Materi Kuliah Sociolinguistics
Koesnandar,
0923385P1 – STKIP PGRI Sidoarjo
P. Trudgill
(1974: 32) :
Sociolinguistics is that part of linguistics which
is concerned with language as a social and cultural phenomenon. It investigates
the field of language and society & has close connections with the social
sciences, especially social psychology, anthropology, human geography and
sociology.
Hudson
(1996, p. 4) :
Sociolinguistics (micro-sociolinguistics) is
the study of language in relation to society.
Sociology of
language (macro-sociolinguistics)is
the study of society in relation to language.
In
sociolinguistics we study language and society in order to find out as much as
we can about what kind of thing language is, and in the sociology of language
we reverse the direction of our interest.
A variety of
language as “a set
of linguistic item with similar distribution,” a definition that allows us to
say that all of teh following are varieties: Canadian English, London English,
the English of football commentaries, and so on.
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. A fourth
possibility is to assume that there is no relationship at all between
linguistic structure and social structure and that each is independent of the
other.
Coulmas
(1997, p. 2) :
Micro-sociolinguistics investigates how social structure
influences the way people talk and how language varieties and patterns of the
correlate with social attributes such as class, sex, and age.
Macro-sociolinguistics, studies what society do with their
language, that is, attitudes and attachments that count for the functional
distribution of speech forms in society, language shift, maintenance, nd the
replacement, the delimitation and interaction of speech communities.
A. Language
Variation: Focus on Users
There are
four language variation that are based on its users. The first is idiolect, the
second is dialect, the next is social dialect and the last is temporal dialect.
The description of those language variation can be seen as follow:
1. Idiolect
Idiolect is
the language variation that is individual in nature (Chaer & Agustina,
1995:82). Everyone has his own language variation or his own idiolect. This
idiolect variation is concerning with the colours of voice, choice of words,
language style, sentence order, etc. The colours of voice is the most dominant
aspect in language variation, because we can recognize someone just by
listening to voice without seeing the person.
2. Dialect
According to
Spolsky (1998:33) dialect is something that concerns variations which are
located regionally or socially. Dialect also means the language variation that
comes from a group of users that are relative in numbers, living in one
particular place, region or area (Chaer & Agustina, 1995:83). Since dialect
is based on the place, region or area where the users live, it is usually
called as area dialect, regional dialect or geography dialect. The users of a
dialect have certain features that mark them as people who have the same
dialect although they have their own idiolect. People who use Javanese with
dialect of Semarang have their own particular features that are different from
others who have the dialect of Surabaya. But they can communicate well with
each other because those dialects are included in the same language, Javanese.
The definition mentioned by (Chaer & Agustina, 1995) above is in line with
what Spolsky (1998) concludes about regional dialects. He concludes that
regional dialects tend to show less differences from their close neighbours and
greater differences from distant neighbours (Spolsky, 1998:29).
Regional
variation or regional dialect can also be found in the internatonal world. The
variation can be distinguished from the pronunciation, vocabulary and even from
the grammatical differences (Holmes, 2001:124). Pronunciation and vocabulary
differences probably are the easiest differences that people aware of between
different dialects of English. The examples of the pronunciation differences
mentioned by Holmes (2001:124) in her book is the word dad pronounced by
a New Zealander that to British ears sounds like dead that pronounced by
an English person and the word god pronounced by an American that sounds
like guard that pronounced by an English and the word latter that
sounds like ladder to many non-American English speakers. The examples
of the vocabulary differences can be found in the term used by Australians,
people live in England and New-Zealanders. Australians use the term sole
parents, while people live in England use single parents and
New-Zealanders call them solo parents. South Africans use the term robot
while British call exactly the same thing as traffic light. Furthermore,
Holmes (2001:125) gives the example of the American vs British influence on
vocabulary used in one’s region. It can be examined by using the ten questions
using both American and British items. Those ten questions are:
a. When you
go window-shopping do you walk on the pavement or the sidewalk?
b. Do you put your shopping in the car’s trunk or in the boot?
c. When the car’s engine needs oil do you open the bonnet or the hood?
d. Do you fill up the car with gas or with petrol?
e. When it is cold do you put on a jersey or a sweater?
f. When the baby is wet does it need a dry diaper or nappy?
g. Do you get to the top of the building in an elevator or a lift?
h. When the children are hungry do you open a can or a tin of
beans?
i. When you go on holiday do you take luggage or baggage?
j. When you’ve made an error do you remove it with an eraser or a rubber?
There are
eight sentences created by Holmes (2001:125) to distingushed the preferred
American from the traditional British usages. Those eight sentences are:
a. Do you
have a match?
b. Have you got a cigarrete?
c. She has gotten used to the noise.
d. She’s got used to the noise.
e. He dove in, head first.
f. He dived in head first.
g. Did you eat yet?
h. Have you eaten yet?
The
explanation made by Holmes (2001:125) of those eight sentences are that
Americans prefer to use do you have while the traditional British
English use have you got, Americans use gotten while most people
in England use got, many Americans use dove while most British
English speakers prefer dived and Americans ask did you eat?
while the English ask have you eaten?
