Walt Wolfram, Ryan Rowe, and Drew Grimes
North Carolina State University
LAVIS III
University of Alabama
April, 2004
Sociolinguistic Involvement in Community Perspective:
Opportunity and Obligation
1. Framing Relationships with the Community
• Traditional Principles of (Socio)linguistic Involvement
Principle of Error Correction
A scientist who becomes aware of a widespread idea or social practice with important
consequences that is invalidated by his own data is obligated to bring this error to the
attention of the widest possible audience. (Labov 1982:172)
Principle of the Debt Incurred
An investigator who has obtained linguistic data from members of a speech community has
an obligation to use the knowledge based on that data for the benefit of the community,
when it has need of it. (Labov 1982:173)
Principle of Linguistic Gratuity
Investigators who have obtained linguistic data from members of a speech community
should actively pursue ways in which they can return linguistic favors to the community.
(Wolfram 1993)
•
Researcher-Researched Relationships
Ethics
In ethical research, then, there is a wholly proper concern to minimize damage and offset
inconvenience to the researched, and to acknowledge their contribution. But the underlying
model is one of ‘research on’ social subjects. (Cameron, et al. 1992:14)
Advocacy
...the ‘advocacy position’ is characterized by a commitment on the part of the researcher not
just to do research on subjects but research on and for subjects... a researcher is asked to use
her skills or her authority as an ‘expert’ to defend subjects’ interests...( Cameron et al.
1992:15)
Empowered Research
We understand ‘empowered research’ as research on, for and with. One of the things we take
that additional ‘with’ to imply is the use of interactive or dialogic research methods, as
opposed to the distancing or objectifying strategies positivists are constrained to use...
(a) ‘Persons are not objects and should not be treated as objects.’
(b) ‘Subjects have their own agendas and research should try to address them.’
(c) ‘If knowledge is worth having, it is worth sharing.’ (Cameron et al. 22-24)
• Rationale for Involvement
The fundamental rationale for getting involved in application, advocacy, and empowerment
is that we owe it to the people whose data fuel our theories and descriptions; but these are
good things to do even if we don’t deal directly with native speakers and communities, and
enacting them may help us to respond to the interests of our students and to the needs of
our field. (Rickford 1999:315)
2
2. Sociolinguistic Partnerships and the Southern Community
• The Southern context of community
• Local speech and community consciousness
• Language and heritage
• Sociolinguistic goals and community interests
3. Products for the Community
•
Trade books and articles
e.g. Hoi Toide on the Outer Banks: The Story of the Ocracoke Brogue (Wolfram and Schilling-Estes
1997, The University of North Carolina Press); Fine in the World: Lumbee Language in Context
Walt Wolfram, Clare Dannenberg, Stanley Knick & Linda Oxendine. 2002, NC State
Humanities/Publications)
• Local vocabulary pamphlets
e.g. Ocracoke, Harkers Island, Lumbee
• Video/TV documentaries
e.g. The Ocracoke Brogue (Blanton and Waters 1997); Indian by Birth: The Lumbee Dialect (Neal
Hutcheson 2000) Hyde Talk: The Language and Land of Hyde County, North Carolina (Benjamin
Torbert 2002; Mountain Talk (Neal Hutcheson 2004); Voices of North Carolina (forthcoming
2004); Celebrating Princeville (Neal Hutcheson 2004); Princeville Remembers the Flood (forthcoming
2005 Drew Grimes); Celebrating Muzel Bryant (forthcoming Drew Grimes, Walt Wolfram, and
Jeffrey Reaser)
• Dialect curricula for K-12
e.g. Dialects and the Ocracoke Brogue (Wolfram et al. 1994-present ); Mountain Talk (Anderson,
Dannenberg et al.), “Texana McClelland and her Community” (4th grade lesson plan, The
African American Experience in North Carolina, Christine Mallinson and Becky Childs)
• Compact discs
e.g. Ocracoke Speaks (Becky Childs and Walt Wolfram 2000); An Unclouded Day (Neal
Hutcheson 2004)
• Museum exhibits
e.g. “The Brogue Exhibit” at the Ocracoke Preservation Society; “The Lumbee Dialect” at
the Museum of the Native American Resource Center
• Commemorative T shirts
"Save the Brogue" T-shirt with the Ocracoke Preservation Society (1996)
• Local, regional, and national media coverage
e.g. features on dialect death, dialect history and culture, dialect curricula, sociocultural
dialects; radio show on North Carolina NPR “The State of Things”; TV features on “North
Carolina Now”, etc.
4. A Mini-Case Study of an Emerging Community Partnership: Princeville
Remembers the Flood
Ryan Rowe and Drew Grimes report on Princeville
3
5. Critical Consideration of Dialect Awareness and Preservation Programs
(from Wolfram 1998 and Wolfram 2004)
•
•
•
•
•
Notions such as “partnership,” “gratuity,” “collaboration,” and “benefit” are ideologically
laden notions. Working out the everyday details of gratuity and negotiating communitybased partnerships can often be complicated and controversial. Some of the issues that arise
are:
Issues of Power and Authority
Although the members of a research team may assume a variety of situated roles and
relationships as visitors, researchers, and friends, the initial and primary status in these
communities was framed by our role as university-based language experts. This specialized
language expertise sets up an asymmetrical relationship of authority with respect to language
matters.
