In 1963, a group of 14 seven-year-old British children from various socio-economic backgrounds spent what seemed to be an ordinary day of enjoyment at the zoo, the playground and a dance party. These children did neither meet by chance nor did they happen to be just ‘any’ children. They were chosen, although rather arbitrarily, and brought together for a film project named Seven Up!, a documentary that would later be described as “one of the towering achievements in the history of documentary film”. The series was directed by Paul Almond and filmed by the camera operator Michael Apted, who later became the director of the sequels. Seven Up! was first launched by London based Granada Television as part of a program called World in Action and broadcast on ITV, an independent British network, on May 5, 1964.
The two objectives of Seven Up! were the attempt to represent the variety of social classes in England at the present time on the one hand and a study of the development of English culture on the other. Apted hoped to acquire “a glimpse of England in the year 2000”. The Jesuit proverb “Give me a child until he is seven and I will give you the man” was chosen as a proposition to the series as a result of the assumption that a child’s future is somewhat predestined by its affiliation with a particular social class.
Since 1964, a new documentary was filmed every seven years, hence the production of the sequels Seven Up!, 7 Plus Seven!, 21 Up!, 28 Up!, 35 Up! and 42 Up!, in order to follow up on the lives of these children and to document their personal developments from childhood to adulthood. All chosen individuals were interviewed throughout the series and asked questions about their experiences in life, how they spend their spare time, how they perceive the world around them, which level of education they would like to attain at some point and their general future plans. The purpose of these interview questions was whether the Jesuit motto proves to be true and therefore confirms that the ideas, values and expectations of a seven-year-old child indeed condition their future.The fourteen children who took part in this documentary are Bruce Balden, Jackie Bassett, Symon Basterfield, Andrew Brackfield, John Brisby, Peter Davies, Susan Davis, Charles Furneaux, Nicholas Hitchon, Neil Hughes, Lynn Johnson, Paul Kligerman, Suzanne Lusk, and Tony Walker.
Table of Contents
1. INTRODUCTION
2. AIM OF STUDY
3. METHODOLOGY
4. H- DROPPING
4.1. GENERAL DEFINITION
4.2. THE HISTORICAL SITUATION
4.3. STIGMATISATION IN THE PAST AND PRESENT
5. INDEPENDENT SOCIAL VARIABLES
5.1. SOCIAL CLASS AND ITS CORRELATION WITH EDUCATION AND OCCUPATION
5.2. SOCIAL CLASS AND LINGUISTIC VARIATION
5.3. NETWORKS
5.4. AGE
5.5. GENDER AND SEX
5.6. MOBILITY
5.7. GEOGRAPHICAL MOBILITY
5.8. OCCUPATIONAL MOBILITY
5.9. SOCIAL MOBILITY
6. THE INTERVIEWEES
6.1. JACKIE
6.2. TONY
6.3. BRUCE
6.4. NICHOLAS
6.5. SUZIE
6.6. ANDREW
7. INTERVIEWEES REMARKS ON SOCIAL CLASS - A SELF-STYLISATION
8. METHOD OF DATA GATHERING
9. ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION
9.1. JACKIE
9.2. TONY
9.3. BRUCE
9.4. NICHOLAS
9.5. SUZIE
9.6. ANDREW
10. DISCUSSION
Research Objectives and Themes
This thesis investigates the social conditioning of h-dropping, a linguistic feature often stigmatized in English. By analyzing the longitudinal "Up!" documentary series, the research aims to correlate the frequency of h-dropping in six participants with independent social variables such as social class, education, mobility, and age to determine if h-dropping remains a significant marker of social identity in present-day England.
- The correlation between h-dropping and social background.
- The impact of education and occupation on linguistic variation.
- The role of social networks and individual mobility in language change.
- The persistence of linguistic stigmatization in British society.
- Comparative analysis of speech patterns across diverse socio-economic groups.