3. Social
dialect
Social
dialect means the language variation that is concerning with the social status
and class (Chaer & Agustina, 1995:84). This language variation is usually
the most spoken language variation and most time consuming to talk about since
this variation is concerning with all personal problems of the users, such as
age, gender, occupation, level of royalty, economic, social status, social
class, etc. According to Holmes (2001:134) social dialects are the language
that reflects the groupings of people that based on similar social and economic
factors. Holmes (2001:134) also states that a person’s dialect reflects his
social background which can be found the complications of social dialects in
Java and the ways used by Javanese speakers to show their social background. In
Javanese , a particular social dialect can be defined as a particular
combination of styles or levels that has its distinctive patterns of
vocabulary, grammar and pronunciation. In Javanese, every time a Javanese
person talks to a different person, he has to choose the right words and
pronunciations because almost every word is different and they fit together in
patterns or levels. A well-educated Javanese who comes from a rich family
usually use five different levels of language. According to Marjohan (1988:34),
the social relationship that related to status and familiarity between the
Javanese speaker and the listener has to be marked. The status depends on
wealth, nobility, education, occupation, age, kinship, etc. For example, in
Javanese the word for house has three forms that bear status meanings, they are
omah, griya and dalem.
The term
social class that is related to the social dialect refers to the differences
between people which are associated with differences in social prestige, wealth
and education (Holmes, 2001:135). People from different social class do not
speak in the same way. For example, bank managers do not talk like office
cleaners, lawyers do not talk in the same way as the criminals they defend in
court.
In
accordance with this social dialect, there are some other language variation
that people usually call as acrolect, bacilect, vulgar, slang, colloquial,
jargon, argot and cant (Chaer & Agustina, 1995:87). The description of
these particular language variation are in the following:
a. Acrolect.
This is the social language variation that is considered to be higher or more
prestigious than other social language variation (Chaer & Agustina,
1995:87). For example, the French with the dialect of the city of Paris is
considered to be in the higher level than other French dialects.
b. Bacilect.
It refers to the social language variation that is considered to be lower or
less prestigious than other social language variation (Chaer & Agustina,
1995:87). For example, the English used by cowboys and miners can be classified
into bacilect.
c. Vulgar.
This means the social language variation that contains features that are used
by people that are less educated or even uneducated (Chaer & Agustina,
1995:87). Languages in Europe that existed from the Romans age up to the Middle
age can be classified into vulgar language since the intellectual group of
people of those ages used Latin in conducting all of their activities.
d. Slang.
It refers to the non-standard words that are known and used by a certain group
of people, for example a group of teenagers, a group of college students, a
group of jazz players, etc (Widarso, 1989:63). Since every group has its own
slang words there are many kinds of slang that can be found. Slang is usually
created arbitrarily, for example the word money has some slang words,
such as cabbage and dough. Sometime slang words are more alive,
more expressive than the standard words. For example, the slang word of cemetery
is boneyard, the slang word for clerk is pencil pusher and
the slang words for women who like men only because of their money are money
mad and gold digger.
Slang is
also related to peer group and gang speech in order to obtain some degree of
secrecy (Spolsky, 1998:35). In one of the Australian aboriginal languages,
exists a men’s society with a secret language in which every word means its
opposite. Another example is pig Latin which is a children’s secret language
using a meaningless vowel that is inserted after every syllable, like Canay
uyay unayderaystanday thisay? Other social norms are also transgressed by
slang, it makes free use of taboo expressions such as the words like fuck and
shit in public media that has become a mark of liberation or a sign of revolt
(Spolsky, 1998:36).
e. Colloquial.
It means the social language variation used in daily conversation, it means the
language used in speaking and not in writing (Chaer & Agustina, 1995:88).
The term colloquial is derived from the word colloquium meaning
conversation. The examples of colloquial in spoken English are don’t for
the words do not, I’d for the words I would or I had,
we’ll for we will, pretty for very, funny
for peculiar and stock in for believe. Here are other
examples of colloquial expression in English with their formal meanings:
1. join up
=> enlist
2. put up with => tolerate
3. know-how => technical skill
4. the law => a policeman
5. outside of => except
6. a natural => one who is naturally expert
f. Jargon.
According to Spolsky (1998:33) it is in-group variety which serves not only to
label new and needed concepts but also to create bonds among the members of a
certain group and enforce boundaries for people outside the group. Hacking
and surfing the net are phrases that do not have obvious meaning to
people who are not following the computer revolution and sticky wicket
and hit for a six are understood by people who play cricket.
Jargon also
refers to the words that are known and used by a certain group of people which
usually concerns with a certain field of occupation (Widarso, 1989:63). We can
also say that jargon is the technical language of a particular profession.
Usually it is quite easy to find the meaning of a jargon without using a
special dictionary. We can see an example of jargon in the production of a
motion picture. When the director wants to stop an cat of an actor, he will say
Cut! and not Stop!. Other example of jargon are the terms used by
sailors who use the terms starboard side to refer to the right side of a
boat or ship, and port side to refer to the left side of a boat or ship.
g. Argot.
This means the social variation that are limited to certain proffession only
and secretly in nature by using special vocabulary (Chaer & Agustina,
2004:28). In the crime world of thieves and pick-pocketers, people in it use
the terms like glasses for police, leaves for money,
etc.
h. Cant.
According to Chaer & Agustina (2004:28) it means the certain social
variaton that is used to show poverty that is usually used by beggars, just
like the expression the cant of beggars which means the language of
beggars.
Spolsky
(1998) has another opinion about the definition of cant. According to him, cant
is the jargon used by thieves and the underworld which are used to make it hard
for the outsiders to understand their conversations (Spolsky, 1998:34).
However, cant is not limited to the underworld only because it can also be
found in other area of occupation such as the Jewish horse traders in Alsace
who have used a great number of Hebrew terms for numbers and parts of a horse
to keep their language secret.
4. Temporal
dialect
Temporal
dialect means the language variation that is used by a certain social group in
particular time (Chaer & Agustina, 1995:84). For example, the language
variation can be seen in the development of English. According to Widarso
(1989:22-28) the development of English had began from the Old English in the
year of 600 to 1100, the Middle English in the year of 1100 to 1450, the Early
Modern English in the year of 1450 to 1700 until the Modern English in the year
of 1700 up to now.
