LN270 Society
and Language Linguistics for
Social Scientists
Course Booklet
2024-2025
LN270 Society and Language: Linguistics for Social Scientists
Introduction
Welcome to the course. I hope you will enjoy it, and I look forward to getting to know
you and hearing about your ideas and interest in language(s).
This booklet will give you an overview of the content and the format of this course, what
you can expect to learn and how the work you will do for this course will be assessed
and graded. You will also find information on reading and the use of the Moodle course
webpage as well as information and tips on how to complete formative and summative
coursework and assessments.
Please read this booklet carefully as it will give you important information about the
course. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. I would like to
encourage you to raise any questions or issues you might have early with me. You can
see me in my office hours (bookable via the LSE Student Hub) or get in touch via email.
Dr Peter Skrandies
Course Organiser
2
LN270 Society and Language: Linguistics for Social Scientists
Contents
GENERAL INFORMATION .................................................................................................................... 4
OVERVIEW OF THEMATIC BLOCKS & KEY QUESTIONS ......................................................................... 5
OVERVIEW OF WEEKLY S ESSIONS ...................................................................................................... 6
READING........................................................................................................................................... 7
COURSEWORK AND ASSESSMENT....................................................................................................... 7
(A) Research project (presentation and essay) ................................................................... 7
(B) One-week take-home assessment ................................................................................11
(C) Formative assessment....................................................................................................11
ASSESSMENT D ISCIPLINE AND ACADEMIC MISCONDUCT ..................................................................12
POLICY ON THE USE OF GENERATIVE AI TOOLS.................................................................................13
ASSESSMENT CRITERIA ...................................................................................................................16
(A) Oral presentation of research project ...........................................................................16
(B) Research project essay ...................................................................................................19
(C) Take-home written assessment ....................................................................................23
3
LN270 Society and Language: Linguistics for Social Scientists
GENERAL INFORMATION
Course Organiser: Dr Peter Skrandies; office: PEL.6.01f; p.j.skrandies@lse.ac.uk;
https://www.lse.ac.uk/language-centre/people/peter-skrandies
Meetings
Seminar: Monday 14:00 – 1500 in KSW.1.05
Class 1: Thursday 10:00 – 11:00 in KSW.2.07; Class 2: Thursday 11:00 – 12:00 in
KSW.207
Office hours: Please book via the LSE Student Hub: https://studenthub.lse.ac.uk/
Moodle course website: https://moodle.lse.ac.uk/course/view.php?id=10281
Availability: Available as an outside option to all undergraduate and General Course
students. Students can take this course in any year of their studies. All students should
seek approval from the teacher responsible before completing course selection.
Course content: The course will introduce you to key (socio)linguistic concepts
(semantic and pragmatic meaning, discourse, register, genre, dialect, idiolect, sociolect)
employed in the analysis of language use as a social process. You will explore the
reciprocal relationship between language and specific social identities, contexts and
structures (class, gender, ethnicity), and study the role that language plays in the
creation, maintenance and change of social relations and institutions. Important
themes are changing attitudes to language and the prestige afforded to particular
languages and language varieties. The use of language for academic purposes will be
analysed, as will be situations of language contact, multilingualism and the role of
translation in intercultural and international communication. The implications and
consequences for less widely used languages of the emergence of English (and other
widely spoken languages) as a global lingua franca will be outlined and discussed.
Teaching: 10 hours of seminars and 10 hours of classes in the Autumn Term (AT). 10
hours of seminars and 10 hours of classes in the Winter Term (WT). 1 hour of seminars
and 1 hour of classes in the Spring Term (ST).
Two hours per week, featuring:
a) Teacher-led, interactive presentations on a range of topics and concepts,
b) Classes to discuss these topics and consolidate knowledge,
c) Classes with students' presentations,
d) Revision workshops.
Students on this course will have a reading week in week 6 of AT and WT.
Formative coursework: Proposals for a research project, linguistic analyses, and short
essays AT and WT.
Summative assessment: Oral presentation of a research project (10%, 500 words) in
the WT. Project essay (40% weighting, 3,500 – 4,000 words) (Spring break deadline)
Take-home assessment (50%) in the main exam period (Spring Term). The take-home
assessment set during the spring exam period will have to be completed over a period
of seven days.
4
LN270 Society and Language: Linguistics for Social Scientists
OVERVIEW OF THEMATIC BLOCKS & KEY QUESTIONS
Autumn Term
Theme 1: The structure and study of language(s) (weeks 1 - 5)
•
•
•
•
How can language(s) be conceptualized, described, and studied?
What are the (structural) elements of language(s)? Looking at language sounds,
words, and sentences.
How do words and sentences mean something (semantics) and how is meaning
linked to situational contexts (pragmatics)?
What are the connections between language(s), thought and culture? A look at
linguistic relativity.
Theme 2: Language use, variation and change (weeks 7 - 11)
•
•
•
•
How does language (use) vary and change depending on location and social
contexts? A look at dialects and sociolects.
How are language(s) and language use systematically related to social
structures, behaviours and identities (class, sexuality, gender, ethnicity)?
How does language (use) relate to different social functions and specific aims of
language users? A look at genres and registers.
How is language (use) affected by computer-mediated communication and AIgenerated language?
Winter Term
Theme 3: Language and power (weeks 1- 4)
•
•
•
•
•
How can the relationship between language and power be conceptualised?
How does language use reflect relations of power? How do relations of power
affect the way in which language is used?
How is language used to influence, persuade and manipulate people?
What are discourses and how can they be analysed?
What are the social origins of attitudes to language(s) and how do they influence
the ways in which people view language(s) and their users?
Theme 4: Language policy and planning, linguistic diversity and multilingualism (week
5 and weeks 7 - 10)
•
•
•
•
What are the social and political consequences of linguistic diversity and
multilingualism? How do societies and individuals become multilingual?
How and why do institutions enact language policies? What factors influence
language policies and how does this affect the relationship between users of
different languages?
What are the consequences of the use of English as the dominant global
language and international lingua franca?
How do people communicate across linguistic and cultural boundaries? How
does translation work?
