WHAT IS SOCIOLINGUISTICS?

Sociolinguistics is a term including the aspects of linguistics applied toward the

connections between language and society, and the way we use it in different social
situations. It ranges from the study of the wide variety of dialects across a given region
down to the analysis between the way men and women speak to one another.
Sociolinguistics often shows us the humorous realities of human speech and how a
dialect of a given language can often describe the age, sex, and social class of the
speaker; it codes the social function of a language.
http://logos.uoregon.edu/explore/socioling/index.html

Sociolinguistics is the study of the effect of any and all aspects of society, including
cultural norms, expectations, and context, on the way language is used, and the effects of
language use on society. Sociolinguistics differs from sociology of language in that the
focus of sociolinguistics is the effect of the society on the language, while the latter’s
focus is on the language’s effect on the society. Sociolinguistics overlaps to a
considerable degree with pragmatics. It is historically closely related to Linguistic
Anthropology and the distinction between the two fields has even been questioned
recently.[1]

It also studies how language varieties differ between groups separated by certain social
variables, e.g., ethnicity, religion, status, gender, level of education, age, etc., and how
creation and adherence to these rules is used to categorize individuals in social or
socioeconomic classes. As the usage of a language varies from place to place (dialect),
language usage varies among social classes, and it is these sociolects that sociolinguistics
studies.

Applications of sociolinguistics:

For example, a sociolinguist might determine through study of social attitudes that a
particular vernacular would not be considered appropriate language use in a business or
professional setting. Sociolinguists might also study the grammar, phonetics, vocabulary,
and other aspects of this sociolect much as dialectologists would study the same for a
regional dialect.

The study of language variation is concerned with social constraints determining

language in its contextual environment. Code-switching is the term given to the use of
different varieties of language in different social situations.

William Labov is often regarded as the founder of the study of sociolinguistics. He is

especially noted for introducing the quantitative study of language variation and change,
[3]
making the sociology of language into a scientific discipline.

Fundamental concepts in sociolinguistics

While the study of sociolinguistics is very broad, there are a few fundamental concepts
on which many sociolinguistic inquiries depend:

Speech community
Main article: Speech community

Speech community is a concept in sociolinguistics that describes a more or less discrete

group of people who use language in a unique and mutually accepted way among
themselves.

Speech communities can be members of a profession with a specialized jargon, distinct

social groups like high school students or hip hop fans, or even tight-knit groups like
families and friends. Members of speech communities will often develop slang or jargon
to serve the group's special purposes and priorities.

High prestige and low prestige varieties

Main article: Prestige (sociolinguistics)

Crucial to sociolinguistic analysis is the concept of prestige; certain speech habits are
assigned a positive or a negative value which is then applied to the speaker. This can
operate on many levels. It can be realized on the level of the individual sound/phoneme,
as Labov discovered in investigating pronunciation of the post-vocalic /r/ in the North-
Eastern USA, or on the macro scale of language choice, as realized in the various
diagnosis that exist throughout the world, where Swiss-German/High German is perhaps
most well known. An important implication of sociolinguistic theory is that speakers
'choose' a variety when making a speech act, whether consciously or subconsciously.

Social network

Understanding language in society means that one also has to understand the social
networks in which language is embedded. A social network is another way of describing
a particular speech community in terms of relations between individual members in a
community. A network could be loose or tight depending on how members interact with
each other.[5] For instance, an office or factory may be considered a tight community
because all members interact with each other. A large course with 100+ students be a
looser community because students may only interact with the instructor and maybe 1-2
other students. A multiplex community is one in which members have multiple
relationships with each other.[5] For instance, in some neighborhoods, members may live
on the same street, work for the same employer and even intermarry.