B. Language
Variation: Focus on Uses
In terms of
language variation that are based on its uses, the discussion is focused on the
ways in which speech reflects the contexts in which language is used and not
the characteristics of the speakers (Holmes, 2001:223). The language variation
that is concerning with the uses or functions can be called as style or
register.
1. Style
For the term
style, there are many definitions which are basically the same. The first to be
mentioned here is the definition given by Marjohan (1988:34) that style refers
to a variation in speech or writing from more formal to more casual. Some
markers for the formal style would be the use of may instead of might
and can and also constructions such as For whom did you get it?
Instead of Who’d you get that for? in more casual speech.
Bell’s (ed.
Jaworski, 1997) statement about style is in line with the statement made by
Holmes (2001:223) above that style is related more with the situations than
with the speakers themselves. This can be seen in his statement that when we
want to talk about style, it means that we talk about the same speakers who
talk in different ways on different situations and not the different speakers
who talk in different ways from each other (Bell, ed. Jaworski, 1997:240).
According to
Holmes (2001:246) the term style refers to language variation which reflects
changes in situational factors. She also mentions that styles are often
analysed according to the levels of formality (Holmes, 2001:246). This is in
accordance with Martin Joos (1967) in his book The Five Clocks as quoted by
Nababan (1986:22) who divides the style of formality into five levels, frozen,
formal, consultative, casual and intimate styles. The description of these
styles can be seen in the following:
a. Frozen
style. It is the most formal style used in formal situations and ceremonies
(Nababan, 1986:22). It is called frozen because the pattern has been set up
firmly and can never be changed by anyone. In written form, we can see this
style in historical documents, ratification, and other formal documents.
b. Formal
style. It is the style used in formal speech, formal meeting, office
correspendence, lesson books for school, etc (Chaer & Agustina, 1995:93).
Formal style is basically similar to the frozen style that is only used in
formal situations and not in informal situations. The example of formal style
as quoted by Marjohan (1988:35) from Nababan (1987) is the first paragraph of
the opening of the 1945 constitution of the Republic of Indonesia that was
written in a formal or even in a frozen style,
Bahwa sesungguhnya
kemerdekaan itu ialah hak segala bangsa dan oleh sebab itu maka penjajahan di
atas dunia harus dihapuskan karena tidak sesuai dengan peri kemanusiaan dan
peri keadilan.
c. Consultative
style. This is the style used in ordinary conversation held at school, in
meeting or conversation that leads to result and production (Nababan, 1986:22).
It can be said that this style is the most operational one.
d. Casual
style. It is the style used to speak with friends, family or relatives,
during the leisure time, while exercising, etc (Chaer & Agustina, 1995:93).
The casual style markers in English mentioned in Marjohan’s book (1988:35) are:
1. The
absence of an article at the beginning of a sentence, for example:
e. Friend of
mine saw it.
f. Coffee’s cold.
2. The
absence of the subject at the beginning of a sentence, for example:
a. Bought it
yesterday?
b. Makes no difference.
3. The
absence of an auxiliary, for example:
a. Leaving?
b. Seen John lately?
e. Intimate
style. This is the style used with people who have close relationships with
the speaker (Nababan, 1986:22). By using this style those people do not need to
use complete sentences with clear articulation, they just simply use short
words. It happens mainly because there is an understanding among those people.
A number of
kinds of style can also be found in the study conducted by Labov in 1966 as
mentioned by Bell (ed. Jaworski, 1997:241) in his writing. In gathering some
useful informations from his informants, Labov used a series of language tasks
and recorded his interviews with them. From this recordings, he found the
casual speech or the condition of paying the least attention to someone’s
speech. This casual speech was used when a speaker was speaking to someone else
who was not the interviewer, or discussing topics which got the speaker and
that someone involved with each other. He also found another style, the careful
style or the condition of paying a bit more attention to someone’s speech. This
style especially revealed in the recordings when a speaker was answering
questions in a typical interview way and when a speaker paid more attention to
his pronunciation whenever he was asked to read aloud a brief passage of a
story. Labov also found that there was the maximum amount of attention that was
paid to a one’s speech whenever a speaker was asked to read out a list of
isolated words and a set of minimal pairs.
Peter
Trudgill (ed. Jaworski, 1997:179) used four different styles that are related
to five social groups in his work on the standard ing pronunciation and
the non-standard in pronunciation in Norwich English. The four styles
are Word List Style (WLS), Reading Passage Style (RPS), Formal Speech (FS) and
Casual Speech (CS) while the five social groups are lower working-class (LWC),
middle working-class (MWC), upper working-class (UWC), lower middle-class (LMC)
and middle middle-class (MMC). According to Bell (ed. Jaworski, 1997:241) from
the style graph there are two things that can be revealed. The first is that
when we go from the middle-class groups to the working-class groups the use of
the non-standardin pronunciation increases and the use of the standarding
pronunciation decreases. The second is that when each group style have to do
the tasks demanding increasing attention, each group style moves from using
less in to using more ing. Therefore in casual speech the five
groups use most in, in careful speech and reading passage they use less in
and in the word lists they use the least in.
2. Register
For the term
register, according to Holmes (2001:246) it refers to the language of groups of
people with common interests or jobs, or the language used in situations
associated with such groups. The examples of different registers can be seen in
the language used by journalist, legalist, auctioneers, race-callers, sports
commentator, airline pilots, criminals, financiers, politicians, disc jockeys
and also the language used in the courtroom and the classroom. One example
mentioned by Holmes (2001:247) in her book the language used by people who describe
a sporting event which can be distinguished easily from language used in other
contexts especially in the vocabulary. In cricket, people describe positions by
using terms like silly mid on, square leg, the covers and gully
and describe deliveries by using terms like off-break, googly and
leg break.
