University of Baghdad- College of Education

Ibn-Rushd for Human Sciences

Department of English

A Sociolinguistic Study of Stereotype

Submitted by: Ali Shimal Kzar
Sociolinguistics
Supervised by: Asst. Prof. Baidaa Abass Al-Zubaidy ( PhD )

Apr 11, 2023

Abstract
Most people, especially adults, have a collection of images that they have committed to
memory. Whether they come from the West or the East, these pictures are always used to
generalize about a person or a group of people. Since stereotyping is frequently seen as an
inherent and evident part of human life, especially when it comes to passing judgement on
others, it can be challenging for some individuals to overcome their preconceived notions
about a group. In addition, cultural stereotyping often occurs without the target's
understanding, and as a result, it can have a favorable or bad impact on the target's
judgement by providing insight into the target's typical approach to dealing with others.
To examine the cultural and societal distinctions between groups, this article focuses on
the interplay between stereotypical categories (gender, age, and race) and authority. The
purpose of this research is to shed qualitative and sociolinguistic light on the idea of
stereotype. There are five parts to this study. An introductory section providing a broad
overview of stereotype as a linguistic and social phenomenon. In the second part, we'll go
through some of the fundamental ideas behind this research. In the third segment, we break
down the many types of stereotyping. In the fourth segment, we look at how language may
be used to examine stereotypes, as well as the roles that stereotypes play in fostering bias
and discrimination. Language, gender of the speaker, indicators, markers, stereotype, and
overt and covert biases are all discussed in the fifth part.
The study reached at a conclusion that Since all societies have varying populations, it
stands to reason that stereotypes would also coexist. Therefore, within or among in-
groups, negative stereotypes are typically attenuated. Those who share a same
community may discuss this issue, but those from separate communities may also bring it
up. Stereotypes are pervasive and may be seen in every society; as a result, many people
may form opinions based only on the images they have previously formed in their heads,
regardless of how accurate or inaccurate those images may be. Establishing for group
differentiation reasons and advocating for groups to illustrate disparities among them are
all part of the stereotyping process. Despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of
data suggests otherwise, stereotypes have a remarkable ability to endure the test of time
and become widely accepted as fact. Although the particular elements of stereotype are
likely to be acquired through social learning, some components of stereotyping may be
hardwired from birth.

1
 1. Introduction
Stereotypes are an important part of every culture because people have always thought of
them as part of their everyday lives. Stereotypes are built into the way people think. It's
important to point out that a "stereotype" is not a bad habit. You can't think of everyone
you meet as a brand-new person, a clean sheet. So, it makes a person's thought process
more efficient and quicker. Positive outcomes for society can be attributed to the
stereotyping processes that shape people's expectations and perceptions. However, not all
preconceptions are negative examples of this phenomenon. (Negative and positive) For
instance, the elderly moves more slowly and carelessly than their younger counterparts.
Many senior citizens may be irritated by their sluggish gait, but there's nothing they can do
about it. It's a good way to greet somebody you don't know.(Hemmati,2002:75).
According to Vasilyeva (2009), pages 93-98, generalizations elicit strong feelings and are
simple to grasp. Clichés, in the opinion of Bartminski (2009:5-21), are fluid, neutral, and
open to manipulation. According to Bartminski, the employment of stereotypes in places
like folklore books and practices can help people understand one other and work together
to find solutions to problems.
The word "stereotype" comes from the combination of two Greek words: "ste-reos," which
means "solid," and "typos," which means "mark of a blow" or "model" in general. In fact,
the word "stereotype" was first used to mean a metal plate that is used to print pages. So, a
stereotype probably includes at least two ideas, like stiffness and repetition or sameness.
(Schneider, 2004:8). Stereotypes help people in many ways, both intellectually and
socially. (Schneider,2004:363). People often use stereotypes in everyday settings,
especially when they don't have a sense of home or a sense of who they are. Since, people
are always meeting people from other groups for the first time, especially strangers.
So, it seems like stereotyping is common in "circumstances" that aren't what you're used
to. So, stereotyping can be seen as "a natural way to deal with what you don't know."
(Samovar et al.,2010:170). So, "the epistemic" has been thought of as the most important
function of a stereotype, since the main reason people want to understand, know, and
expect other people. (Macrae et al., 1996:19) According to Tajfel, stereotypes benefit the
perceiver by maintaining the value system of the perceiver and organizing and simplifying
the information available to the perceiver. For this reason, labels are beneficial and can be
used for inductive and deductive reasoning when forming judgements about individuals.