The looseness or tightness of a social network may affect speech patterns adopted by a
speaker. For instance, Sylvie Dubois and Barbara Horvath found that speakers in one
Cajun Louisiana community were more likely to pronounce English "th" [θ] as [t] (or [ð]
as [d]) if they participated in a relatively dense social network (i.e. had strong local ties
and interacted with many other speakers in the community), and less likely if their
networks were looser (i.e. fewer local ties).[6]
A social network may apply to the macro level of a country or a city, but also to the inter-
personal level of neighborhoods or a single family. Recently, social networks have been
formed by the Internet, through chat rooms, MySpace groups, organizations, and online
dating services.

[edit] Internal vs. external language

In Chomskian linguistics, a distinction is drawn between I-language (internal language)

and E-language (external language). In this context, internal language applies to the study
of syntax and semantics in language on the abstract level; as mentally represented
knowledge in a native speaker. External language applies to language in social contexts,
i.e. behavioral habits shared by a community. Internal language analyses operate on the
assumption that all native speakers of a language are quite homogeneous in how they
process and perceive language. [citation needed] External language fields, such as
sociolinguistics, attempt to explain why this is in fact not the case. Many sociolinguists
reject the distinction between I- and E-language on the grounds that it is based on a
mentalist view of language. On this view, grammar is first and foremost an interactional
(social) phenomenon (e.g. Elinor Ochs, Emanuel Schegloff, Sandra Thompson).

Differences according to class

Sociolinguistics as a field distinct from dialectology was pioneered through the study of
language variation in urban areas. Whereas dialectology studies the geographic
distribution of language variation, sociolinguistics focuses on other sources of variation,
among them class. Class and occupation are among the most important linguistic markers
found in society. One of the fundamental findings of sociolinguistics, which has been
hard to disprove, is that class and language variety are related. Members of the working
class tend to speak less standard language, while the lower, middle, and upper middle
class will in turn speak closer to the standard. However, the upper class, even members of
the upper middle class, may often speak 'less' standard than the middle class. This is
because not only class, but class aspirations, are important.

Class aspiration

Studies, such as those by William Labov in the 1960s, have shown that social aspirations
influence speech patterns. This is also true of class aspirations. In the process of wishing
to be associated with a certain class (usually the upper class and upper middle class)
people who are moving in that direction socio-economically will adjust their speech
patterns to sound like them. However, not being native upper class speakers, they often
hypercorrect, which involve overcorrecting their speech to the point of introducing new
errors. The same is true for individuals moving down in socio-economic status.

Deviation from standard language varieties

The existence of differences in language between social classes can be illustrated by
the following table:
Bristolian Dialect (lower class) ... Standard English (higher class)
I ain't done nothing ... I haven't done anything
I done it yesterday ... I did it yesterday
It weren't me that done it ... I didn't do it

Any native speaker of English would immediately be able to guess that speaker 1 was
likely of a different social class than speaker 2, namely from a lower social class,
probably from a working class pedigree. The differences in grammar between the two
examples of speech is referred to as differences between social class dialects or
sociolects.

It is also notable that, at least in England and Australia, the closer to standard English a
dialect gets, the less the lexicon varies by region, and vice-versa.

Differences according to age groups

There are several different types of age-based variation one may see within a population.
They are: vernacular of a subgroup with membership typically characterized by a specific
age range, age-graded variation, and indications of linguistic change in progress.

One example of subgroup vernacular is the speech of street youth. Just as street youth
dress differently from the "norm", they also often have their own "language". The reasons
for this are the following: (1) To enhance their own cultural identity (2) To identify with
each other, (3) To exclude others, and (4) To invoke feelings of fear or admiration from
the outside world. Strictly speaking, this is not truly age-based, since it does not apply to
all individuals of that age bracket within the community.