A variety of
language marked by choices of vocabulary and used in a specific situation
involving particular roles and statuses can also be considered as a register as
well (Spolsky, 1998;34). The examples include a toast at a wedding, sports
broadcast, or talking to a baby. As mentioned by Brown (2000:261) besides
maintaining solidarity, registers are also used to identify different
occupational or socioeconomic groups, that can be done in many ways, for example
by looking at certain phonological variants, vocabulary, idioms or other
expressions. Truckers, airline pilots, salespersons and farmers can be good
examples of people who use words and phrases which are unique to their own
group.
Another
definition of register mentioned by Chaer & Agustina (1995:92) is that
register concerns with in what activity, purpose or field a language is used
for. For example the language variation used in the field of journalism,
military services, scientific activities, etc. Language variation in the field
of journalism has specific characteristics, it is simple, communicative and
brief. The language is simple because it has to be understood easily,
communicative because it has to deliver news appropriately, and brief because
of the limited space (in printed media) and limited time (in electronic media).
Language
variation in the field of military services has been known with its
characteristics, which are brief and strict in line with the military duty and
life that is full of discipline and instructions. While the scientific language
has been known with its characteristics of being straight-forward, clear and
free from ambiguities, metaphors and idioms because the language of science
must give scientific information clearly, without any doubts, and free from
possibilities of being interpreted in different meanings.
C.
Application in Language Teaching
There is an
interesting theory made by Bernstein in the filed of teaching that concerns
with the language variation. It is called the deficit hypothesis which
is based on the different language variation of the lower class and the middle
class (Nababan, 1986:63). This theory states that at home children from the
middle class use the language variation in a complete form (elaborated code)
while children from the lower class are growing in the language variation in an
incomplete form (restricted code). Since the formal language variation -which
is close to the complete form of language variation used by children from the
middle class, is used at schools, children from the lower class who use the
incomplete form must learn the new language variation besides other subjects.
It makes them tend to be less successful than children from the middle class.
There is an
interesting question concerning language variation in its relation with
language teaching raised by Chaer & Agustina (2004:221). The question is,
should all language variation be taught? Since what should be taught is the
language fact used in all interaction activities, therefore the answer to this
question is supposed to be yes. Instead, there are three reasons why the
non-formal styles do not need to be taught explicitly. The first reason is that
in the national language policy (in the National Language Policy Seminar in
1975), it is stated that the formal style is the style which should be nurtured
and developed without mentioning other non-formal styles. The second reason is
that in reality the non-formal styles usually can be learned directly in daily
conversations as the non-formal styles are used widely in the community. The
third reason is concerning with the limited time, energy and ability of the
teachers. Since time, energy and ability possessed by teachers are very
limited, they should be used well to teach the formal style only. Although the
non-formal styles do not need to be taught explicitly, they still need to be
explained to students in order to make them understand which style is formal
and which style is non-formal so that in the future they can use them in a much
better and wiser way.
Pidgin and
Creole Languages
Originally
thought of as incomplete, broken, corrupt, not worthy of serious attention.
Pidgins still are marginal: in origin (makeshift, reduced in structure), in
attitudes toward them (low prestige); in our knowledge of them.
Some quick definitions:
1. Pidgin language (origin in Engl. word `business’?) is nobody’s native
language; may arise when two speakers of different languages with no common
language try to have a makeshift conversation. Lexicon usually comes from one
language, structure often from the other. Because of colonialism, slavery etc.
the prestige of Pidgin languages is very low. Many pidgins are `contact
vernaculars’, may only exist for one speech event.
2. Creole (orig. person of European descent born and raised in a
tropical colony) is a language that was originally a pidgin but has become
nativized, i.e. a community of speakers claims it as their first language. Next
used to designate the language(s) of people of Caribbean and African descent in
colonial and ex-colonial countries (Jamaica, Haiti, Mauritius, Réunion, Hawaii,
Pitcairn, etc.)
3. Relexification The process of substituting new vocabulary for old.
Pidgins may get relexified with new English vocabulary to replace the previous
Portuguese vocabulary, etc.
A creole
language, or simply
a creole, is some kind of sloppy French. It’s a stable language that has
originated from a pidgin language that has been nativized (that is, acquired by
children). The vocabulary of a creole language consists of cognates from the
parent languages, though there are often clear phonetic and semantic shifts. On
the other hand, the grammar often has original features but may differ
substantially from those of the parent languages. Most often, the vocabulary comes
from the dominant group and the grammar from the subordinate group, where such
stratification exits. For example, Jamaican Creole features largely English
words superimposed on West African grammar.
A creole is
believed to arise when a pidgin, which was developed by adults for use
as a second language, becomes the native and primary language of their children
— a process known as nativization.
Diglossia
In
linguistics, diglossia (pronounced /daI’ɡlɒsiə/, from Greek: διγλωσσία <
δύο+γλώσσα, two languages) refers to a situation in which two dialects or
languages are used by a single language community. In addition to the
community's everyday or vernacular language variety (labeled "L" or
"low" variety), a second, highly codified variety (labeled
"H" or "high") is used in certain situations such as
literature, formal education, or other specific settings, but not used for
ordinary conversation.
Post-1959
research on diglossia has concentrated on a number of variables and important
questions: function, prestige, literary heritage, acquisition, standardization,
stability, grammar, lexicon, phonology, the difference between diglossia and
standard-with-dialects, extent of distribution in space, time, and in various
language families, and finally what engenders diglossia and what conditions
favor its development.