Excerpt from the Book
4.1. General Definition
H-dropping, also described as ‘h-instability’ or ‘h-variable’ describes the omission of the letter ‘h’ in the stressed syllable of words like home, honey, hungry or hell. This linguistic variation is “particularly sensitive to social stratification in [its] pronunciation” (Martin Montgomery 1995: 65). John Wells shares a similar view on h-dropping. In his book Accents of English he states that it “appears to be the single most powerful pronunciation shibboleth in England” and it plays a major role in the English we speak today (1982: 253-4).
H-dropping is mainly apparent in accents of the lower social classes where ‘h’ is omitted in words like hit, hammer, hedge or happy. They are pronounced /ıt/, /æmə/, /ed/ and /æpi/ instead. Consequently, minimal pairs such as hedge and edge, heat and eat, hall and all, art and heart, and arm and harm are perfect homophones, meaning they are pronounced the same (Hughes/Trudgill 1997: 62, Wells: 253-4).
Summary of Chapters
1. INTRODUCTION: Provides context for the "Up!" documentary series and explains its role as a longitudinal resource for studying the development of British children from different socio-economic backgrounds.
2. AIM OF STUDY: Defines the research objective of investigating the hypothesis that h-dropping acts as an indicator of independent social variables.
3. METHODOLOGY: Details the rationale for using the "Up!" series as a sociolinguistic corpus and the criteria for selecting the six participants.
4. H- DROPPING: Explores the linguistic definition, history, and the long-standing stigmatization of h-dropping in English society.
5. INDEPENDENT SOCIAL VARIABLES: Analyzes the theoretical framework, discussing social class, networks, age, gender, and various forms of mobility as factors influencing speech.
6. THE INTERVIEWEES: Presents the socio-biographical profiles of the six selected study participants.
7. INTERVIEWEES REMARKS ON SOCIAL CLASS - A SELF-STYLISATION: Compiles the participants' own perspectives on the existence and influence of class in England.
8. METHOD OF DATA GATHERING: Describes the practical process of recording and calculating the percentage of h-dropping for each participant.
9. ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION: Evaluates the statistical data for each of the six subjects, correlating their h-dropping ratios with age, mobility, and education.
10. DISCUSSION: Summarizes the study's conclusions, confirming that h-dropping remains a reliable indicator of social status and social mobility in British English.
Keywords
h-dropping, sociolinguistics, social class, linguistic variation, longitudinal study, Up series, Received Pronunciation, social identity, social mobility, education, prestige, stigmatization, English dialects, phonology, language change
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this research?
This research focuses on h-dropping as a linguistic variable and its correlation with independent social factors in English society.
Which documentary series serves as the foundation for this study?
The study is based on the British "Up!" documentary series, which follows the lives of fourteen individuals starting in 1964.
What is the core research question?
The study examines whether h-dropping functions as an indicator of social status and how it is influenced by education, mobility, and social class.
What scientific methodology was employed?
The author employed a pragmatic quantitative approach, recording every instance of h-dropping in the participants' speech and calculating the frequency against total possible occurrences across different life stages.
What does the main part of the work cover?
The main body covers the linguistic definition of h-dropping, its historical and social context, an analysis of independent social variables, and a detailed evaluation of six specific case studies.
Which key terms characterize the study?
The study is characterized by terms such as social stratification, linguistic variation, longitudinal analysis, prestige forms, and social identity markers.
How does the author define the social impact of h-dropping?
The author defines h-dropping as a powerful social shibboleth that historically and presently marks speakers as lower-class or uneducated, contrasting sharply with Received Pronunciation.
How did the participants' mobility affect their linguistic development?
The analysis indicates that increased mobility, particularly for members of the middle class, often leads to linguistic change, whereas upper-class speakers maintain stable speech patterns regardless of mobility.
- Quote paper
- MA Katrin Hansen (Author), 2007, H-Dropping as indicator of independent social variables, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/80423