Age-graded variation is a stable variation which varies within a population based on age.
That is, speakers of a particular age will use a specific linguistic form in successive
generations. This is relatively rare. J.K. Chambers cites an example from southern
Ontario, Canada where the pronunciation of the letter 'Z' varies.[7] Most of the English-
speaking world pronounces it 'zed'; however, in the United States, it is pronounced 'zee'.
A linguistic survey found that in 1979 two-thirds of the 12 year olds in Toronto ended the
recitation of the alphabet with the letter 'zee' where only 8% of the adults did so. Then in
1991, (when those 12 year olds were in their mid-20s) a survey showed only 39% of the
20-25 year olds used 'zee'. In fact, the survey showed that only 12% of those over 30 used
the form 'zee'. This seems to be tied to an American children's song frequently used to
teach the alphabet. In this song, the rhyme scheme matches the letter Z with V 'vee',
prompting the use of the American pronunciation. As the individual grows older, this
marked form 'zee' is dropped in favor of the standard form 'zed'.[7]

People tend to use linguistic forms that were prevalent when they reached adulthood. So,
in the case of linguistic change in progress, one would expect to see variation over a
broader range of ages. William Bright provides an example taken from American English
where there is an on-going merger of the vowel sounds in such pairs of words as 'caught'
and 'cot'.[8] Examining the speech across several generations of a single family, one would
find the grandparents' generation would never or rarely merge these two vowel sounds;
their children's generation may on occasion, particularly in quick or informal speech;
while their grandchildren's generation would merge these two vowels uniformly. This is
the basis of the apparent-time hypothesis where age-based variation is taken as an
indication of linguistic change in progress.

Differences according to gender

Men and women, on average, tend to use slightly different language styles. These
differences tend to be quantitative rather than qualitative. That is, to say that women
make more minimal responses (see below) than men is akin to saying that men are taller
than women (i.e., men are on average taller than women, but some women are taller than
some men). The initial identification of a women's register was by Robin Lakoff in 1975,
who argued that the style of language served to maintain women's (inferior) role in
society ("female deficit approach").[9] A later refinement of this argument was that gender
differences in language reflected a power difference ("dominance theory").[10] However,
both these perspectives have the language style of men as normative, implying that
women's style is inferior.

More recently, Deborah Tannen has compared gender differences in language as more
similar to 'cultural' differences ("cultural difference approach"). Comparing
conversational goals, she argued that men have a report style, aiming to communicate
factual information, whereas women have a rapport style, more concerned with building
and maintaining relationships.[11] Such differences are pervasive across media, including
face-to-face conversation,[12][13] written essays of primary school children,[14] email,[15] and
even toilet graffiti (Green, 2003).[16]

Communication styles are always a product of context, and as such, gender differences
tend to be most pronounced in single-gender groups. One explanation for this, is that
people accommodate their language towards the style of the person they are interacting
with. Thus, in a mixed-gender group, gender differences tend to be less pronounced. A
similarly important observation is that this accommodation is usually towards the
language style, not the gender of the person . That is, a polite and empathic male will tend
to be accommodated to on the basis of their being polite and empathic, rather than their
being male.[17]

-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociolinguistics-

Sociolinguistics

Walt Wolfram
Language as Social Behavior

Language is one of the most powerful emblems of social behavior. In the normal transfer
of information through language, we use language to send vital social messages about
who we are, where we come from, and whom we associate with. It is often shocking to
realize how extensively we may judge a person's background, character, and intentions
based simply upon the person's language, dialect, or, in some instances, even the choice
of a single word. Given the social role of language, it stands to reason that one strand of
language study should concentrate on the role of language in society

Sociolinguistics has become an increasingly important and popular field of study, as

certain cultures around the world expand their communication base and intergroup and
interpersonal relations take on escalating significance.

The basic notion underlying sociolinguistics is quite simple: Language use symbolically
represents fundamental dimensions of social behavior and human interaction. The notion
is simple, but the ways in which language reflects behavior can often be complex and
subtle. Furthermore, the relationship between language and society affects a wide range
of encounters--from broadly based international relations to narrowly defined
interpersonal relationships.

For example, sociolinguists might investigate language attitudes among large populations
on a national level, such as those exhibited in the US with respect to the English-only
amendment--the legislative proposal to make English the 'official' language of the US.
Similarly, we might study the status of French and English in Canada or the status of
national and vernacular languages in the developing nations of the world as symbols of
fundamental social relations among cultures and nationalities. In considering language as
a social institution, sociolinguists often use sociological techniques involving data from
questionnaires and summary statistical data, along with information from direct
observation.