5
LN270 Society and Language: Linguistics for Social Scientists
OVERVIEW OF WEEKLY SESSIONS
Autumn Term
Week 1:
Society and language – an introduction to the course
Week 2:
The “object” of study – what is language?
Week 3:
Language structure: sounds, words and sentences
Week 4:
Meaning in language: semantics and pragmatics
Week 5:
Language, culture, thought – the “Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis” and
linguistic relativity
Week 6:
Reading week: no lecture and classes
Week 7:
Language variation: dialect, sociolect, and class
Week 8:
Language variation: ethnicity
Week 9:
Language variation: gender
Week 10: Functional language variation: register and genre, language for
academic purposes
Week 11: Human language, computer-mediated communication and AI
generated language
Winter Term
Week 1:
Language, ideology and power – key concepts and topics
Week 2:
Rhetoric and political language
Week 3:
(Critical) Discourse Analysis
Week 4:
Attitudes towards language(s) and language ideology
Week 5:
Linguistic diversity and multilingualism
Week 6:
Reading week: no lecture and classes
Week 7:
Language planning and policy
Week 8:
Globalisation and the emergence of World English(es)
Week 9:
English as a lingua franca: developments and consequences
Week 10: Linguistic and sociolinguistic aspects of translation
Week 11: Revision session 1
Spring Term
Week 1:
Revision session 2
6
LN270 Society and Language: Linguistics for Social Scientists
READING
Reading the texts chosen for each week, reading for your own research and reading
"around" the topics is essential for your learning in this course.
You will find specific information about the essential texts selected for reading for each
week on the Moodle course page. You can access the readings either as a pdf-copy
from the Moodle page or via the LSE library. Please make sure to read the texts listed
under each week before the seminar or before the class at the latest. You will benefit
more from the seminar, and the weekly readings are the basis for our discussions and
activities in class.
You can find links to additional texts available electronically in the LSE library on the
Moodle course site. There is also a wider list of monographs, articles and other reading
material at https://readings.lse.ac.uk/leganto/nui/lists?scope=all_lists . Please sign in
and search for LN270.
Please get in touch if you need further advice on how to find relevant reading material
and resources, in particular related to your research project.
COURSEWORK AND ASSESSMENT
Quick overview
Item of coursework
Format /length
Category
Due date
Initial proposal for a
research project
300-500 words
+ bibliography
formative, not
graded
End of week 6 AT
Revised proposal
300-500 words
+ bibliography
and outline
formative, not
graded
16/12/2024
Summaries and short
answers
c. 2000 words
formative, not
graded
13/01/2025
Oral presentation of
research project
10 minute inclass
presentation
summative
(10% weighting)
Essay question
c. 1200 words
formative,
graded
From week 2 or 3
WT
End of week 10 WT
Essay documenting your 3,500 to 4000
research project
words
summative
(40% weighting)
18/4/2025
One-week take-home
assessment
summative
(50% weighting)
From week 2 ST
1000 – 1200
words per
question
(A) Research project (presentation and essay)
You are free to choose your own (socio-)linguistic topic, which must be related to one
of the themes studied in this course. This is a chance for you to work on something
that interests you while you will also demonstrate your understanding of the course
content. For your project you have to produce three pieces of written work and give one
7
LN270 Society and Language: Linguistics for Social Scientists
oral presentation. The first two pieces are preparatory formative work, and you have to
submit them electronically on Moodle by the deadlines stated above to receive timely
feedback so you can progress with your research. The third written piece is a project
essay of 3,500 - 4,000 words in which you describe the research project and present its
results. Before you write up your project, you will be asked to present it in class. You
can find further information about each assessed item further below.
For your project you must do research about and find answers to a (socio)linguistic
question, issue or problem related to one of the themes studied in this course. Please
note that you will submit a proposal for this research project before we will have
studied all the themes covered in the course. This means that you should look at all the
themes and topics we will study throughout the year, and you can choose a topic or
issue which is of interest to you.
You have to formulate specific research aims and questions and come up with a
research plan and a methodology that will enable you to answer your research
questions. This plan will involve a programme of study and reading and may include
your own empirical research, e.g., the use of primary data, documents, surveys or
interviews. It is important that your methods for finding, producing and interpreting data
and sources are systematic and linked to recognised (socio)linguistic concepts and
ideas. You must support and back up your research with references to a range of
suitable academic sources and, if appropriate, primary sources or data.
The proposal is assessed formatively, the oral presentation and the final project essay
are part of the summative assessment and carry a weight of 10% and 40% respectively.
The work for your project starts with an:
1) Initial proposal (formative): reasons, research aims/questions (300 – 500 words)
and bibliography/list of sources. Hand-in date: End of week 6, MT. The proposal
describes your project and should address the following questions:
a) What is the issue or problem you are interested in?
b) Why are you interested in this topic/issue and why do you consider it relevant?
c) How does it relate to the topics studied in the course?
d) What do you want to find out? What are your (research) questions? Please
make sure to formulate specific questions focusing on a particular issue, topic
or problem.
e) How are you going to answer your research questions and carry out your
research?
f) What do you think will be your most important primary and secondary sources?
You will receive written feedback for your initial proposal by the end of week 8/9 AT
and should discuss this feedback with the course organiser in a meeting in week 9
or 10 AT. The written feedback and the discussion should inform the second
submission of a revised proposal.
2) Revised proposal (formative). Hand-in date: 16/12/2024. This should include the
following:
a) Revised version of the first proposal in light of the feedback and your own
research progress and, in addition, to the first proposal:
8
LN270 Society and Language: Linguistics for Social Scientists
b) Your proposed methods and approach, including your use of literature,
concepts, and (possibly) primary data and sources. Your project must be based
on a reading programme of relevant academic literature and the use of suitable
concepts. Depending on your project, the use (collection, production, and
interpretation) of primary data and sources (e.g., documents, media article,
quantitative data, surveys, interviews etc) might be appropriate, but it is not
obligatory. Your project can be based on the synthesis and analysis of suitable
secondary academic literature.
c) The proposed structure of the research essay, i.e., a plan/outline in bullet form:
1, 1.1. etc.
d) A revised bibliography of primary and secondary sources
You will receive written feedback for your revised proposal by Friday 17/01/2025.