1. Function. The functional differentiation of discrepant varieties in a
diglossia is fundamental, thus distinguishing it from bilingualism. H and L are
used for different purposes, and native speakers of the community would find it
odd (even ludicrous, outrageous) if anyone used H in an L domain, or L in an H
domain.
2. Prestige: in most diglossias examined, H was more highly valued (had greater
prestige) than was L. The H variety is that of `great' literature, canonical
religious texts, ancient poetry, of public speaking, of pomp and circumstance.
The L-variety is felt to be less worthy, corrupt, `broken', vulgar,
undignified, etc.
3. Literary Heritage: In most diglossic languages, the literature is all in
H-variety; no written uses of L exist, except for `dialect' poetry,
advertising, or `low' restricted genres. In most diglossic languages, the
H-variety is thought to be the language; the L-variety is sometimes denied to
exist, or is claimed to be only spoken by lesser mortals (servants, women,
children). In some traditions (e.g. Shakespeare's plays), L-variety would be
used to show certain characters as rustic, comical, uneducated, etc.
4. Acquisition: L-variety is the variety learned first; it is the mother
tongue, the language of the home. H-variety is acquired through schooling.
Where linguists would therefore insist that the L-variety is primary, native
scholars see only the H-variety as the language.
5. Standardization: H is strictly standardized; grammars, dictionaries,
canonical texts, etc. exist for it, written by native grammarians. L is rarely
standardized in the traditional sense, or if grammars exist, are written by
outsiders.
6. Stability: Diglossias are generally stable, persisting for centuries or even
millennia. Occasionally L-varieties gain domains and displace the H-variety,
but H only displaces L if H is the mother tongue of an elite, usually in a
neighboring polity.
7. Grammar: The grammars of H are more complex than the grammars of L-variety.
They have more complex tense systems, gender systems, agreement, syntax than
L-variety.
8. Lexicon: Lexicon is often somewhat shared, but generally there is
differentiation; H has vocabulary that L lacks, and vice-versa.
9. Phonology: Two kinds of systems are discerned. One is where H and L share
the same phonological elements, but H may have more complicated
morphophonemics. Or, H is a special subset of the L-variety inventory. (But
speakers often fail to keep the two systems separate.)
A second type is one where H has contrasts that L lacks, systematically
substituting some other phoneme for the lacking contrast; but L may `borrow'
elements as tatsamas, using the H-variety contrast in that particular item.
10. Difference between Diglossia and Standard-with-dialects. In diglossia,
no-one speaks the H-variety as a mother tongue, only the L-variety. In the
Standard-with-dialects situation, some speakers speak H as a mother tongue,
while others speak L-varieties as a mother tongue and acquire H as a second
system.
11. Distribution of diglossia in language-families, space, and time. Diglossia
is not limited to any geographical area or language family, and diglossias have
existed for centuries or millennia (Arabic, South Asia). Most diglossias
involve literacy, but oral diglossias are conceivable.
12. What engenders diglossia and under what conditions.
(a) Existence of an ancient or prestigious literature, composed in the
H-variety, which the linguistic culture wishes to preserve as such.
(b) Literacy is usually a condition, but is usually restricted to a small
elite. When conditions require universal literacy in H, pedagogical problems
ensue.
(c) Diglossias do not spring up overnight; they take time to develop
These three factors, perhaps linked with religion, make diglossia extremely
stable in Arabic and other linguistic cultures such as South Asia.
Bilingualism
and Multilingualism
A bilingual
individual, generally,
is someone who speaks two languages. An ideal or balanced bilingual speaks each
language as proficiently as an educated native speaker. This is often referred
to as an ideal type since few people are regarded as being able to reach this
standard. Otherwise, a bilingual may be anywhere on a continuum of skills.
A
multilingual person, in a broad
definition, is one who can communicate in more than one language, be it
actively (through speaking, writing, or signing) or passively (through
listening, reading, or perceiving). More specifically, the terms bilingual and
trilingual are used to describe comparable situations in which two or three
languages are involved. A generic term for multilingual persons is polyglot.
Poly (Greek: πολύς) means “many”, glot (Greek: γλώττα) means “language”.
Multilingual speakers have acquired and maintained at least one language during
childhood, the so-called first language (L1). The first language (sometimes
also referred to as the mother tongue) is acquired without formal education, by
mechanisms heavily disputed. Children acquiring two languages in this way are
called simultaneous bilinguals. Even in the case of simultaneous bilinguals one
language usually dominates over the other. This kind of bilingualism is most
likely to occur when a child is raised by bilingual parents in a predominantly
monolingual environment. It can also occur when the parents are monolingual but
have raised their child or children in two different countries.
Code-switching
In
linguistics, Code-switching is the concurrent use of more than one
language, or language variety, in conversation. Multilinguals – people who
speak more than one language – sometimes use elements of multiple languages in
conversing with each other. Thus, code-switching is the syntactically and
phonologically appropriate use of more than one linguistic variety.
Code-switching is distinct from other language contact phenomena, such as
borrowing, pidgins and creoles, loan translation (calques), and language
transfer (language interference). Speakers form and establish a pidgin language
when two or more speakers who do not speak a common language form an
intermediate, third language. On the other hand, speakers practice
code-switching when they are each fluent in both languages. Code mixing is a
thematically related term, but the usage of the terms code-switching and
code-mixing varies. Some scholars use either term to denote the same practice,
while others apply code-mixing to denote the formal linguistic properties of
said language-contact phenomena, and code-switching to denote the actual,
spoken usages by multilingual persons.
Types of
switching
Scholars use
different names for various types of code-switching.