2
2. Theoretical Background
2.1 What is Sociolinguistics ?
As the new millennium begins, sociolinguistics has matured into a dynamic, confident
field of study. This argument is based on a concern for the empirical realities of linguistic
diversity and a reasonable examination of the origins and effects of this variation and
evolution. It's evident and inevitable that languages will evolve, and the uneven pace of
that evolution over space and time is what gives rise to the wide range of human
languages. There is a direct line between the classical objectives of dialectology and
philology and the contemporary interest in variation and change in sociolinguistics.
Dialectology and philology described the several varieties that make up a language and
tracked the historical development of specific aspects of vocabulary and grammar. (Llamas
et al., 2007)
Traditional dialectology was naturally also concerned in distinctions in pronunciation
before the advent of portable recording technology in the form of the desk-sized tape-
recorder, which marked the beginning of sociolinguistics. By eliminating the need to
extrapolate sound-change rules backwards in time or deduce them from written texts, this
allowed scholars to compare accent variation and study speech more confidently. As a
result of technological advancements in recording and reproducing speech, sociolinguists
may now isolate individual sounds and look for correlations between speakers' age,
gender, socioeconomic status, education level, worldview, politics, and more. New
sociolinguistic methods shed light on the workings of human society and language in the
metropolitan environments where most people in industrialised nations live. (Ibid)
Sociolinguistics is the study of language in relation to society ( Hudson ,1996:1)
2.2 The Coinage of the Term Sociolinguistics
Sociolinguistics was first used by Currie (1952) in an article that set out to examine
whether or not there was a connection between speakers' socioeconomic status and their
communication styles. Currie's paper included no new information, but rather explored the
potential for developing present trends in linguistics, notably in dialectology, into an
entirely new area. Currie correctly predicted a shift away from focusing mostly on rural
areas in dialectology in the United States, in contrast to the situation in Europe. It's
possible that the urban context played a part in elevating the significance of social
interactions. Using data from South Carolina, McDavid (1948) found racial differences in
the use of postvocalic r. Historically, this wasn't seen as valuable in and of itself, but as
McDavid notes, "a social analysis proved necessary because the data were too complicated
to be described by only a geographical statement." (ibid.: 194). This provides significant

3
evidence that the social analysis was not an original focus of the research; nevertheless,
during the subsequent fifteen years or more, this emphasis altered. (Ball, 2009)
Labov's contributions to the field of linguistics in the 1960s brought sociolinguistics to the
forefront, which led to increased attention and acceptance. Martha's Vineyard (Labov
1963) and New York City laid the groundwork for the present burst of study in this sector.
(Labov 1966).
Trudgill (1979) provides a great illustration of the rapid internationalization of variationist
sociolinguistics with its application to the city of Norwich in England. Therefore,
sociolinguists have moved their attention from fine-grained analyses of negligible
associations between social and linguistic variables to more systemic problems. Some
examples include the phenomena of bilingualism, multilingualism, diglossia, code-
switching, language and culture, language and power/language and gender, language shift,
and linguistic planning. This last area has taken on more significance in recent years as a
large number of languages around the world appear to be in danger of dying out. (Crystal
2000).
2.3 The Difference between Sociolinguistics and the Sociology of Language
Sociolinguistics has been defined as 'the study of language in relation to society', implying
(intentionally) that sociolinguistics is part of the study of language. Therefore,
sociolinguistics is useful because of the insights it provides into the features of language in
general or a specific language. It stands to reason that linguists would find linguistic data
illuminating; after all, it's hard to imagine any aspect of a civilization as unique or crucial
to its operation as its language. Simply put, the sociology of language is "the study of
society in relation to language" (or the inverse of our definition of sociolinguistics).
( Hidson,1996:4)
To a large extent, the difference between sociolinguistics and the sociology of language is
a matter of emphasis, depending on whether the researcher is more interested in language
or society, and also on whether they have more experience analysing linguistic or social
structures. In light of the substantial common ground between the two, it appears fruitless
to attempt a stricter delineation between them than already exists. Yet, there are topics that
such a textbook should cover but will not, most notably what is commonly referred to as
"macro" sociology of language, which investigates the connections between societies and
languages at the macro level. From a sociological (and political) perspective, this is an
important subject to study because of the questions it raises about the impact of
multilingualism on economic growth and the policies a government might implement
regarding languages. Yet, the concept of 'language X' is typically left unanalyzed in such
macro' investigations, making them less illuminating than the micro' experiments. (ibid)
4
Everyone in this society speaks the same language and is fluent in the same grammatical
structures and vocabulary words. They all also pronounce these words the same way and
understand the same range of meanings. (Any discrepancy from an exact match opens the
door to claims regarding the relationship between language and society, such as "Person A
knows pronunciation M, while Person B knows pronunciation N, for the same word.")
(Wardhaugh, 2010)
2.4 Stereotype: Definition and Background
As a sociolinguistically significant linguistic characteristic, speakers have a
strong awareness of stereotypes. (Llamas et al., 2007)
The original application of the term "stereotype" was in the field of typography,
where it referred to prefabricated moulds used to substitute for individual
letters. Walter Lippman coined the term "stereotype" in 1922 in his book
"Public Opinion." Lippman argues that stereotyping helps us make sense of the
world by providing us with "pictures in our head." (Quasthoff, 1989). Various
academic fields, including anthropology, sociology, and social psychology,
have conducted research on and analysed the phenomenon of stereotyping.
Linguists' attention has been piqued in recent years by the topic of stereotypes.
"The positive or negative beliefs that we hold about the characteristics of a
social group" (Stangor et al., 2022, p. 523, emphasis in original) are what social
psychologists mean when they use the term "stereotype." All members of
society appear to be familiar with and adhere to these "beliefs," although their
origins are rarely discussed. What's more, it's not a given that these convictions
are grounded in reality. Furthermore, minorities and the weaker elements of any
society are frequently the targets of stereotyped comments. Distinctive
elements of stereotypes include the following:
 Labov (1972) and Quasthoff (1989) argue that stereotypes are a form of common
knowledge about a certain thing or occurrence that is held by members of a given
social group.
 According to Grindsted (2000), stereotypes tend to be passed down through families
and communities. Stereotypes are commonly the outcome of oversimplification, in
which two groups are viewed as polar opposites. This is due to incorrectly placing
value on certain distinctions between classes. (Scollon & Scollon 1995).

