Part 3: Summary and Discussion Questions
Hornberger, N. & McKay, S. (Eds.)(2010). Sociolinguistics and language education.
Toronto: Multilingual Matters Press.
Jurgen Jaspers: Style and Styling
Jaspers notes that research has moved from quantitative examinations of the how
shifts in the ways in which people speak reflect social hierarchies to qualitative
studies that examine exceptions and the construction of language-based identities.
He provides a brief history of language variability research. First, he ties Saussure’s
notions of langue and parole in structural linguistics to Chomsky’s notions of
competence and performance in transformational grammar. Second, he reviews the
history of sociolinguistics and the work of Hymes, Fishman and Labov. Using social
constructionist theory and empirical research in conversational analysis, politeness
studies and social interaction, Jaspers problematizes the notion of the authentic
speaker and argues that individuals make choices regarding language styles in terms
of what Goffman calls framing and what Lave and Wegner call communities of
practice. Jaspers notes that it is now considered important to look at how speakers
make choices from a range of language related options, how these choices relate to
overall patterns of style and how these choices construct linguistic communities.
H. Samy Alim: Critical Language Awareness
Alim outlines notions related to critical discourse analysis (Fairclough) and critical
pedagogy (Friere) and uses the example of Barrack Obama’s speeches to illustrate
how language practices contain patterns that reflect power relations and ideology.
These patterns are often hidden or unconscious. He notes that many in the field
contend that work using the above frameworks are “over theorized” and argues that
empirical research is needed that is applicable to concrete teaching practices. He
points to the usefulness of examining pop culture in developing critical language
awareness about the relative status of standard and marginalized language varieties.
He cites Pennycook to the effect that all language learning is permeated by politics
and that teachers should embrace their roles in societal change.
Jeff Siegel: Pidgins and Creoles
Siegel problematizes some of the basic notions in sociolinguistics (and found within
the Holmes’ text) by citing numerous examples of language varieties that don’t
neatly fit into the standard categories of pidgins and creoles. He notes that language
choice is dependent on the degree of formality required in various contexts. On the
basis of his review of the literature, Siegel contends that pidgins and creoles are
complete rule-governed systems should not be considered deficit varieties.
Moreover, he argues that the learning of substrate varieties does not interfere with
the learning of superstrate or standard varieties. In fact, learners acquire standard
varieties more efficiently when their own substrate language varieties are fully
developed and respected.
Questions:
These three chapters problematize the notions of standard language varieties and
standardized language usage. Saussure’s concepts are often cited as important
precursors for structuralist theory. His notion of langue, in particular, is an idealistic
or rationalist theory of language that has antecedents back to Plato. Chomsky’s
concept of competence is similar in terms of its biologically based notion of human
exceptionality.
Idealist or rationally-based linguistics argue that:




there are universal standards (syntax) as to what constitutes language (e.g.
“colorless green ideas sleep furiously” is correct; “sleep colorless green furiously
ideas” is not);
language is a system that is genetically derived (i.e. hard wired in the brain);
language is infinitely creative;
language exists at a deeper level than what we usually consider discrete
languages (Universal Grammar).
These notions are in contrast to functionally-based theories of language. The most
influential of these is the systemic functional model developed by Michael Halliday,
which posits language as a socially based set of resources for the construction of
meaning and communication. Language learners make language choices within
social contexts.
Functional linguistics argues that:




language is a resource and a set of meaningful choices for the user, rather than a
system of formal grammar rules;
there is little value in positing an ideal or abstract version of a user of language;
human language use is in “chunks”, not in discrete words or phonemes;
language forms cannot be separated from meaning or context.
If rational linguistics is valid, how can one explain the differences in meaning that
are culturally or context dependent, such as in the following example?
“Many dogs are friendly and many dogs are well-bred”;
“Many dogs are well bred and friendly”.
If functional linguistics is valid, how can one explain the speed at which first
languages are learnt by children?
See my Structural and Functional Grammars ppt (posted on my website) for more
detailed treatment of these two orientations towards language.