• Intersentential switching occurs outside the sentence or the clause
level (i.e. at sentence or clause boundaries).
• Intra-sentential switching occurs within a sentence or a clause.
• Tag-switching is the switching of either a tag phrase or a word, or
both, from language-B to language-A, (common intra-sentential switches).
• Intra-word switching occurs within a word, itself, such as at a
morpheme boundary.
Speech
community
Speech
community is a group
of people who share a set of norms and expectations regarding the use of
language. Speech communities can be members of a profession with a specialized
jargon, distinct social groups like high school students or hip hop fans (see
also African American Vernacular English), or even tight-knit groups like
families and friends. In addition, online and other mediated communities, such
as many internet forums, often constitute speech communities. Members of speech
communities will often develop slang or jargon to serve the group’s special
purposes and priorities.
Definition
Exactly how
to define speech community is debated in the literature. Definitions of speech
community tend to involve varying degrees of emphasis on the following:
• Shared community membership
• Shared linguistic communication
However, the relative importance and exact definitions of these also vary. Some
would argue that a speech community must be a ‘real’ community, i.e. a group of
people living in the same location (such as a city or a neighborhood), while
more recent thinking proposes that all people are indeed part of several
communities (through home location, occupation, gender, class, religious
belonging, and more), and that they are thus also part of simultaneous speech
communities.
Similarly, what shared linguistic communication entails is also a variable
concept. Some would argue that a shared first language, even dialect, is
necessary, while for others the ability to communicate and interact (even
across language barriers) is sufficient.
Variation
Studies: Some Findings and Issues
An Early Study
One of the earliest studies of variation was Fischer’s study (1958) of the (ng)
variable, i.e., pronunciations like singing [ŋ] versus singin’ [n]. There is a
long history of both the [ŋ] and [n] variants in the language, that
stigmatization of the [n] variant is a phenomenon of the nineteenth and
twentieth centuries, and that even today in some circles in the United Kingdom,
necessarily privileged ones, people still go huntin’, shootin’, and fishin’,
not hunting, shooting, and fishing.
As part of a study of child-rearing in a New England community, Fischer
conducted interviews with young children, twelve boys and twelve girls, age
3-10. He noted their use of [ŋ] and [n] in a very formal situation during the
administration of the Thematic Apperception Test, in a less formal interview,
and in an informal situation in which the children discussed recent activities.
In table below shows that boys use more –in’ forms than girls in the most
formal situation.
Preferences for –ing and –in’ endings, by sex
-ing > -in’
-ing < -in’
Boys 5 7
Girls 10 2
Fischer also compared the use of [ŋ] and [n] of a boy described by his teachers
as a ‘model’ boy with that of a boy described as a ‘typical’ boy. The model boy
worked well in school and was described as being popular, thoughtful, and
considerate; the typical boy was described as being strong, mischievous, and
apparently unafraid of being caught doing something he should not be doing. In
the most formal situation these two boys produced the number of instances of
-ing and –in’ reported in table below.
Preferences of two boys for –ing and –in’ endings
-ing -in’
‘Model’ boy 38 1
‘Typical’ boys 10 12
However, Fischer further observed that the model boy also use –in’ more as the
formality of the situation decreased, as we can see in table below.
Preferences for –ing and –in’ endings, by formality of situation
Most formal
Formal interview Informal interview
-ing 38 33 24
-in’ 1 35 41
He observeb several other interesting facts. As children relaxed in the most
formal situation they produced more instances of –in’ . Such usage was also
associated with specific verbs so that verbs like hit, chew, swim, and punch,
i.e., verbs describing everyday activities were much more likely to be given
–in’ endings than more ‘formal’ verbs like criticize, correct, read and visit.
Fischer’s conclusion is that ‘the choice between the –ing and the –in’ variants
appears to be related to sex, class, personality (aggressive/cooperative), and
mood (tense/relaxed) of the speaker, to the formality of the conversation and
to the specific verb spoken’.
A Variety of
Studies
The Detroit study (Shuy et al., 1968) and Wolfram’s follow-up to that study
(1969) hav esome findings which are worthy of comment in the present context.
For example, the Detroit study investigated the use of multiple negation as a
linguistic variable in that city. The study showed that there is a very close
relationship between the use of multiple negation and social class.
Wolfram’s general findings in Detroit were that social status was the single
most important variable correlating with linguistic differences, with the
clearest boundary being between the lower middle and upper working classes. In
each class, however, females used more standard-language forms than males.
Older subjects also used fewer stigmatized forms than did younger subjects.
Finally, reading style showed the fewest deviations of all from
standard-language forms.
Controversies
I noted that linguistic variables may show correlations not only with social
variables but also with other linguistic features, i.e., they may be
linguistically constraint too, as with the deletion of l in Montreal. In their
discussion of linguistic variation, Wolfram and Fasold (1974, pp. 101-5)
present data from an earlier study by Fasold (1972) to show that it is possible
to state how two or more factors, or constraint, interact to affect the
distribution of a variable. In this case they are concerned with deletion of
final stop in clusters, e.g., the d in the word like cold, in speech among
blacks in Washington, DC. The data showed that the parenthesized stop were
deleted as follows: san(d) castle, 83.3 percent deletion; fas(t) car , 68.8
percent deletion; wil(d) elephant, 34.9 percent deletion ; and lif(t) it, 25.2
percent deletion. If we look closely at the environments of these stops, we
will find that sometimes the stop is preceded by a sonorant (a nasal or l) and
sometimes by a non-sonorant ( a stop or a fricative), and it is followed
sometimes by a vowel and sometimes by a consonant (or non-vowel).