3) Oral presentation of your project in class (summative assessment, 10% of the final
mark) from week 2 or 3 of the Winter Term.
The presentation should last for a maximum of 10 minutes and give an overview of
your project to your fellow students. This means you can assume some general
linguistic and sociolinguistic understanding – especially if it concerns topics we
already discussed in class – but you should explain the specifics of your research
project. The presentation will be followed by a short questions and answers session
of up to 5 minutes.
In your presentation you should focus on describing and explaining:
(i)
your aims and research questions,
(ii)
the relevance and background of the issues you are researching,
(iii) your way of addressing the questions (approach, concepts & methods),
(iv) the links to the course themes.
You may include expected or preliminary results or present a hypothesis if you have
already reached that stage of your project, but this is not mandatory.
Please read the marking criteria carefully. They will give you further information on
how you should approach this task and how you will be assessed.
Presentations will take place in class from week 2 or 3 of the Winter Term. You
will be asked to select a date for your presentation at the beginning of the Winter
Term.
4) Research project essay (summative 40% of final mark) Length: 3,500 - 4,000 words
(+/– 10%). Hand-in date: 18/4/2025.
The project essay is the documentation of your project and its results. In it you
describe your project, your aims and questions, and your way of approaching the
project, including the theories, concepts, and methods you used to answer your
research question(s). You should justify and explain your choice of concepts and
methods. In the main part of your essay, you should present and critically discuss
the results of your research. You must refer to appropriate and reliable academic
sources and, if necessary, to primary data to back up your claims and results. If you
have used primary data or sources, you should describe and justify the methods
you employed to collect and analyse them. If your project is based on secondary
9
LN270 Society and Language: Linguistics for Social Scientists
sources (i.e. existing academic literature), you should synthesise the literature
comprehensively and systematically and explain how this allowed you to answer
your research questions.
Please read the marking criteria carefully. They will give you further information on
how you should approach this task and how you will be assessed. There will be a
presentation in class in the Winter Term to give you further information on the
writing of your project essay and you will have a chance to read successful projects
from previous years.
The essay documenting your research project is in many ways similar to other
social science academic essays and does not require a specific linguistic or
sociolinguistic format. The most important points are:
•
Outline the background and relevance of the research project.
•
Describe the aims of your research project and specify one or more explicit
research questions.
•
Describe and justify the methodology for answering the research
question(s)/aim(s) which you used, i.e. explain how you were able to answer
the research question(s): on the basis of secondary sources (existing
academic literature) and, if applicable, also through the use of primary data
or sources.
•
If you used primary data or sources, you should explain how this data was
gained. Describe how you analysed the data and describe and discuss the
results of your analysis.
•
If your research project was based on secondary literature: synthesise and
discuss what you have read. Explain the most important concepts.
•
Evaluate and discuss the results of your research in relation to your research
questions. To what extent were you able to answer your research questions?
•
What are the main conclusions of your projects and what are the most
important implications for theory, practice or further research. You should
also state the limitations of your project and the results.
You should follow the general principles of clear and critical argumentation and of
providing suitable evidence when necessary. Your referencing must be clear and
consistent. The recommended system is Harvard Referencing (see the LSE guide
below), but you are free to use a system of your choice as long as you apply it
correctly and consistently. The following webpage on citing and referencing from
the LSE library will give you further advice: https://www.lse.ac.uk/library/using-thelibrary/library-resources-guide/citing-and-referencing.
You can also have a look at the web page of the Royal Literary Fund for an overview
of different styles: https://www.rlf.org.uk/resources/mla-apa-harvard-or-mhra/. A
detailed guide to the Harvard referencing style can also be found at the Mendeley
website: https://www.mendeley.com/guides/harvard-citation-guide#
Please note that LSE offers a variety of study skills sessions which can help and
advise you on writing successful essays. Please check the LSE Life website for
further information: https://info.lse.ac.uk/current-students/lse-life.
10
LN270 Society and Language: Linguistics for Social Scientists
(B) One-week take-home assessment
The take-home assessment will take place during the main exam period in the Spring
Term. It contributes 50% to your final mark and you will have seven days to complete it.
You have to answer two questions from a number of essay questions which are divided
into two sections:
•
Section A (Autumn Term): The structure and study of language(s), Language use,
variation and change
•
Section B (Winter Term): Language and power; Language policy and planning,
linguistic contact and diversity
You will have to answer one question from each section, i.e., two questions in total. You
will have the chance to practice answering essay questions in the formative
assignment for the Winter Term. Past exam papers with typical essay questions can be
found on the LSE website: https://library.lse.ac.uk/protected-exam/index.html.
The texts answering the essay questions should be clearly structured, based on your
reading of the academic sources listed in the question, stay focused on the question
and answer it in full. Further information about the assessment will be made available
on Moodle and the revision sessions scheduled for week 11 of the Winter Term and
week 1 of the Spring Term will focus on preparing you for this assessment.
(C) Formative assessment
Formative assessments do not contribute to the final grade you will receive for this
course. They are designed to develop your academic skills and test your understanding
of the course content. The tasks will help prepare you for the summative assignments.
1)
Initial proposal research project (details above under research project). The
feedback will focus on the suitability and feasibility of your planned research.
This coursework will not be graded.
2)
Revised proposal research project (details see above). The feedback will
focus on the suitability and feasibility of your planned research considering
progress and changes you have made. This coursework will not be graded.
3)
Summary of article(s) /concepts/ short answers (week 0 WT). You will be
asked to summarise the main argumentation and conceptual content of
relevant literature and write short answers to questions covering topics of
the Autumn Term. You will receive qualitative feedback on your writing and
your understanding of concepts. You will not receive a numerical grade for
this work.
4)
Answer to essay questions (week 10 WT). You will be asked to answer an
essay question from a past assessment paper. You will receive qualitative
feedback and a numerical grade.
11
ASSESSMENT DISCIPLINE AND ACADEMIC MISCONDUCT
Please familiarise yourself with LSE’s rules regarding academic discipline and
misconduct which can be found on the School’s website at this link:
https://info.lse.ac.uk/current-students/services/assessment-and-results/exams/examdiscipline-and-academic-misconduct.