5
  According to Kurtcz (1989), generalizations are unchangeable since they treat
everyone and everything the same way.
 Last but not least, Scollon and Scollon (1995) argue that stereotypes contain an
ideological stance.

Schemata and prototypes are frequently spoken in the same breath as stereotypes. Both
schemas and stereotypes can be seen as as mental organizations that aid in the
interpretation, classification, and storage of incoming information through the use of
oversimplification and overgeneralization. (Popovic, 2004). Differentiating stereotypes,
however, is the presence of an evaluative component. For instance, the schemata' clothing
of a cowboy' can be analogous to the archetypal image of someone wearing jeans, long
leather boots, and a hat. To assume, however, that every cowboy wears the same gear and
then to turn that assumption into a bad or positive stereotype would be an
overgeneralization.

Similar qualities can be seen in another idea known as "prototypes." Prototypes are used to
show what a category or class typically looks like. (Saeed, 1997). For the category of
"birds," the "typical" representation is a sparrow. A sparrow is used as an illustration
instead of a penguin or an ostrich since it more closely resembles the archetype in terms of
characteristics like wings, the ability to fly, etc. While prototypes can be used to any field
of study, preconceptions are limited to social groups. Some of these groupings may be
based on a person's race or ethnicity.

2. Categories of Stereotype

Cultural stereotyping has certain classifications yet, the most important and basic ones are(
gender, age and race or ethnicity). According to Schnider's opinion these three categories
are called ''the big three'' as they are significant, have a special way of dealing with, and
also, they are ''the prototypic stereotype magnets''. In fact, these categories likely in nearly
most cultures are regarded as ''culturally silent''. So, the concentration of an individual may
only be on these categories. For instance, when there is a meeting between two
individuals, it is difficult to forget one's gender, age and race or ethnicity. Whereas, another
thing may be easy to forget such as the time of meeting, after a short period of
6
time( Schnider, 2004:37). However, in a short while, you probably won't remember details
like when you and your friend met.( Schnider, 2004:37).

3.1 Gender Category of Stereotype

This is the first sort of stereotypical thinking, and it consists of ideas about what it means
to be a man or a woman. Gender stereotypes, however, encompass a wide range of details,
including but not limited to mental traits, social connections, actions, concerns, and even
outward appearance. Because of the interconnected nature of these "dimensions," the
following characteristics can reliably be used to identify a person as a woman or a man:

1 - Tasks typically performed by women, such as housework, child care, and cooking.

2 - Women have a unique set of physical traits, such as femininity and sensitivity. Third,
there are stereotypes about women's mental makeup, such as the notions that they are too
sensitive, overly passionate, overly reliant, and overly fragile. (Golombok and Fivush,
1994:17).