Language
change
Linguists have traditionally studied variations in a language occurring at the
same, time (synchronic study) or how language develops over time (diachronic or
historical study). Both can be useful aids to understanding.
The study of language change is often narrowed to consideration of change in
one aspect of language: lexis, semantics or syntax, say. But you should have a
sense of the broad historical development of English. Later, you may wish to
study more fully how the language developed at a particular period. For the
20th century, we are able to study some kinds of change over a very short time,
as there is plenty of evidence. The further back we go, the longer may be the
periods over which change can be observed. Before the 20th century, most of the
evidence that survives is of written forms. We have some second-hand written
evidence of spoken language forms, but no recorded speech earlier than that
allowed by modern recording technology.
Studying
standardization and change by language category
Although a chronological model gives us a sense of succession and of history as
narrative, it can make it hard to see the theory or outline of a question or
contemporary opinion. It can also lead us to see historical divisions (the end
of a century) as having more importance than is really the case. In what
follows aspects of change and standardization are considered in terms of
language categories. Some of these will affect spoken or written English only
(e.g. phonology or spelling, respectively) while others (lexis, semantics,
syntax) are common to both or (like style) affect both but possibly in
different ways.
Grammar
Models or examples that we imitate may become real or de facto standards. Texts
with a large audience may thus create patterns to which we conform.
Prescriptive rules are compiled because the writer presumably wishes to
“correct” some real language tendency – these invented rules (akin to matters
of etiquette or table manners) are likely to fail, but may in the meantime
promote social attitudes about “correct” or “incorrect” English that are
confused with genuine rules.
Some “rules”, like those drawn up by Lowth in 1762, have acquired currency: for
example, that one should not put a preposition at the end of a sentence, use
double or multiple negatives, split the infinitive, or use they as a
gender-neutral pronoun. Professor R.W. Zandvoort describes how English usage
ignores these pseudo-rules, while Jean Aitchison in her lecture A Web of
Worries gives historical and modern examples to show what Zandvoort describes.
Lexis and
semantics
This is less problematic or, rather, the problems are readily grasped. Some
lexical items with some meanings are certainly standard features of English at
a given time – the OED is full of them. Equally, some other items are obviously
not standard or have n/s meanings. And many items are in the process of
becoming or ceasing to be standard. Thus, in spite of continual language
change, we can create a standard lexicon at any time. We can take this further
and show how a given lexical item with a given meaning may be standard in a
given context or within a variety but be n/s as regards the mainstream.
For example Hoover began life as a brand name, a proper-noun equivalent
to generic vacuum cleaner. Nowadays, in spoken UK English Hoover or
arguably hoover is acceptable as a generic name or common noun. At the turn of
the century supplements to the OED recorded various forms of Kodak
(small portable camera) including kodaker (photographer) and kodakry
photography. These are no longer standard although Polaroid is
acceptable to denote the instant photographs produced in such cameras.
Both lexis and semantics (especially semantic change or drift) may be
culturally determined. They may depend on some other thing (a process or
object) which ceases to be familiar, and so the word disappears or the meaning
shifts. This has happened to words like wireless, telegram or
terms from imperial measurement and pre-decimal currency (foot, inch,
gallon, bushel, halfpenny [do you know the standard pronunciation of
this?], and shilling.
Spelling
Discussion of spelling is bedevilled by strong social attitudes. Even teachers,
who should know better, characterize n/s spelling by epithets such as “bad”,
“poor”, “awful” or “appalling” – as if the writer wilfully ignored the standard
form. The National Curriculum draws attention to many other features of written
performance as well as spelling, but the social attitudes persist. Yet Chaucer,
Shakespeare and Milton (necessarily) wrote without regard to a standard, so
standard spelling can hardly be a measure of merit. The allegation that n/s
spelling confuses the reader is often false (as with n/s omission or adding of
a second consonant or n/s e before -ing in verbs). Non-standard spellings
used in marketing (Kwik Fit, Kwik Save, Toys R Us) rarely appear
unintentionally in children’s writing, as any teacher knows. On the other hand,
the commonest “errors” such as alot for (standard) a lot, grammer
for (standard) grammar or belive for standard believe all
make clear what the writer intends.
Johnson’s dictionary establishes a standard because it is not prescriptive
but descriptive. It records what is in Johnson’s (very wide) reading the
most common form, making allowance for consistency of like elements, and
showing etymology, for those who know other languages. Thus cede
(verb=give, from Latin) and seed (noun) are differently spelt though
homophones (having more or less the same sound value). Johnson also disarms
critics by quoting usage, not merely laying down a preferred form.
The modern reader sees Noah Webster’s variants as distinctly American (ax,
color, plow, theater, waggon) but often Webster has recorded an older
English form than Dr. Johnson.
Punctuation
Punctuation, which may be more critical to communicating meaning than spelling,
provokes much less strong social attitudes – perhaps because n/s forms are less
obvious, perhaps because punctuation has no defining moment like the
publication of Johnson’s dictionary, but has evolved gradually and has standard
forms but is open to change.
From the 18th century onwards one sees most punctuation marks which are
considered standard today. Some have changed their use – in general, late 20th
century texts, especially non-literary texts, have less frequent use of marks
which are deemed optional. In modern German, a comma to separate clauses is
obligatory, but not in English. Businesses use so-called “open punctuation” of
addresses (no comma after each element). In many cases ignorance or confusion
about conventions may cause writers to avoid some marks: the semi-colon and
colon are problematic, while the great difference of function between hyphen
and dash may be confused by lack of difference in appearance: on a typewriter
the same key served for both (some typists would repeat the stroke for a dash).