A slightly different concern with language and society focuses more closely on the effect
of particular kinds of social situations on language structure. For example, language
contact studies focus on the origin and the linguistic composition of pidgin and creole
languages. These special language varieties arise when speakers from mutually
unintelligible language groups need a common language for communication. Throughout
the world, there are many sociohistorical situations that have resulted in these specialized
language situations--in the Caribbean, Africa, South America, Asia, and the Pacific
Islands. In examining language contact situations, it is also possible to examine not only
the details of a particular language but also the social and linguistic details that show how
bilingual speakers use each language and switch between them.

Another approach to language and society focuses on the situations and uses of language
as an activity in its own right. The study of language in its social context tells us quite a
bit about how we organize our social relationships within a particular community.
Addressing a person as 'Mrs.', 'Ms.', or by a first name is not really about simple
vocabulary choice but about the relationship and social position of the speaker and
addressee. Similarly, the use of sentence alternatives such as Pass the salt, Would you
mind passing the salt, or I think this food could use a little salt is not a matter of simple
sentence structure; the choice involves cultural values and norms of politeness, deference,
and status

In approaching language as a social activity, it is possible to focus on discovering the

specific patterns or social rules for conducting conversation and discourse. We may, for
example, describe the rules for opening and closing a conversation, how to take
conversational turns, or how to tell a story or joke.

It is also possible to examine how people manage their language in relation to their
cultural backgrounds and their goals of interaction. Sociolinguists might investigate
questions such as how mixed-gender conversations differ from single-gender
conversations, how differential power relations manifest themselves in language forms,
how caregivers let children know the ways in which language should be used, or how
language change occurs and spreads to communities. To answer these questions related to
language as social activity, sociolinguists often use ethnographic methods. That is, they
attempt to gain an understanding of the values and viewpoints of a community in order to
explain the behaviors and attitudes of its members.

Two trends have characterized the development of sociolinguistics over the past several
decades. First, the rise of particular specializations within this field has coincided with
the emergence of more broadly based social and political issues. Thus, the focus on
themes such as language and nationalism, language and ethnicity, and language and
gender has corresponded with the rise of related issues in society at large. Second,
specialists who examine the role of language and society have become more and more
interested in applying the results of their studies to the broadly based social, educational,
and political problems that probably gave rise to their emergence as sociolinguistic
themes to begin with. Sociolinguistics thus offers a unique opportunity to bring together
theory, description, and application in the study of language.

http://www.lsadc.org/info/ling-fields-socio.cfm

by Peter L. Patrick

Sociolinguistics

1. Adopts model of social sciences: studies behavior, uses both quantitative and
qualitative methods (incl. statistics); ethnographic & sociological research
paradigms; explanation does not imply ability to predict or apply laws. [Employs
same linguistic-analysis toolbox as formal linguistics, plus more]
2. Focuses on diversity-- variation-- of language use in different social groups
(cultures, ethnicities, societies, nations, genders, ages, occupations, cities, and so
forth); asks, "How does social context determine language use?", and "What are
the social functions of linguistic diversity?"
3. Investigates socially-constituted and -learned patterns of language use and their
interface w/language structure
 4. Requires systematic methods of data collection: since every speaker has complex
social identity, it must take account of social context & history
5. Concerned with both informational and expressive functions of language
6. Evidence from communities and coherent social settings; also interested in
"margins" (e.g. deaf signers, minorities); takes their social/historical context and
needs into account

GOAL: seeks to understand & explain language variation through (linguistic &
social) context

http://courses.essex.ac.uk/lg/lg554/FormalSocio.html

What is sociolinguistics?

Sociolinguistics is the study of the interaction between language and society. In this
classic introductory work, Janet Holmes examines the role of language in a variety of
social contexts and considers both how language works and how it can be used to signal
and interpret various aspects of social identity. Written with Holmes’ customary
enthusiasm, the book is divided into three sections which explain basic sociolinguistic
concepts in the light of both classic approaches and the most recent research.