3.2 Age Category of Stereotype

"A simplified, undifferentiated portrayal of an age group, that is often erroneous,

unrepresentative of reality, and resistant to modification" (Evans et al., 2001:45) is how
age category stereotypes are described. In addition to affecting, one's decision to have
children, it also affects one's outlook, social circle, hobbies, and professional path. Age is
one factor that can be used to distinguish between sexes, and as it is generally not seen as a
problematic way to categories people, it is not frowned upon in any society. One aspect
that may be relied on by adults to determine a person's age is the tone of their voice, which
can make it clear whether or not they are a child. The second trait is known as facial
signals, and it is an obvious quality that places a person in the category of age. Third, you
can tell the age of a person and their gender from the way they walk or move.
(Schnider,2004:467).

7
 3. 3 Race or Ethnicity Category of Stereotype

''As a biologically structured technique of identifying persons in a certain society'' is the

final remaining significant category of stereotypes. However, the term "ethnicity" can also
be defined as a social classification based on shared cultural norms and practices. Even
while there is some overlap between the concepts of race and ethnicity, the focus of the
former is on outward appearances, such as skin color. While "ethnicity" considers and
emphasizes cultural traits that convey "a sense of group membership," including
"language, traditions, and territorial identity" (Boslaugh & Mcnutts, 2008:883).

However, non-white people and cultural differences might be singled out when using the
term "race."(Spencer,2004:91). People of a different ethnicity or social class are
commonly stereotyped by the general public. For instance, when contrasting the
historical experiences of the United States and African Americans. African Americans are
often dismissive of white people in the United States since the two groups are so different
and do not share the same values. (Schaefer,2008:1277). Gerber and Plessis (2009:51) use
the fact that Black individuals tend to buy expensive shoes as an example to explain what
is meant by "race."

4. Linguistic Approach to the Study of Stereotype

Uta Quasthoff was one of the earliest linguists to examine stereotypes from a linguistics
standpoint. (1973). What she means by the term "stereotype"

Belief [that] is characterized by a high degree of collective sharedness within a speech

community or subgroup of a speech community...[it] has the logical form of a judgement
which ascribes or denies certain properties (traits or forms of behavior) to a set of persons
in a (logically) unwarrantedly simplifying and generalizing way, with an emotionally

8
evaluative tendency. The sentence is the fundamental grammatical unit of linguistic
description. (Quasthoff 1978, p. 6)

The phrase is the fundamental linguistic description of stereotypes, according to Quasthoff,

but she later changes her mind and proposes that the semantic unit of a stereotype is a
proposition consisting of reference and predication. (Quasthoff, 1987, p. 786). According
to Quasthoff (1989), stereotypical attitudes and beliefs need not be stated directly in order
to be communicated verbally. However, they are typically implied rather than stated
explicitly. Therefore, the ability to verbally articulate the inference of a stereotyped
expression is a necessary condition for text coherence. (Quasthoff, 1989).

4.1 Functions of Stereotype

There are important psychological and social uses for stereotypes. "Reduces, essentializes,
naturalizes, and fixes difference," as Hall (1997) puts it, is what stereotyping does. (p.
258). By dissecting this description, Hall argues that stereotypes simplify and generalize
about a social group by focusing on a small subset of its members. Second, they reduce
members of a social group to their most fundamental characteristics, making it easier to
generalize about the group as a whole. Finally, stereotyping makes distinctions between
social groups seem obvious. It is possible to find a lasting solution to those differences.
Hall (1997, p. 258) argues further that stereotypes have a restraining effect. They are
useful for distinguishing normal from abnormal behavior and normal from abnormal
appearance. Stereotypes, for instance, can be used to categories people into "in" and "out"
groups within a community. As such, they serve as a demarcation point between one's own
identity and that of another. Finally, the prevalence of stereotypes appears to correlate with
unequal power relations, so that the ruling group benefits from the stereotypes' spread.
(Hall, 1997).

9
According to Quasthoff (1989), stereotypes serve cognitive, inner psychic, and social
purposes. The cognitive processes demonstrate that the human mind must simplify, at least
to some extent, the organization and development of beliefs about the world. The
"authoritarian personality," whose aggressiveness is typically aimed at organizations or
people considered as weak in comparison to the individual, has inner mental functions that
rationalize attitudes in which anything and anybody unusual is viewed as a threat.
(Quasthoff, 1989). According to Quasthoff (1989), the social function is predicated on the
in-group/out-group theory of cultural classification. Thus, stereotyping fosters isolation
from outsiders while highlighting the value of belonging to one's own community.