Some modern computer software restores the difference, where the grammar
checking can detect that the context calls for the (longer) dash. (HTML
character sets seem not to distinguish between the hyphen and dash, so I can’t
show you the difference in appearance here.)
Some writers may have caused punctuation marks to lose impact by over-use.
Teachers will be familiar with multiple exclamation marks, or with exclamation
marks in contexts where only mild emphasis is intended.
Phonology
Before the advent of modern recording and broadcasting technology debate about
sounds was reliant on written transcripts, which could at best approximate to
real phonology. Much is made of inference from, for example, rhyming words in
poetry – did the poet use imperfect rhyme or have sounds changed in, for
example, John Donne’s “And find/What wind/Serves to advance an honest mind”.
Does US (rhymes with lurk) or UK (rhymes with dark) pronunciation
of clerk preserve the older English form – or have two rival sounds
fared differently in separate locations? And what of lieutenant? US loo-ten-unt
(with stress on first or second syllable) is closer to the French original than
UK lef-ten-unt (stress on second syllable).
The various phonetic alphabets give a symbolic representation of sounds that
are described in terms of physical performance (for example the position of
tongue relative to teeth). Modern recording technology can be used to give a
far more precise and objective description of a sound produced, as a waveform
or a measure of frequency and so on.
As sound recording is now more than a century old, we can observe change and
standardizing tendencies in spoken English. Received Pronunciation (RP) is a
notional standard form of pronunciation. RP is associated with prestige and
formal public spoken discourse, such as the law, parliament, education or
broadcasting. In some of these it may be in tension with regional variations.
RP currently is a modified form of the accent heard in independent and grammar
schools or spoken by newsreaders; the accent is largely neutral as regards
region, but long/soft vowels are preferred to hard/short vowel sounds.
Listening to a recording of a broadcast from an earlier period (a Pathé newsreel
or Alvar Liddell [an early BBC radio broadcaster] reading the news for the BBC)
will show how far RP has changed over time – the earlier RP survives in part in
the accent of Queen Elizabeth II, who speaks with much less clearly
differentiated (or less open) vowels than the modern RP speaker (the stiff
upper lip is literal as well as a metaphor). Our notion of RP in earlier times
may also derive from the accents heard in UK feature films (think of Celia
Johnson in Brief Encounter). We have no easy way of knowing how far this
corresponded to the prestige accent of the time.
Invented
rules
You may understand this subject better by looking at some invented rules. These
are not descriptions of general usage but inventions of Robert Lowth and
others. Some of them have so influenced past generations that they are accepted
as normative. Here are examples of some of the more commonly-encountered
pseudo-rules.
They and them are not to be used
as singular pronouns.
Example: If
anyone calls, tell them I’m in a meeting.
Comment: Such use may be inelegant style but does not break any real rule of
grammar. Professor R.W. Zandvoort (The Fundamentals of English Grammar –
Arnold’s Card Guides; London, 1963) says, “Where sex is unknown he or they
may be used of an adult, he or it of children”. Jean Aitchison
(The Language Web, p. 8) quotes examples from the 18th century to the present
day of writers who disregard this “rule”, including William Thackeray, Lewis
Carroll, Virginia Woolf and George Bernard Shaw.
The
infinitive should not be split (separated from to by a qualifier)
Example: The mission was to boldly go where no man had ever gone before.
Comment:
There is no justification at all for this supposed rule.
Double
negatives are really affirmatives.
Example: I don’t know nothing about that.
Comment: This derives from Robert Lowth (“Two negatives… are equivalent to an
affirmative”) but is deeply entrenched in popular attitudes to language. It
arises from confusing vernacular languages with logic or theory of number. Now the
double negative is often used to signal an affirmative, but indirectly, as in
that’s not unreasonable. Aitchison finds a multiple (fourfold) negative for
emphatic negation in Chaucer’s General Prologue to the Canterbury Tales. Of the
knight, we are told he never yet no vileynye ne sayde
In al his lyf unto no maner wight
(He never even no wicked thing not said in all his life to
no kind of person).
Different
should be immediately followed by “from” (not “than” or “to”)
Comment: Aitchison finds examples of different to and H.W. Fowler’s Modern
English Usage labels the preference for different from a “superstition”.
But different to and different than may have other distinct uses.
Consider these examples:
• After the room was painted it looked different to me.
• After the room was painted it looked different from how it did before.
• A dog is different from a wolf. A slug is different from a
wolf. But a slug is more different than a dog from a wolf.
Most prepositions function in ways that are not coherent or logical. Many
languages do not have them. Since their use is a matter of convention, the idea
of style or fitness (as with the double negative) may now argue against different
to.
Prepositions
should not come at the end of a sentence.
Example: This is the man who/that I spoke to.
(Preferred form given as This is the man to whom I spoke.)
Comment: The suggestion that the preposition should come before the verb phrase
has no justification. The second example above may be more elegant, but rigid
enforcing of the “rule” can have the opposite effect, as in the notorious: This
is English, up with which I will not put.
Quizzes
Dates and events
If you want to learn important events and their dates, click on the link below
for a short quiz. Why do this? You may want to be confident, before taking an
exam, that you know what happened when.
• Take a quiz on important dates in the history of English
Learn about
the lexicon
If you want to learn about the English lexicon, click on the link below for a
short quiz. Why do this? You may want to be confident, before taking an exam,
that you know examples of lexis which have entered English from different
languages.
• Take a quiz on the etymology of English words.
Take a general language change quiz
Click on the link below for a general quiz on language change – some questions
are not yet covered by this guide: you may need to look elsewhere to find out
more. Many thanks to Terry of South Downs and the English Language List for
sharing this quiz.
• Take a quiz on language change