabelle. 2014. Quotatives: New trends and sociolinguistic implications. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Buchstaller, Isabelle & D'Arcy, Alexandra. 2009. Localised globalisation: A multi-local, multivariate investigation of be like. Journal of Sociolinguistics 13(3), 291–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buchstaller, Isabelle, Rickford, John R., Traugott, Elizabeth Closs, Wasow, Thomas & Zwicky, Arnold. 2010. The sociolinguistics of a short-lived innovation: Tracing the development of quotative all across spoken and internet newsgroup data. Language Variation and Change 22(2), 191–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buchstaller, Isabelle & van Alphen, Ingrid (eds.). 2012. Quotatives: Cross-linguistic and cross-disciplinary perspectives. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butters, Ronald R. 1982. Editor's note to Schourup (1982). American Speech 57(2), 149.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L. 2003. Mechanisms of change in grammaticalization: The role of frequency. In Joseph, Brian D. & Janda, Richard D. (eds.), The handbook of historical lingusitics, 602–23. Malden, MA: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Callary, Robert E. 1975. Phonological change and the development of an urban dialect in Illinois. Language in Society 4(2), 155–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chambers, J. K. & Trudgill, Peter. 1998. Dialectology, 2nd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cheshire, Jenny, Kerswill, Paul, Fox, Sue & Torgersen, Eivind. 2011. Contact, the feature pool and the speech community: The emergence of Multicultural London English. Journal of Sociolinguistics 15(2), 151–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cukor-Avila, Patricia. 2002. She say, she go, she be like: Verbs of quotation over time in African American Vernacular English. American Speech 77(1), 3–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cukor-Avila, Patricia. 2012. Some structural consequences of diffusion. Language in Society 41(5), 615–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cukor-Avila, Patricia & Bailey, Guy. 2011. The interaction of transmission and diffusion in the spread of linguistic forms. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 17(2), Article 6. https://repository.upenn.edu/pwpl/vol17/iss2/6 (8 August, 2019).Google Scholar
D'Arcy, Alexandra. 2004. Contextualizing St. John's Youth English within the Canadian quotative system. Journal of English Linguistics 32(4), 323–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
D'Arcy, Alexandra. 2007. Like and language ideology: Disentangling fact from fiction. American Speech 82(4), 386–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
D'Arcy, Alexandra. 2012. The diachrony of quotation: Evidence from New Zealand English. Language Variation and Change 24(3), 343–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
D'Arcy, Alexandra. 2015a. Quotation and advances in understanding of syntactic systems. Annual Review of Linguistics 1(1), 43–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
D'Arcy, Alexandra. 2015b. Stability, statis and change: The longue durée of intensification. Diachronica 32(4), 449–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
D'Arcy, Alexandra. 2017. Discourse-pragmatic variation in context: Eight hundred years of LIKE. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dailey-O'Cain, Jennifer. 2000. The sociolinguistic distribution of and attitudes toward focuser like and quotative like. Journal of Sociolinguistics 4(1), 60–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denis, Derek. 2015. The development of pragmatic markers in Canadian English. PhD dissertation, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
Denis, Derek, Gardner, Matt Hunt, Brook, Marisa & Tagliamonte, Sali A.. 2019. Peaks and arrowheads of vernacular reoganization. Language Variation and Change 31(1), 43–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dimlock, Michael. 2019. Defining generations: Where Millennials end and Generation Z begins. FACTANK: News in the Numbers, Pew Research Center. https://pewrsr.ch/2szqtJz (13 January, 2020).Google Scholar
Drager, Katie & Hay, Jennifer. 2012. Exploiting random intercepts: Two case studies in sociophonetics. Language Variation and Change 24(1), 59–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Durham, Mercedes, Haddican, Bill, Zweig, Eytan, Johnson, Daniel Ezra, Baker, Zipporah, Cockerman, David, Danks, Esther & Tyler, Louise. 2012. Constant linguistic effects in the diffusion of be like. Journal of English Linguistics 40(4), 316–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferrara, Kathleen & Bell, Barbara. 1995. Sociolinguistic variation and discourse function of constructed dialogue introducers: The case of be + like. American Speech 70(3), 265–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fox, Barbara A. & Robles, Jessica. 2010. It's like mmm: Enactments with it's like. Discourse Studies 12(6), 715–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fox, Sue. 2012. Performed narrative: The pragmatic function of this is + speaker and other quotatives in London adolescent speech. In Buchstaller, & van Alphen, (eds.), 231–57.Google Scholar