4.2 Prejudice and Discrimination

Prejudice and discrimination are larger social issues from which stereotypes emerge.
Prejudice, according to Quasthoff (1989), is "clearly a mental state, composed of —
normally negative — attitudes towards social groups and matching stereotypical beliefs."
(p. 184). People from different cultural and social backgrounds often become the targets of
prejudice. Prejudice can be directed against members of society based on many factors,
including but not limited to their color, ethnicity, gender, nationality, religion, etc.
According to Van Dijk (1984, p. 13), prejudice is not something people naturally have but
rather something they learn to have as part of their in-group. These beliefs serve as a shield
to keep the in-group safe. One definition of prejudice is an individual's "attitude" towards
another group of people based on their shared beliefs and emotions. Some people then act
on their prejudice by engaging in discriminatory practices.

When someone is treated unfairly because of the group they belong to, we call that
discrimination. (Dovidio & Gaertner, 2004). There is a widespread belief that different
racial and ethnic groupings of people have distinctive personality traits that explain why
they are treated differently due to their outward appearance. (Ghani, 2008). When one
group discriminates against another, it must believe that their own race is better. These
days, it's common for people to attribute racism to disparities in biology. Discriminatory
10
laws that target minorities or weaker social groups are another way in which
discrimination can become institutionalized in our legal system. South Africa's apartheid
era racial segregation laws are an example of this type of legislation.

4.3 Culture and Stereotype

A great deal of traditional social-psychological work assumes that stereotype should be
regarded as cultural constructs , transmitted to the individual through some socially
unspecified process of socialization. Until the development of social cognition perspective
in the early 1970 , most social psychologists accepted along with Lippmann ( 1922:55 )
that ‘ in the great booming , buzzing , confusion of the outer world we picked up what our
culture has already defined for us .’ As a reaction social cognition work has tended to
bracket issues of social construction and to focus on the way in which stereotype mat be
formulated by individuals on the basis of personal experience.
According to Samovar and others(2010:23), the concept of culture can be defined in two
ways: either as the result of human action or as a material embodiment of the human
intellect. Culture provides a framework for one's daily life, both now and in the past and
future, which means it gives life meaning and purpose. (Vecvagars, 2006:11). The evident
evidence pretends and indicates that stereotypes are normally or widely held by a
community, but stereotypes have a tendency to immortalize with time. Although there may
be certain components of stereotype that are genetically coded, the specific contents of
stereotype are probably acquired through social learning. There are two main channels by
which members of a society or community pick up on and internalize the preconceptions
of others in that society or community. ( Kashima et al., 2008:59-60).
To demonstrate how specific factors can tip the scales towards or away from cultural
preconceptions and differences: the first is that cultural shifts inevitably degrade or
undermine broad generalizations. Second, it's important to consider cultural interference
because it might shed light on "minority trends" inside one's own culture that could
otherwise go unnoticed. Third, overcoming the bias of the relevant cultures by working
closely with social psychologists. Fourth, despite cultural differences, there are a number
of universal laws or principles that can be applied to a wide range of content with the same
results. In order to state one's own self-image, which is once again group-based, cultural
differences overlap with culturally guaranteed identities.(Nelson,2009:52)
Referring back to Lippmann's opinion on stereotype by saying that they "are simplified
pictures in our head" serves as a fitting conclusion to the discussion of the connection
between stereotypes and culture. Lippmann agrees that one's cultural upbringing or one's
own creation determines the nature of one's mental images. He also emphasizes the
significance of culture by providing concrete examples (Lippmann, 1922:81): among the
enormous "blooming, buzzing, confusion of the outer world," people select what their

11
culture has previously defined for them. What they've chosen to focus on is often
perceived through the lens of cultural stereotypes.

5. The linguistic Variable

Certain elements of a variety tend to vary more than others, as linguists have discovered
when studying sociolinguistic behaviour. Nevertheless, there are some qualities for which
the variance has additional social relevance. The term linguistic variable is employed to
capture and characterise such characteristics. A trait that can be used as a label to
categorise a speaker's output. One such variation is the pronunciation of the letter "r," as
William Labov has shown through his study of New York English. There is a large
disparity in the realisation of /r/ amongst different communities inside the city. New York's
traditional working class does not use the sound /r/ after vowels and never uses it before
consonants or vowels.
Realized forms of automobile and card are [ka " ] and [ka " d]. New Yorkers from more
affluent socioeconomic backgrounds are more likely to pronounce the /r/ in this place; for
example, the aforementioned word would be pronounced [ka] and [ka# d] by these
speakers. Sounds that are treated as linguistic variables are denoted by square brackets [for
example] (r).
Variables of language use are not uniform among countries or even cities. The vowel in the
word "cut," for instance, is pronounced differently in northern England than in the south.
Some speakers pronounce this with a high back vowel, while others use a low vowel and
differentiate between but [b $ t] and bush [b %& ]. In London, some people employ a
glottal stop for intervocalic/t/ in words like butter , while others continue to pronounce it as
[t] in all places. Phonological variation is not the only kind of language variation. African
Americans often use grammatical variants like as double negation, ain't, and unmarked
third-person singular present-tense verbs. The term "shibboleth" refers to a non-linguistic
term for a linguistic variable. The story of Jephthah and the Gileadites' victory against the
Ephraimites on the Jordan River's banks is recorded in the Book of Judges of the Old
Bible, where the term first appeared. Gileadites beat the Ephraimites to the river crossing.
Each person in the back was asked to say the word "shibboleth," which can be interpreted
as "stream in flood" or "ear of corn," to determine if they were part of their group. Those
who pronounced it with a s instead of a & were not considered Gileadites, but rather, foes.

5.1 The Speaker’s Sex and Prestige

12
The sex of the speakers has typically been included as a social trait for categorization in
quantitative studies, and both male and female speakers have been included. Most research
has also been applied to languages that distinguish between non-standard and standard
forms (often reflecting a social-status hierarchy). A striking trend has emerged from these
investigations, one that holds true across variables and communities of varying
socioeconomic status: women of all ages employ prestige standard variants more
frequently than men ( Hudson:1996)
There has been an advancement that takes into account the wide range of female
education levels present across countries. A diglossic culture is one in which both
languages are taught in schools, but girls have less opportunities to learn the prestige form
than boys do. It's therefore not surprising that women are less likely to use prestige
variations than men. In order to use norms that are distinct from everyday discourse, as
Labov puts it, women require access to those norms (1990: 213)
In addition, studies have shown that women are more likely to embrace novel linguistic
patterns than males are; however, this trend may be reversed if the novelty in question
challenges the status quo.
And finally, the variable must be truly stratified, meaning that it is sensitive to social
class, with more affluent people favoring the standard variations. The existence of certain
variables that are stratified for one sex but not the other is the motivation for this clause.
Most men do not stay at home but instead work outside the home; their social standing is
tied to their professional and community contributions. Man's social position is defined by
the sum of the power relationships he has established with other people as a result of his
contributions to society, whether those ties be subordinate, superior, or equal. Yet, women
are more likely to remain at home and have fewer professional opportunities to 'earn' their
place in society. Instead, she must use symbols associated with male statuses (although
randomly), such as linguistic variables, to emphasize her own. When high-status males
adopt a particular linguistic form, we call it prestigious; this makes prestigious language
the feminine equivalent of a high-status profession.
There are three problems with the status explanation:
One, it uses successful males as role models for prestige language when research shows
that successful females are more likely to speak a prestige language than successful males.
Trudgill found something pretty interesting when he questioned his Norwich speakers
about their own speech, but this theory doesn't account for it (Trudgill 1974/1983: 896°.).
As an example, he played them both the RP and local non-standard pronunciations of

13
"tune," the former with a "y" glide before the vowel and the latter without, and asked them
to choose.
Third, there is a discrepancy between the status explanation and another very broad trend
that Labov has noted and that we touched on briefly above: the trend of young women
taking the lead in language change. (1990, 1994: 156). If women in general rely on
prestige forms determined by powerful males for their own status, then why should they
take the bold step of inventing new forms? (As Labov (1990) notes, it is true that women's
innovations are more likely to be adopted by the next generation than men's because of
young women's role in child-rearing, but it is still strange that women create at all.)
Considering that the ‘sophisticated' stereotype appears to be characterized negatively as
'not rough,' the 'rough' stereotype is the more distinct of the two. Even if we grant that
these relatively basic stereotypes do in fact drive our understanding about the social
environment, we still have a problem. Now think about four more social stereotypes
defined by class and sex: an upper-middle-class man and lady, and an underprivileged man
and woman. To the extent that sophistication is characterized negatively as being different
from the basic stereotype, then upper-class women would seem to be the most
sophisticated group. This makes sense, at least in the context of stereotypes and not the
intricacies of the real world.

5.2 Indicators, markers, and stereotypes

There are indicators, markers, and stereotypes; Labov (1972) distinguishes amongst them.
An indicator is a language variable with little social connotations. Indicators can only be
recognized by an observer with language training. Some North American speakers, for
instance, differentiate the vowels in cot and catch, while others do not; this is of little
interest to people who are not linguistic specialists. On the other hand, markers can convey
significant social information and are often easily recognizable. Dropping the g in ‘singing'
is not required in every instance. 'We witness listeners behaving in a discrete way,' Labov
explains.
At first, they don't notice that the speaker is "dropping his g's," but after a while, they start
to assume that he does it every time. (Labov 1972, 226). All varieties of English share the
practice of omitting the letter "g." The distribution of markers is obviously tied to social
groupings and to styles of speaking, and people are aware of markers. Whether it's the
Northumbrian Wot-cher (What cheer?) greeting, the British use of chap, or the Bostonian
Pahk the cah in Hahvahd Yahd, these are all examples of stereotypes about the speech of a
specific ethnicity. Such generalizations are frequently stigmatized everywhere, and in at

14
least one occasion, the lethal results of a stereotyped shibboleth pronunciation were
reported. A stereotype doesn't have to be accurate; it only has to provide some kind of
approximate categorization, with all the issues that come along with it. As a result,
researchers primarily describe the distributions of linguistic variables that serve as markers
in their studies of variation. (Wardhaugh, 2010)

5.3 Language Attitude

Labov, in his pioneering work on linguistic variety, advocated that the study of linguistic
attitudes should play a key part in sociolinguistics. He argued that the distributional
patterns of sociolinguistic variables were a source of social meaning. One method he used
to collect this information was the "subjective reaction test," from which he gleaned, for
instance, that many New Yorkers equated rhoticity with professional status. (Labov
1972b). This idea of status has persisted for quite some time in the research on linguistic
attitudes. Social psychology, where attitudes are of essential importance to understanding
social behavior and thought, and sociolinguistics, which focuses on the social dimensions
of language especially, have since collaborated on a great deal of ground-breaking work in
the study of language attitudes. Some of the earlier work is reviewed here, and then some
of the most pressing concerns and recent advances are discussed.
It is widely accepted that people learn their attitudes through their interactions with others,
with attitudes formed earlier in life being more difficult to alter. (Sears 1983). Commonly,
three components make up an attitude: cognitive (beliefs and stereotypes), emotional
(evaluations), and behavioral. However, the relationship between the last of these is murky.
(See Garrett et al. 2003: 7 ff.). Multiple purposes are ascribed to attitudes; for instance,
(both positive and negative) stereotypes are used to organize our social world and, in
particular, to explain intergroup connections. (Tajfel 1981).
Since attitudes are purely conceptual, it is possible that our data do not accurately reflect
the attitudes of the respondents. There is a lot of discussion about how to approach this
problem. The societal treatment approach, the direct approach, and the indirect approach
are the three main types of study methods. The first type encompasses a wide range of
research methods, such as observational (ethnographic) studies and content analysis of
publicly available materials like government and school policy documents, employment
and consumer advertisements, novels, TV shows, cartoons, and books on etiquette and
social graces. Research in this area, which typically delves more deeply into the
sociocultural and political context of attitudes, has not been given enough attention in
recent high-profile assessments of linguistic attitudes.
15
5.4 Explicit and Implicit Stereotype
Explicit stereotypes are those that the person holding the stereotype is aware they hold and
are employing in making judgements about other individuals. Decision bias can be
partially mitigated through conscious control if person A is making a judgement about
person B from group G and person A has an explicit stereotype for group G; however,
attempts to offset bias due to conscious awareness of a stereotype often fail to be truly
impartial, due to either underestimating or overestimating the amount of bias being created
by the stereotype. Implicit preconceptions are ones that people unconsciously hold but
aren't aware of. Automatic activation and associative networks in semantic (knowledge)
memory form the foundation on which implicit stereotypes are constructed. Implicit
stereotypes occur when an individual's mind makes an immediate and unconscious
connection between a social group and a particular domain or trait. Even if you believe
that women and men have equal potential to become skilled electricians, many people may
automatically connect the profession with men.
According to the field of social psychology, the term "stereotype" refers to a generalization
made about a group of people based on a few defining characteristics or behaviors. These
ideas or assumptions might or might not be grounded in reality. Different
conceptualizations and theories of stereotyping exist within psychology and beyond
disciplines, sometimes having commonality, and incorporating contradicting parts.
Stereotypes are sometimes replicated and can be identified in certain ideas in the social
sciences and some branches of psychology, for instance in preconceptions about other
cultures.

16
Conclusion
Because there are different social groups, stereotypes are considered to be a universal
social phenomenon. As a result, unfavorable stereotypes tend to be attenuated between or
among members of the same community, or in-group; yet, they may be amplified between
members of different communities, or out-groups. Stereotypes are pervasive and may be
found in any society; as a result, many people likely base their evaluations on
preconceived notions based on their own positive or negative prior experiences with the
group in question.
A lot of traditional social-psychological work is based on the idea that stereotypes should
be seen as cultural constructs that are passed on to the person through a process of
socialization that is not well understood. Before the early 1970s, most social psychologists
agreed with Lippmann (1922:55) that "in the great booming, buzzing, confusion of the
outer world, we picked up what our culture has already defined for us." As a result, social
cognition work has tended to ignore questions about how society is put together and
instead focus on how people can form stereotypes based on their own experiences.
Culture has more than one meaning. It can be defined as the result of human action or as a
way for the human mind to show itself in the physical world. Culture provides a
framework for one's everyday life, both in the present and in the past and future. This
means that culture gives life meaning and context. Assumptions tend to last forever, even
though most of the evidence shows that assumptions are usually or usually shared by a
group. The details of a stereotype are probably learned from other people, but there may be
some parts that are hardwired in our genes. Stereotypes spread from person to person and
from society to society. People learn about group stereotypes in two ways: by interacting
with each other or by talking to each other.
To show the balance between cultural stereotypes and cultural differences by focusing on
certain things: First, it's clear that generalizations based on stereotypes hurt or destroy
cultures when they change. Second, when people from different cultures associate with
each other, they learn about "minority trends" in their own cultures, so this should be taken
17
into account. If it isn't, the trends of the group won't be seen. Third, working with social
psychologists can help avoid a one-sided view that gets in the way of understanding
important societies. Fourth, there are a few rules or principles that are the same across
countries and show that the same processes work on different kinds of materials. Fifth,
there are differences between cultures that overlap with people's ideas of who they are,
which are again based on the groups they belong to.

References
Crystal, D. (2008). A dictionary of linguistics and phonetics. Blackwell.

Ball, M. J. (2009). The Routledge Handbook of Sociolinguistics Around the World.

Routledge.

Labov, W. (1972). Sociolinguistic patterns. University of Pennsylvania Press.

Hudson, R. A. (1990). Sociolinguistics. Cambridge Univ. Pr.

Wardhaugh, R. (2010). An introduction to sociolinguistics. Wiley-Blackwell.

Bell, A. (1984). Language Style as Audience Design. Delacorte.

Henri Tajfel, & Peter, W. (1996). Social groups and identities : developing the legacy of

Henri Tajfel. Butterworth-Heinemann.

Llamas, C., Mullany, L., & Stockwell, P. (2007). The Routledge companion to

sociolinguistics. Routledge.

Lyons, J. (1981). Language and linguistics : An Introduction. Cambridge Univ. Press.

Milroy, L., & Gordon, M. (2008). Sociolinguistics. John Wiley & Sons.

Trudgill, P. (2000). Sociolinguistics : an Introduction to Language and Society. Penguin.

Yule, G. (2020). The study of language (7th ed.). Cambridge University Press.

18
Grindsted, A. (2000). Stereotypes in action. Odense Working Papers in Language and
Communication, 19, 33-51.

Lippmann, W. (1922). Public Opinion. Harcourt, Brace.

Quasthoff, U. M. (1978). The uses of stereotype in everyday argument. Journal of

Pragmatics, 2, 1-48.

Quasthoff, U. M. (1987). Linguistic prejudice/stereotypes. In U. Ammon, N. Dittmar, & K.

Mattheier (eds), Sociolinguistics/Soziolinguistik. An International Handbook of the

Science of Language and Society

Quasthoff, U. M. (1989). Social prejudice as a resource of power: Towards the functional

ambivalence of stereotypes.

Schaefer, R. T. (2008). Encyclopedia of race, ethnicity, and society (Vol. 3). Sage.

Scollon, R., & Scollon, S. W. (1995). Intercultural Communication: A Discourse

Approach. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Thompson, J. B. (1990a). Ideology and Modern Culture. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Utami, I. (2017). A Sociolinguistic Analysis of Stereotype in Multicultural Society As

Represented In the Express Movie. Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta.

19