Here you can find all relevant information about the rules for submitting coursework
(extensions, deferrals, penalties for late submission etc) and what is expected of you in
terms of academic conduct. All formative and summative work submitted in this course
must be your own. When you submit coursework, you will be asked to complete the
following Academic integrity Statement:
By submitting this work to the School you confirm you will abide by and uphold the
School’s Code of Good Practice, Ethics Code and academic integrity as outlined in the
School’s Regulations on Assessment Offences and follow the relevant LSE Language
Centre’s policy on the use of generative Artificial Intelligence tools (see below) and you
also confirm that:
•
the work in this assessment is solely your own; and
•
you have not conferred or colluded with anyone in producing this specific
assessment*; and
•
you understand the use of AI tools to help with any part of your assessment is
strictly prohibited unless some use is permitted as defined by the Department
responsible for the assessment (see Departmental guidance); and
•
where necessary, you have clearly cited and referenced the work of others
appropriately to make clear which parts are your own work; and
•
your submission does not re-use substantial/verbatim materials you have
previously submitted to the School or elsewhere. To note, in some cases expanding
on earlier formative or summative work may be permitted as defined by the
Department responsible for the assessment (see Departmental guidance) and;
•
you understand the School has the right to ask you questions about the originality
of your work if deemed necessary
*It is acceptable to consult with LSE LIFE for general study skills questions but not
questions specific to the content of a particular assessment.
Before you submit your coursework, please check that you have correctly referenced all
the sources you have used both in your list of references (bibliography) and in the text
itself. Whenever you use the words or thoughts of another author, you must include a
reference to the relevant source in your text. When inserting a section of text from
someone else's work into your own, you must use quotation marks and a reference to
the source to make clear that you are citing verbatim (word-for-word). Failure to do so
may result in allegations of plagiarism. Your referencing must be clear and consistent.
The recommended system is Harvard Referencing, but you are free to use a system of
your choice as long as you apply it correctly and consistently. The following webpage
on citing and referencing from the LSE library will give you further advice:
https://www.lse.ac.uk/library/using-the-library/library-resources-guide/citing-andreferencing.
LN270 Society and Language: Linguistics for Social Scientists
POLICY ON THE USE OF GENERATIVE AI TOOLS
The following policy applies to the use of generative AI tools in formative and
summative assessments submitted for this course.1
Before you use generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools, you should familiarise
yourself with the School's guidance and policies and develop your understanding of
generative AI tools. You should read LSE's guidance on the use of Generative AI,
complete the ‘Generative AI: developing your literacy’ Moodle course and consider
developing your AI skills further by engaging with relevant offerings from the Digital
Skills Lab, LSE LIFE and LSE Library.
The adopted position for LN270 in line with LSE Guidelines is “Limited authorised use
of generative AI in assessment”. The use of generative AI in formative and summative
assessments is only permitted for a number of specific and limited purposes.
You must read this policy and relevant assignment specifications closely to determine
for what purposes and to what extent you are permitted to use generative AI tools. It is
your responsibility to understand when, where, and how the use of generative AI is
permitted.
This policy is based on the consideration that formative and summative assignments in
this course aim to assess your ability to find, understand and analyse information, and
to demonstrate your understanding of course content by writing persuasively about it.
Generative AI tools may support your learning and your work, but these tools must not
replace your own ideas and perspectives.
Texts produced by AI tools are not valid academic sources. Such texts may reproduce
biases inherent in the training data, they do not reliably state their sources, and
information produced by AI has been found to be unreliable and misleading. For these
reasons, all information obtained from AI tools must be cross-checked and verified. It is
vital that you use academic and discipline specific texts and resources when
developing your own work.
The table on the next page states the details of the permitted and prohibited uses of
generative AI tools in LN270. Any use of generative AI tools in assessments not listed in
this table is prohibited.
If you want to use a generative AI tool for the purposes outlined below, LSE encourages
the use of Microsoft Copilot due to its enhanced data privacy and security protections.
Unlike other generative AI tools, Copilot does not record prompting or conversation
history; these can, however, be exported to a word or PDF file. As an LSE student, you
have access to Microsoft’s generative AI tool, Copilot (Copilot with Commercial Data
Protection), free of charge.
1 The policy aligns with the “School position on generative AI” available at
https://info.lse.ac.uk/staff/divisions/Eden-Centre/Artificial-Intelligence-Education-and-Assessment/Schoolposition-on-generative-AI [accessed 19/09/2024]. This policy has considered and made use of AI policies published
by LSE 100, and the LSE Departments of Media and Anthropology.
13
LN270 Society and Language: Linguistics for Social Scientists
Policy in this course
Use of text
produced by
generative AI tools
(e.g., but not limited
to ChatGPT or
Microsoft Copilot)
You may not copy text produced by generative AI tools into
any submitted piece of work or use such text in an oral
presentation.
You may not use text produced by generative AI tools as the
basis for your own writing, including but not limited to
modifying or paraphrasing AI-generated text.
You may not quote or use text produced by generative AI to
support statements and arguments made in your own texts.
Citing text
produced by
generative AI tools
for limited
purposes
You may cite text produced by a generative AI tool for the
purpose of discussing or commenting on the output and
functionality of that AI tool. For example, when research on
the functionality and limitations of generative AI is part of the
assessment.
If you include a verbatim quotation from a text produced by a
generative AI tool in your own submitted text, you must
acknowledge this and use the referencing system of your
choice for the citation. Read and follow the LSE library
guidance on citing and referencing generative AI tools on this
webpage: https://www.lse.ac.uk/library/using-thelibrary/library-resources-guide/citing-and-referencing .
Text editing and
proofreading
You may use generative AI tools for the purposes of
correcting or improving the spelling, grammar or style of your
own written work (e.g., Grammarly or the re-writing function in
MS Word).
You must declare such use of AI in the coversheet of your
work.
AI-assisted
searches and
research
You may use generative AI tools to find relevant academic
literature and to decide whether a source will be useful to
read for your own research.
You may use generative AI tools to let them explain concepts
or ideas as part of your learning process, but you should be
aware that there is a risk of “hallucination” or misinformation.
You must not upload or copy any course materials (including
assessment guidance, lecture or presentation slides, readings
etc.) to any generative AI tool. This will violate copyright rules.
You may not copy AI-generated summaries or overviews of
sources into your work.
You must declare AI use for research purposes in the
coversheet of your work.
Bibliography and
referencing
You may use bibliographic software such as EndNote, and
you may use generative AI tools to identify academic sources.
You may not use generative AI tools to create the
bibliography/reference list for any submitted assessment.
14
LN270 Society and Language: Linguistics for Social Scientists
Text-to-speech and
speech-to-text
tools
You may use text-to-speech or speech-to-text software in the
context of assessments, e.g. to transcribe interviews you
have conducted as part of your research or to transcribe
audio or video sources. You must verify the accuracy of any
outputs of these tools.
If you include a verbatim quotation from a transcript
produced by a generative AI tool you must acknowledge this
and use the referencing system of your choice for the
citation.
You must declare this use of AI in the coversheet of your
work.
Interlingual
machine translation
(e.g., Google
Translate, DeepL, or
Large Language
Models)
You may use machine translation software to translate texts
into English or other languages.
You must verify the accuracy of the translation before using
any translated text in your submitted work. If you quote or
refer to any text which has been machine-translated, you
must state the original source and the method of translation.
Use the referencing system of your choice for the citation.
Do not upload or copy course materials to machine
translation tools for translation into other languages – doing
so may violate copyright rules.
Image and visuals
generated by AI
You may use generative AI tools to generate or modify
supporting images for your work or to generate or modify
charts, graphs, diagrams and other visuals.
If you include such AI generated material in your submitted
work, you have to acknowledge this. Use the referencing
system of your choice for the reference.
Code generation for
the purposes of
creating non-text
material (e.g.,
GitHub Copilot)
You may use any assistive AI tools you wish to help you in
generating code to produce non-text components of your
work. For example, you may use GitHub Copilot in writing
Python code to produce a graph or chart from data and
include this in your submitted work.
You must declare this use of AI in the coversheet of your
work.
Notes:
Violations of this policy will be treated under the School’s academic misconduct procedures.
Staff teaching on Language Centre linguistics degree courses may ask students to explain the writing
and research processes which were used in producing any aspect of a formative or summative
assessment submitted for the courses.
Language Centre teaching staff may use automated systems or other available tools to identify any
unauthorised use of generative AI tools in assessments.
You can contact any staff teaching on the courses for queries regarding this policy.
15
LN270 Society and Language: Linguistics for Social Scientists
ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
(A) Oral presentation of research project
FIRST (>70%) - an excellent, outstanding or exceptionable performance
The presentation explains the background and rationale of the research project
effectively and accurately, referring to a range of appropriate sources, highlighting key
issues and potential difficulties. It develops an insightful and coherent argument,
framed by a concise introduction and conclusion; the points are clearly set out and
communicated exceptionally well, with excellent pacing; the presentation is wholly
audible and easy to follow; the visual aids and/or handout are well-prepared and
support the presentation effectively. There is engagement with the audience (students
as well as teacher) and the presentation is given in a natural, interesting way. There is a
direct, thoughtful, and informed response to questions asked by members of the
audience.
Specific criteria:
1. Understanding/development of problem and research aims: Through their
presentation the candidate demonstrated and communicated an excellent,
thorough and in-depth description and understanding of the problem/questions
which they are addressing in their project. The candidate formulated clear and
suitable research questions. The argumentation was insightful, creative and
entirely convincing. The candidate demonstrated clarity of analysis of the
problem/question(s) and showed an independent and critical interpretation of
the issues raised by it.
2. Link to course contents/disciplinary background: The candidate demonstrated
and communicated an excellent, thorough and in-depth understanding of the
wider disciplinary background of the questions they want to address and were
able to link it compellingly to themes studied in the course.
3. Engagement with literature: The candidate identified and presented a range of
suitable academic sources and demonstrated a comprehensive understanding
of relevant methods, concepts and evidence (including, if applicable, the
handling of primary data).
4. Handling of questions: The candidate answered all questions fully, persuasively,
and with extraordinary skill.
5. Process: excellent in all areas; the presentation was clear, fluent, integrated,
focused and delivered with an excellent timing.
• >90% Creative and very sophisticated
• >80% Striking insight demonstrated
• >75% Excellent in all areas and displaying originality
UPPER SECOND (60-69%) – a good or very good performance
The presentation describes the research project and its aims clearly and coherently and
refers to appropriate sources. Potential difficulties are identified. The presentation
forms a coherent argument, with an introduction and conclusion. The points are clear
and well-communicated, and the presentation is audible and well-paced. The visual
aids/handout are a useful support for the presentation. There is engagement with the
audience; the presentation is easy to follow. The responses to questions after the
presentation are focused and informative.
16
LN270 Society and Language: Linguistics for Social Scientists
Specific criteria:
1. Understanding/development of problem: In their presentation the candidate
demonstrated and communicated a very good (65-69%) or good (60-64%)
description and understanding of the problems/questions which they are
addressing in their project. The candidate formulated suitable research
questions. The argumentation was always logical and persuasive, and the
presentation included a systematic analysis of the issues raised by the questions
and demonstrated independent thought.
2. Link to course contents/disciplinary background: The candidate demonstrated
and communicated a very good/good understanding of the wider disciplinary
background of the questions they addressed and were able to link it convincingly
to themes studied in the course.
3. Engagement with literature: The candidate demonstrated and communicated
their engagement with a range of suitable academic sources and their very
good/good understanding of relevant methods, concepts and evidence
(including if applicable primary data).
4. Handling of questions: The candidate answered all questions fully and
persuasively.
5. Process: very good/good in all areas; the presentation was clear, fluent, wellstructured and delivered within the time-constraints.
LOWER SECOND (50 - 59%)
A presentation which describes the research project adequately and refers to some
suitable sources. Most of the arguments and the structure are coherent; the overall
line of argumentation is clear. The presentation is audible, and the visual
aids/handout contains material relevant to the presentation. There is engagement
with the audience, and it is possible to follow the presentation. The responses to
questions from members of the audience are meaningful.
Specific criteria:
1. Understanding/development of problem: Through their presentation the
candidate demonstrated and communicated a sound description and
understanding of the problems/questions which they chose to address. The
candidate formulated adequate research questions. The argumentation was
sound, but the discussion relied more heavily on description than on independent
analysis of the issues. There may have been some inconsistencies, irrelevant
points and unsubstantiated claims in the argument.
2. Link to course contents/disciplinary background: The candidate demonstrated
and communicated a reasonable understanding of the wider disciplinary
background of the questions addressed and was able to link it to themes studied
in the course.
3. Engagement with literature: The candidate demonstrated and communicated
their engagement with a range of suitable academic sources and their
reasonable understanding of relevant methods, concepts and evidence
(including if applicable primary data).
4. Handling of questions: The candidate was able to address most issues raised by
questions.
17
LN270 Society and Language: Linguistics for Social Scientists
5. Process: sufficient in all areas; the presentation was always understandable and
delivered within the time-constraints (+/- 10%).
THIRD (40-49%)
The presentation of the research project has some positive features, but shows some
of the following weaknesses:
The rationale and aims of the research project are only partially explained, and the
presentation refers to a very limited number of sources or unsuitable sources. The
candidate formulated research questions which are not wholly suitable. The
argumentation of the presentation is not always coherent, and not all the points are
clearly set out. The presentation may not be very audible. The visual aids/handout are
not fully developed to support the presentation. There is little attempt at engaging with
the audience; the response to questions is limited.
1. Understanding/development of problem: Through their presentation the
candidate demonstrated and communicated a satisfactory but limited
understanding of the problems/questions which they chose to address. The
argumentation was not always convincing, and any analysis attempted remained
superficial.
2. Link to course contents/disciplinary background: The candidate demonstrated
and communicated a satisfactory but limited understanding of the wider
disciplinary background of the questions they addressed but were not fully able
to link it to themes studied in the course.
3. Engagement with literature: The candidate demonstrated and communicated
partial engagement with academic sources and a limited understanding of
relevant methods, concepts and evidence.
4. Handling of questions: The candidate had some problems in addressing the
issues raised by questions persuasively.
5. Process: only partially successful in all areas; the presentation was still mostly
comprehensible, but not always clear and the candidate may have flouted time constraints by more than 15%.
FAIL (20-39%)
The presentation of the research project showed the following weaknesses:
The aims and rationale of the project were not described and explained adequately.
Research questions, if formulated, are only partially suitable. The presentation did not
refer to appropriate sources and did not outline potential problems. The argument of
the presentation was vague or confused. The points made were not clear or clearly
linked. The presentation may have been inaudible and hard to follow. The visual
aids/handouts were inadequate and did not support the presentation. There was little
or no engagement with the audience or other signs of attempt to communicate the
topic to the audience. There wa no significant attempt at answering questions.
1. Understanding/development of problem: The candidate demonstrated very
limited knowledge of the issues discussed and did not identify key aspects, the
analysis was poor or flawed.
2. Link to course contents/disciplinary background: The candidate demonstrated
and communicated very little understanding of the wider disciplinary background
18
LN270 Society and Language: Linguistics for Social Scientists
of the questions they addressed and were not able to link the issues convincingly
to themes studied in the course.
3. Engagement with literature: some inaccuracies or omissions in the use of
concepts, very limited and frequently inappropriate use of sources.
4. Handling of questions: The candidate was not able to address the issues raised
by questions.
5. Process: unsuccessful in all areas; the presentation was not always
comprehensible, and frequently unclear. The candidate may have flouted time constraints by more than 30%.
BAD FAIL (0 - 19%)
Overall unacceptable, insufficient demonstration of knowledge and understanding, not
appropriately supported by sources
10-19%: deeply flawed or unacceptably brief
<9%: irrelevant or incomprehensible
(B) Research project essay
FIRST (>70%) - an excellent, outstanding or exceptionable performance
The essay describes and explains the background, relevance and purpose of the project
with remarkable clarity, and states suitable research questions/aims. The project is
exceptionally well-grounded in a wide range of previous research/literature and
demonstrates a comprehensive understanding of relevant concepts and theories. It
shows critical understanding, original thinking and creativity.
If primary data were used, the methods for the selection, collection and/or production
of the data as well as the rationale for using these methods are described
comprehensively and explained persuasively. If the project was not based on primary
data or sources, relevant secondary sources are synthesised exceptionally well.
Analysis and interpretation of the data and/or literature are highly methodical, nuanced
and critical. The results are fully supported by the data and/or literature and are
presented with extraordinary clarity and skill. The essay includes an insightful and
critical discussion of the results linked to the research questions/aims, stating clear
implications for theory, practice or further research and outlines possible limitations
clearly.
The essay is presented in an academically appropriate manner throughout, and all
citations and references are stated accurately and presented consistently.
1. Project design and use of literature: The essay describes and explains the
rationale and purpose of the project exceptionally well. The use of literature
demonstrates an excellent conceptual understanding and theoretical knowledge .
2. Analysis and interpretation of data/literature: The essay describes and explains
the methods of analysis and interpretation exceptionally well. Analysis and
interpretation are highly accurate, nuanced and always persuasive .
19
LN270 Society and Language: Linguistics for Social Scientists
3. Presentation and discussion of results: Exceptionally clear and coherent
presentation of results. The discussion is highly articulate, exceptionally wellargued and draws insightful and significant conclusions.
4. Structure and organisation: clear, fluent, integrated and focused throughout.
5. Completion: excellent in all areas.
•
>90% Creative and sophisticated research design, of publishable quality overall
•
>80% Outstanding in every respect, striking insight demonstrated
•
>75% Excellent in all areas and displaying originality
UPPER SECOND (60-69%) – a good or very good performance
The essay describes and explains the background, relevance and purpose of the project
(very) well, and states suitable research questions/aims. The project is very wellgrounded in previous research/literature and demonstrates a very good or good
understanding of relevant concepts and theories. There is (strong) evidence of
independent and critical thinking.
If primary data were used, the methods for the selection, collection and/or production
of the data as well as the rationale for using these methods are described and
explained (very) well. If the project was not based on primary data or sources, relevant
secondary sources are synthesised (very) well.