Fruehwald, Josef, Gress-Wright, Jonathan & Wallenberg, Joel C.. 2013. Phonological rule change: The Constant Rate Effect. In Seda Kan, Claire Moore-Cantwell & Robert Staubs (eds.), NELS40: Proceedings of the 40th Annual Meeting of the North East Linguistic Society, vol. 1, 219–30.Google Scholar
Gardiner, Shayna. 2017. Yours, mine, and ours: What ancient Egyptian possessives can tell us about language change and stable variation. PhD dissertation, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
Gardner, Matt Hunt. 2017. Grammatical variation and change in Industrial Cape Breton. PhD dissertation, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
Haddican, Bill, Johnson, Daniel Ezra & Hilton, Nanna Huag. 2016. Constant effects and the independence of variants in controlled judgment data. Linguistic Variation 16(2), 247–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haddican, William & Zweig, Eytan. 2012. The syntax of manner quotative constructions in English and Dutch. Linguistic Variation 12(1), 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heine, Bernd & Kuteva, Tania. 2005. Language contact and grammatical change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henley, Bridget, Hollett, Meghan, Ingram, Elizabeth & Van Herk, Gerard. 2008. Grey's Anatomy viewers as a community of choice (seriously!). Presented at New Ways of Analyzing Variation (NWAV) 37, Rice University, Houston, TX.Google Scholar
Hopper, Paul J. & Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 2003. Grammaticalization, 2nd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horvath, Barbara M. & Horvath, Ronald J.. 1997. The geolinguistics of a sound change in progress: /l/ vocalization in Australia. U. Penn Working Papers in Linguistics: A selection of papers from NWAVE 25 4(1), Article 8. https://repository.upenn.edu/pwpl/vol4/iss1/8 (8 August 2019).Google Scholar
Hothorn, Torsten, Bretz, Frank & Westfall, Peter. 2008. Simultaneous inference in general parametric models. Biometrical Journal 50(3), 346–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ito, Rika & Tagliamonte, Sali A.. 2003. Well weird, right dodgy, very strange, really cool: Layering and recycling in English intensifiers. Language in Society 32(2), 257–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, Daniel Ezra. 2009. Getting of the Goldvarb standard: Introducing Rbrul for mixed-effects variable rule analysis. Language and Linguistic Compass 3(1), 359–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kauhanen, Henri & Walkden, George. 2018. Deriving the Constant Rate Effect. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 36(2), 483–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kroch, Anthony. 1989. Reflexes of grammar in patterns of language change. Language Variation and Change 1(3), 199–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kroch, Anthony. 1994. Morphosyntactic variation. In Beals, Katharine, Denton, Jeannette, Knippen, Robert, Melnar, Lynette, Suzuki, Hisami & Zeinfeld, Erica (eds.), CLS 30: Papers from the 30th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, vol. 2, 180–201. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
Labov, William. 1972. Sociolinguistic patterns. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Labov, William. 1984. Field methods of the project of linguistic change and variation. In Baugh, John & Sherzer, Joel (eds.), Language in use: Readings in sociolinguistics, 28–53. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Labov, William. 1990. The intersection of sex and social class in the course of linguistic change. Language Variation and Change 2(2), 205–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labov, William. 1994. Principles of linguistic change, vol. I: Internal factors. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Labov, William. 2001. Principles of linguistic change, vol. II: Social factors. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Labov, William. 2003. Pursuing the cascade model. In Britain, David & Cheshire, Jenny (eds.), Social dialectology: In honour of Peter Trudgill, 9–22. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labov, William. 2007. Transmission and diffusion. Language 83(2), 344–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labov, William. 2018. The role of the Avant Garde in linguistic diffusion. Language Variation and Change 30(1), 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mathis, Terrie & Yule, George. 1994. Zero quotatives. Discourse Processes 18(1), 63–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nevalainen, Terttu & Raumolin-Brunberg, Helena. 1996. Sociolinguistics and language history: Studies based on the Corpus of Early English Correspondence. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Overstreet, Maryann. 1999. Whales, candlelight, and stuff like that: General extenders in English discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Paolillo, John C. 2011. Independence claims in linguistics. Language Variation and Change 23(2), 257–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, Ian. 2007. Diachronic syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rodríguez Louro, Celeste. 