Section A examines the varying patterns of language use within multilingual speech
communities and considers the ways in which languages change within society,
highlighting the factors that can lead to language displacement and, sometimes, to
language death.

Section B explores some of the social reasons behind language variation in monolingual
communities and looks at the ways in which different ethnic, gender and social groups
develop and maintain speech variations. The relationship between language variation and
language change is also described.

Section C assesses how attitudes to language affect speech behaviour and shows that
appropriate linguistic responses take account of a variety of contextual factors – for
example, the relative status of addresser and addressee.
http://www.pearson.ch/HigherEducation/Linguistics/Sociolinguistcs/1471/97814058
21315/An-Introduction-to-Sociolinguistics.aspx

July 6, 2010 http://grammar.about.com/od/rs/g/sociolinguisticsterm.htm

• "There are several possible relationships between language and society. One is that
social structure may either influence or determine linguistic structure and/or behavior. . . .

"A second possible relationship is directly opposed to the first: linguistic structure and/or
behavior may either influence or determine social structure. . . . A third possible
relationship is that the influence is bi-directional: language and society may influence each
other. . . .

"Whatever sociolinguistics is, . . . any conclusions we come to must be solidly based on

 evidence."
(R. Wardhaugh, An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. Wiley, 2005)

• "Sociolinguistic competence enables speakers to distinguish among possibilities such

as the following. To get someone's attention in English, each of the utterances
1. 'Hey!',
2. 'Excuse me!', and
3. 'Sir!' or 'Ma'am!'

is grammatical and a fully meaningful contribution to the discourse of the moment, but only
one of them may satisfy societal expectations and the speaker's preferred presentation of
self. 'Hey!' addressed to one's mother or father, for example, often expresses either a bad
attitude or surprising misunderstanding of the usually recognized social proprieties, and
saying 'Sir!' to a 12-year-old probably expresses inappropriate deference.

"Every language accommodates such differences as a non-discrete scale or continuum of

recognizably different linguistic 'levels' or styles, termed registers, and every socially
mature speaker, as part of learning the language, has learned to distinguish and choose
among places on the scale of register."
(G. Hudson, Essential Introductory Linguistics. Blackwell, 2000)

http://www.reference.com/browse/sociolinguistics

sociolinguistics, the study of language as it affects and is affected by

social relations. Sociolinguistics encompasses a broad range of
concerns, including bilingualism, pidgin and creole languages, and
other ways that language use is influenced by contact among people of
different language communities (e.g., speakers of German, French,
Italian, and Romansh in Switzerland). Sociolinguists also examine
different dialects, accents, and levels of diction in light of social
distinctions among people. Although accent refers strictly to
pronunciation, in practice a dialect can usually be identified by the
accent of its speakers as well as by distinctive words, usages,
idiomatic expressions, and grammatical features. Dialects reflect and
may reinforce class, ethnic, or regional differences among speakers of
the same language. In some cases difference of dialect shades into
difference of language. Where the line between them is not clear,
groups that are linguistically distinct are considered to speak different
dialects of the same language if they can generally understand each
other, although what constitutes this mutual intelligibility is itself not
always clear. For example, someone speaking Mandarin may not be
able to understand the spoken form of another Chinese dialect but can
read it, since the written form of all Chinese dialects is universal;
Serbs and Croats, on the other hand, speak essentially the same
language but use different alphabets to write it. Individuals sometimes
deliberately change their dialect as a means of improving their social
status. Speakers of any dialect or any language may modulate their
vocabulary and level of diction according to social context, speaking
differently in church, for example, than on the playground; social
activities that tend to shape the language of those engaging in it are
sometimes called registers.
See R. A. Hudson, Sociolinguistics (1980); P. Trudgill, Dialects in
Contact (1986); H. Giles and N. Coupland, Language: Contexts and
Consequences (1991).