Analysis and interpretation of the data and/or literature are methodical, thorough and
demonstrate critical awareness. The results are supported by the data and/or literature
and are presented clearly and coherently. The essay includes a balanced and articulate
discussion of the results linked to the research questions/aims, stating implications for
theory, practice or further research as well as possible limitations.
The essay is well presented, using a method of referencing consistently with only minor
errors.
1. Project design and use of literature: The essay describes and explains the
rationale and purpose of the project (very) well. The use of literature
demonstrates a (very) good conceptual understanding and theoretical
knowledge.
2. Analysis and interpretation of data/literature: The essay describes and explains
the methods of analysis and interpretation (very) well. Analysis and
interpretation are accurate and convincing.
3. Presentation and discussion of results: Clear and coherent presentation of
results but there may be minor inconsistencies. The discussion is balanced,
(very) well-argued and draws solid conclusions.
4. Structure and organisation: clear and coherent with only minor issues.
5. Completion: (very) good in all areas.
20
LN270 Society and Language: Linguistics for Social Scientists
LOWER SECOND (50 - 59%) - an average or fair performance
The essay describes and explains the background, relevance and purpose of the project
reasonably well, and states suitable research questions/aims. The essay is grounded in
existing literature and demonstrates a reasonable understanding of concepts and
theories, but there may be some misunderstandings or misrepresentations. There is
some evidence of independent and critical thinking.
If primary data were used, the methods for the selection, collection and/or production
of the data are described reasonably well, but the rationale for the methodology may be
partial. If the project was not based on primary data or sources, relevant secondary
sources are synthesised successfully, but there may be some gaps and
inconsistencies.
Analysis and interpretation of the data and/or literature are adequate but may lack
depth and critical awareness. The results are supported by the data and/or literature
and are generally presented in a clear fashion but there may be inconsistencies. The
results are discussed reasonably well, and implications for theory, practice or further
research are stated, but this may be patchy.
The essay is reasonably well presented, but here may be some errors and
inconsistencies in referencing.
1. Project design and use of literature: The essay describes and explains the
rationale and purpose of the project. The use of literature demonstrates some
conceptual understanding and theoretical knowledge.
2. Analysis and interpretation of data/literature: The essay describes and explains
the methods of analysis and interpretation reasonably well. Analysis and
interpretation are largely accurate and convincing, but not always in-depth and
there may be inconsistencies.
3. Presentation and discussion of results: Largely clear and coherent presentation
of results but there may be inconsistencies and /or gaps. The discussion is
competent but may be one-sided or have limited conclusions.
4. Structure and organisation: generally clear and coherent, but there may be some
inconsistencies and organisational issues.
5. Completion: reasonable in all areas.
THIRD (40-49%) - a satisfactory performance
The essay describes and explains the background, relevance and purpose of the project
at a basic level, and states acceptable research questions/aims. The essay uses some
existing literature but only demonstrates a limited understanding of concepts and
theories showing little critical awareness and successful independent thinking. There
may be several misunderstandings and misrepresentations.
The description of the methods for selecting, collecting or producing primary data is
adequate but limited, with no or little rationale stated for their use. If the project was not
based on primary data or sources, relevant secondary sources are used satisfactorily,
but their synthesis is likely to be limited and show inaccuracies.
21
LN270 Society and Language: Linguistics for Social Scientists
Analysis and interpretation of the data and/or literature are limited and may be
superficial. Results are not fully supported by the data and/or literature, and their
presentation and discussion are basic and not always clear and consistent.
Implications for theory, practice or further research may be missing or minimal.
The presentation of the essay is satisfactory overall, but there are recurring
inconsistencies and inaccuracies in referencing.
1. Project design and use of literature: The essay describes and explains the
rationale and purpose of the project at a basic level. The use of literature
demonstrates a satisfactory understanding and theoretical knowledge.
2. Analysis and interpretation of data/literature: The essay describes and explains
the methods of analysis and interpretation at a basic level. Analysis and
interpretation are adequate, but they are not always accurate and show
inconsistencies.
3. Presentation and discussion of results: Results are presented adequately but
there are recurring inconsistencies and/or gaps. The discussion is satisfactory
but basic, and conclusions are rather limited.
4. Structure and organisation: generally adequate, but there are recurring
inconsistencies and organisational issues.
5. Completion: basic and rather superficial in all areas.
FAIL (20-39%) – an unsatisfactory performance
The description of the background, relevance and purpose of the project is inadequate,
and the research aims/questions might not be suitable. The essay does not engage
sufficiently with relevant literature and fails to demonstrate an adequate understanding
of relevant concepts and theories. There are significant misunderstandings,
misrepresentations and errors of fact.
The description of the methods for selecting, collecting or producing primary data is
severely limited and inadequate. If the project was not based on primary data or
sources, relevant secondary sources have not been synthesised adequately.
Analysis and interpretation of the data and/or literature are inadequate and
characterised by misunderstandings and misrepresentations. The results are not
sufficiently supported by evidence and their presentation is frequently inconsistent. Any
discussion of results is sketchy and few if any relevant conclusions are drawn.
The essay may be poorly presented showing frequent inconsistencies and inaccurate
referencing.
1. Project design and use of literature: The essay does not describe and explain
the rationale and purpose of the project adequately. The use of literature fails to
show satisfactory understanding and theoretical knowledge.
2. Analysis and interpretation of data/literature: The essay does not describe and
explain the methods of analysis and interpretation adequately. Analysis and
interpretation may be attempted but they are frequently inaccurate and
inconsistent.
3. Presentation and discussion of results: Results are not presented adequately
and there are frequent inconsistencies and/or gaps. The discussion and
conclusions are severely limited.
22
LN270 Society and Language: Linguistics for Social Scientists
4. Structure and organisation: inadequate overall, there are frequent
inconsistencies and organisational issues.
5. Completion: inadequate in all areas.
BAD FAIL (0-19%) – a flawed performance
The essay fails to document a research project and demonstrates no understanding of
relevant literature and sources. It may be incomplete and is very poorly presented with
little or no referencing.