2013. Quotatives down under: Be like in cross-generational Australian English speech. English World-Wide 34(1), 48–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Romaine, Suzanne & Lange, Deborah. 1991. The use of like as a marker of reported speech and thought: A case of grammaticalization in progress. American Speech 66(3), 227–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schiffrin, Deborah. 1981. Tense variation in narrative. Language 57(1), 45–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schourup, Lawrence. 1982. Quoting with go ‘say’. American Speech 57(2), 148–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singler, John Victor. 2001. Why you can't do a VARBRUL study of quotatives and what such a study can show us. U. Penn Working Papers in Linguistics 7(3), article 19. https://repository.upenn.edu/pwpl/vol7/iss3/19 (8 August 2019).Google Scholar
Strobl, Carolin, Malley, James & Tutz, Gerhard. 2009. An introduction to recursive partitioning: Rationale, application, and characteristics of classification and regression trees, bagging, and random forests. Psychological Methods 14(4), 323–48.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tagliamonte, Sali A. 2006. Analysing sociolinguistic variation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali A. 2012. Variationist sociolinguistics: Change, observation, interpretation. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali A. & Baayen, R. Harald. 2012. Models, forests, and trees of York English: Was/were variation as a case study for statistical practice. Language Variation and Change 24(2), 135–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali A. & Brooke, Julian. 2014. A weird (language) tale: Variation and change in the adjectives of strangeness. American Speech 89(1), 4–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali A. & D'Arcy, Alexandra. 2004. He's like, she's like: The quotative system in Canadian youth. Journal of Sociolinguistics 8(4), 493–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali A. & D'Arcy, Alexandra. 2007. Frequency and variation in the community grammar: Tracking a new change through the generations. Language Variation and Change 19(2), 119–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali A. & D'Arcy, Alexandra. 2009. Peaks beyond phonology: Adolescence, incrementation, and language change. Language 85(1), 58–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali A., D'Arcy, Alexandra & Rodríguez Louro, Celeste. 2016. Outliers, impact, and rationalization in linguistic change. Language 92(4), 824–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali A. & Denis, Derek. 2010. The stuff of change: General extenders in Toronto, Canada. Journal of English Linguistics 38(4), 335–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali A. & Denis, Derek. 2014. Expanding the transmission/diffusion dichotomy: Evidence from Canada. Language 90(1), 90–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali A. & Hudson, Rachel. 1999. Be like et al. beyond America: The quotative system in British and Canadian youth. Journal of Sociolinguistics 3(2), 147–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tannen, Deborah. 1986. Introducing constructed dialogue in Greek and American conversational and literary narrative. In Coulmas, Florian (ed.), Direct and indirect speech, 311–32. New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Trudgill, Peter. 1974. Linguistic change and diffusion. Language in Society 3(2), 215–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trudgill, Peter. 1986. Dialects in contact. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Vandelanotte, Lieven. 2012. Quotative go and be like: Grammar and grammaticalization. In Buchstaller, & van Alphen, (eds.), 173–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallenberg, Joel C. 2013. A unified theory of stable variation, syntactic optionality, and syntactic change. Presented at the 15th Diachronic Generative Syntax Conference, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON.Google Scholar
Weinreich, Uriel, Labov, William & Herzog, Marvin. 1968. Empirical foundations for a theory of language change. In Lehmann, Winfred P. & Malkiel, Yakov (eds.), Directions for historical linguistics, 95–188. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Wickham, Hadley. 2009. ggplot2: Elegant graphics for data analysis. New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winter, Joanne. 2002. Discourse quotatives in Australian English: Adolescents performing voices. Australian Journal of Linguistics 22(1), 5–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolfson, Nessa. 1979. The conversational historical present alternation. Language 55(1), 168–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, Charles D. 2002. Knowledge and learning in natural language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Yule, George & Mathis, Terrie. 1992. The role of staging and constructed dialogue in establishing speaker's topic. Linguistics 30(1), 199–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar