Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 17:27:16 -0400 From: "Dennis R. Preston" Subject: Re: vernacular Sali, In fact, this is one of difficulties I had in mind. What a 'native speaker' is (and, therefore, what the intepretation of their 'strongest' or 'most deeply-embedded' variety would be), as you point out, not a given by any means. DInIs >Dennis Preston writes: >> >>These are some very important issues. I would add to the style and status >>senses of vernacular the other 'acquisition' one, namely, the >>sociolinguistic 'commonplace' that your vernacular is your 'first learned' >>and hence 'strongest' variety. >> > There are also many instances where a speaker's vernacular is not >their first language or mother tongue, but a variety acquired much >later--especially those cases in which a speaker's first language has >fallen in attrition. This is actually one of the problems with our >sublimation of the native speaker's authority in linguistics. Not all >native speakers are adequate judges of well-formedness/acceptability of >utterances, nor adequate sources of data, although in the majority of cases >non-native speakers just do not do any better, except where they are the >norm-setters. > > I agree with your other comments. > >Sali. > >******************************************************* >Salikoko S. Mufwene s-mufwene[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE] >University of Chicago 773-702-8531; FAX 773-834-0924 >Department of Linguistics >1010 East 59th Street >Chicago, IL 60637 > >*******************************************************