•
10-19%: deeply flawed or unacceptably brief
• <9%: irrelevant or illegible
(C) Take-home written assessment
FIRST (>70%) - an excellent, outstanding or exceptionable performance
The answer demonstrates clarity of analysis, engages directly with the question(s) and
is focused on relevant matters throughout. It shows an independent and critical
interpretation of the issues raised by the question(s). The essay shows exemplary skill
in presenting a logical and coherent argument and demonstrates an excellent
understanding of the literature referred to in the question and – if used -- other relevant
sources. The text is presented in an academically appropriate manner throughout, and
all citations and references are stated accurately and presented consistently.
1. Analysis and argumentation: The candidate has demonstrated a thorough and
in-depth understanding of the problems/questions discussed and has applied
relevant concepts and theories accurately and sophisticatedly. Argumentation
and analysis are insightful, creative and entirely convincing.
2. Focus and use of literature: The candidate has addressed and answered the
question(s) directly, kept the focus throughout, and all sections of the text are
fully relevant. All aspects of the question(s) are discussed with extraordinary
skill, demonstrating an excellent understanding and use of the relevant literature.
3. Structure and organisation: clear, fluent, integrated and focused.
4. Completion: excellent in all areas. All aspects of the question(s) have been
addressed in full and answered comprehensively.
•
>90% Exceptional in every respect, creative, sophisticated and of publishable
quality
•
>80% Outstanding in every respect, striking insight demonstrated
•
>75% Excellent in all areas and displaying originality
UPPER SECOND (60-69%) – a good or very good performance
The answer achieves clarity of analysis, is focused on the question(s) and
demonstrates independent thinking. The text shows appropriate skills in presenting a
clearly reasoned argument, demonstrates a very good or good understanding of the
literature referred to in the question and – if used -- other relevant sources. It is well23
LN270 Society and Language: Linguistics for Social Scientists
presented, and citations and references are nearly always stated accurately and
presented consistently.
1. Analysis and argumentation: The candidate has demonstrated a very good (6569%) or good (60-64%) understanding of all key issues discussed and has
applied relevant concepts and theories accurately. Argumentation and analysis
are persuasive and there is evidence of independent thinking and analysis.
2. Focus and use of literature: The text addresses and answers the questions
directly, is focused and all sections of the text are relevant. All important aspects
of the question(s) are discussed with skill, demonstrating a very good or good
understanding and use of the literature.
3. Structure and organisation: coherent and logical throughout
4. Completion: very good or good in in all areas. All important aspects of the
question(s) have been addressed and answered fully.
LOWER SECOND (50 - 59%) - an average or fair performance
The answer addresses the question(s) and shows a reasonable understanding of the
issues raised by them. It presents plausible arguments, and engages with the literature
referred to in the question. The discussion may rely more heavily on description than
independent analysis. There may be some inconsistencies, irrelevant points and
unsubstantiated claims in the argument. Presentation and referencing are adequate but
may contain inaccuracies.
1. Analysis and argumentation: The candidate has demonstrated an average or fair
understanding of all key issues discussed and applied (some) relevant concepts
and theories largely accurately. There is some evidence of (original/independent)
analysis and thinking, and the argumentation is generally convincing.
2. Focus and use of literature: The text addresses the question(s), is largely
focused and most sections of the text are relevant. Most aspects of the
question(s) are discussed appropriately, demonstrating a fair or average
understanding and use of the literature.
3. Structure and organisation: overall clear and coherent presentation, but little
development of arguments, perhaps uneven.
4. Completion: Sound overall, or of good quality in one area, but with low quality in
others. Most aspects of the question(s) have been addressed and answered, but
not in depth.
THIRD (40-49%) - a satisfactory performance
The answer addresses the question(s) and shows a satisfactory but limited
understanding and some familiarity with the issues raised by them. The essay contains
a minimal attempt at analysis and argumentation and demonstrates limited knowledge
of the literature referred to in the question. Presentation of the text may be poor and
referencing incomplete.
1. Analysis and argumentation: The candidate has demonstrated some general
knowledge of the issues discussed, but argumentation and analysis are rather
24
LN270 Society and Language: Linguistics for Social Scientists
limited. Concepts and ideas are not always used accurately, and the text may
contain misunderstandings. There is little evidence of original or independent
thinking and the line of reasoning and argumentation is not always persuasive.
2. Focus and use of literature: A satisfactory attempt to address the question(s),
but not always on focus with some irrelevant parts. Some aspects of the
question(s) are discussed at a basic level, while others are missing,
demonstrating a satisfactory understanding and use of the literature.
3. Structure and organisation: Adequately structured, but not always logical and
coherent.
4. Completion: Overall, rather superficial and of low quality in a number of areas.
Some but not all aspects of the question(s) have been addressed, but not always
convincingly.
FAIL (20-39%) – an unsatisfactory performance
The essay shows little understanding of the subject and does not adequately address
the question(s). It does not engage sufficiently with the literature referred to in the
question and/or other relevant sources. It may be poorly structured and contain
significant errors of fact. The essay may be poorly presented with inadequate
referencing and fail to demonstrate adequate knowledge of relevant concepts and
ideas.
1. Analysis and argumentation: The candidate has demonstrated very limited
knowledge and understanding of the issues discussed. Concepts and ideas are
repeatedly misunderstood and misrepresented. There is hardly any evidence of
original or independent thinking and the line of reasoning and argumentation is
not persuasive.
2. Focus and use of literature: An inadequate attempt at answering the question
which is frequently unfocused and contains irrelevant sections. Only a few
aspects of the questions(s) are addressed adequately while important facets are
missing, demonstrating an unsatisfactory understanding and use of literature.
3. Structure and organisation: Not always logical or coherent, argument sketchy,
loose ends, disorganised
4. Completion: The question has been dealt with unconvincingly and only some
aspects have been answered satisfactorily.
BAD FAIL (0-19%) – a flawed performance
The answer demonstrates no understanding of the question(s) nor of the literature
referred to in the question and/or other relevant sources. It may be incomplete and is
likely to be very poorly presented with little or no referencing.
•
10-19%: deeply flawed or unacceptably brief.
• <9%: irrelevant or illegible.
25