.The Ethics of Persuasion and Need
The sociolinguistic focus on language differences is typically viewed as an oddity in most
local communities. Language issues are usually not essential to local community identities,
whose primary concerns are more likely to be economic and social.
The Commodification of Vernacular Speech
Sociolinguists tend to package an idealized, basilectal version of the language in their
presentations of the community dialect. This representation often defies the sociolinguistic
reality of language variation within the community.
The Issue of Socioeducational Change
Most sociolinguists promote an agenda of social and educational change that is at odds with
mainstream language ideology. The “sociolinguists-know-best” agenda may be antithetical to
the community’s desired goals with respect to language, particularly in cases where language
is perceived as a weapon of oppression.
The Profit Issue
Sociolinguists profit professionally from the communities they have researched, including
recognition for proactive involvement and partnerships with local communities. In what
ways do communities profit from their involvement with sociolinguists?
6. Persistent Struggles in Sociolinguist-Community Relations
•
•
•
Dominant and local language ideology vs. sociolinguistic premises
The most persistent challenge for sociolinguists working with local communities continues
to be the widespread application of the principle of linguistic subordination. Mitigating the effects
of the dominant ideology involves long-term, formal and informal re-education on both a
local and broad-based level.
Community service vs. linguistic self-interest
Community goals and sociolinguistic intentions may not be aligned. At best, they may be
complementary; at worst, the may be in conflict. Community empowerment with respect to
language is an elusive goal, if at all attainable.
Sociolinguistic honesty vs. community authenticity
It is often difficult to provide a genuine profile of a linguistically subordinate variety that the
community will endorse. To what extent is it possible—and ethical—to portray a unified
picture of a vernacular variety? Is it a realistic goal, and if not, what is the alternative?
4
References
Blanton, Phyllis and Karen Waters, producers. 1995. The Ocracoke Brogue. Raleigh: North Carolina Language
and Life Project.
Cameron, Deborah, Elizabeth Fraser, Penelope Harvey, M.B.H. Rampton, and Kay Richardson. 1992.
Researching Language: Issues of Power and Method. London/New York: Routledge.
Heller, Monica, John Rickford, Marty Laforest, and Danielle Cyr. 1999. Sociolinguistics and public debate.
Journal of Sociolinguistics 3:260-88.
Hutcheson, Neal, producer 2000. Indian by Birth: The Lumbee Dialect. Raleigh: North Carolina Language and
Life Project.
Hutcheson, Neal, producer. 2004. Mountain Talk. Raleigh: North Carolina Language and Life Project.
Hutcheson, Neal, producer. 2004 An Unclouded Day: Stories and Songs of the Southern Appalachian Mountains.
Raleigh: North Carolina Language and Life Project.
Hutcheson, Neal, producer. Forthcoming ( 2004) Voices of North Carolina. Raleigh: North Carolina Language
and Life Project.
Labov, William. 1982. Objectivity and commitment in linguistic science: The case of the Black English trial in
Ann Arbor. Language in Society 11:165-201.
Locklear, Hayes Alan, Walt Wolfram, Natalie Schilling-Estes, and Clare Dannenberg. 1999. Dialect Dictionary of
Lumbee English. Raleigh: North Carolina Language and Life Project.
Rickford, John R. 1999. African American English: Features, Evolution, and Educational Implications.
Malden/Oxford: Blackwell.
Torbert, Benjamin, producer. 2002. Hyde Talk: The Language and Land of Hyde County, North Carolina. Raleigh:
North Carolina Language and Life Project
Wolfram, Walt. 1993. Ethical considerations in language awareness programs. Issues in Applied Linguistics
4:225-55.
Wolfram, Walt. 1998. Scrutinizing linguistic gratuity: A view from the field. Journal of Sociolinguistics 2:271-79.
Wolfram, Walt. 2004. Dialect awareness in community perspective. In Margaret C. Bender (ed.), Linguistic
Diversity in the South: Changing Codes, Practices and Ideologies. Athens: University of Georgia Press.
Wolfram, Walt, Clare Dannenberg, Stanley Knick, and Linda Oxendine. 2002. Fine in the World: Lumbee
Language in Time and Place. Raleigh: North Carolina State Humanities Extension/Publications.
Wolfram, Walt and Natalie Schilling-Estes. 1997. Hoi Toide on the Outer Banks: The Story of the Ocracoke Brogue.
Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
Wolfram, Walt, and Jeffrey Reaser. 2003. Dialects and the Ocracoke Brogue, 5th ed. 8th grade curriculum,
Ocracoke School. Raleigh: North Carolina Language and Life Project.