The results above refer to the dataset as a whole. When the distributions of the results were considered in detail, it was clear that different speakers were employing radically different production strategies especially in the production of the phonemically palatalised laterals. Although the older speakers from Lewis produced categorically palatalised laterals, this was not the case in any other speaker group. The teachers from Glasgow (who all grew up in a Gaelic-speaking environment on the Isle of Lewis) produced mainly palatalised laterals, although the data from individual speakers indicates that the one male teacher in the sample categorically produced laterals with no palatalisation at all. Among the young people, Jonathan from Lewis produced categorically palatalised laterals. Jonathan lived in a very rural part of the island around one hour’s journey from Stornoway. He spoke Gaelic with both sets of grandparents as well as attending Gaelic church services once a week. It is possible this amount of exposure, and interaction with Gaelic in rural parts of Lewis explains their high rates of palatalised lateral production compared to the other young people. This result supports data from previous studies of minority language revitalisation contexts, which found those speakers with more contacts in the minority language-speaking community were more likely to reproduce the language’s traditional systems (Mougeon, Rehner & Nadasdi 2004; Gathercole & Thomas 2009; Morris 2013).
There is a very clear pattern across the different speaker groups: the Lewis older speakers produced 100% palatalised laterals, the Glasgow teachers slightly fewer, the Lewis young people fewer again, and the least palatalised laterals were found in Glasgow. It is likely this represents an ongoing tendency in Gaelic towards fewer distinctions in the lateral system, although this change is far from complete and much variability exists. Only two speakers produced laterals with no aspect of palatalisation at all: the young male Glasgow teacher and speaker gf10, Nicola. All other speakers variably produced some aspect of palatality whether this was a palatalised lateral, a palatal glide, or a non-palatalised lateral followed by a palatal glide.
Why is the palatalised lateral liable to substantial variability? Change from a palatal or palatalised lateral to a palatal glide (the production strategy used by some speakers in this study) is well-attested in the literature, for example, Vulgar Latin laterals were produced as palatal laterals in Old French, which then became palatal glides in Early Modern French (Price 1998, 54). It is therefore possible that the reduction in usage of the palatalised laterals among young Gaelic speakers could be a language-internal development.
(Thomason 2001, 62). Gaelic is not directly adopting the lateral system of local varieties of English, but there is potential erosion of a phonemic category which English lacks. Examples are cited in the literature concerning language attrition contexts which are similar to this situation. For example, Campbell & Muntzel (1989, 186) explain that Pilpil, a language of El Salvador, has lost contrastive vowel length as this feature does not exist in community- dominant Spanish. It seems possible that the Gaelic palatalised lateral is liable to variation and change as this phonemic lateral does not exist in English. While English does not have a phonemic distinction between velarised and alveolar laterals, all speakers will be familiar with these sounds in English. It is possible, however, that some Glaswegian speakers never produce non-velarised laterals in English, and some Lewis young people never produce velarised laterals in English. Even if they do not produce alveolar or velarised laterals in English themselves, the young people will be familiar with these sounds from other English dialects they are exposed to, whereas a palatalised lateral is a much more unusual lateral production. In other words this change could be accelerated by Gaelic’s situation of endangerment and revitalisation, but the direction it takes and particular feature susceptible to change is informed by the nature of the community-dominant language. For this reason, the Gaelic palatalised lateral is the one most liable to variation and change, especially in the speech of young people with less intense interaction with rural varieties of Gaelic.
A previous study of language revitalisation in the Gaelic languages, Maguire (1991, 197), also notes fewer phonemic laterals in the speech of young people compared to traditional contrasts made in the language. Similarly, ´O Curn´ain (2007, 414) notes that a young speaker of Galway Irish merges palatalised and alveolar laterals. Very few speakers produced no palatalised laterals at all (eight out of 39). These data do not therefore indicate that palatalised laterals have completely disappeared, merely that they are lower in frequency among younger speakers. If indirectly this is due to the influence of English as discussed above, then this change represents an example of ‘covert transfer’ in the terminology of Jones (2005). Although not specifically the object of study here, a related phenomenon is noted in Tiree
Gaelic, where palatalised /Rj/ has undergone change, and is now typically realised as [j]
( ´O Maolalaigh 2008a).
Another clear generational difference in the data was the spread of values across the different lateral phonemes: older Lewis speakers produced palatalised laterals with the highest F2-F1, and velarised laterals with the lowest F2-F1 (Figure 6.13). This suggests the Lewis older speakers maintain very distinct phonemic categories. The younger speakers in both Lewis and Glasgow maintain less distinct phonemic categories. A similar result was found in Nance & Stuart-Smith (2013), who found that older Lewis speakers distinguished Gaelic aspirated and non-aspirated stop series to a greater extent that Lewis younger speakers, and argued that this greying of phonemic categories may be indicative of language change. It appears a similar process may also be ongoing in the lateral system, where phonemic laterals are becoming less distinct among younger generations.