2.
10.
Sociolinguistics
I) Language choice in multilingual communities:
Speech community is highly complex and structured. The subdiscipline that treats the
social aspects of language is called sociolinguistics. In any community the distinguishable
varieties (or codes), which are available for use in different social contexts, form a kind of
repertoire of available options. The members of each community have their linguistic
repertoires. Several factors can affect the choice of the code:
Social factors: participants (who is speaking & who are they speaking to?);
setting/social context (where?); topic (what is being talked about?); function (why?)
Social dimensions: social distance scale (intimate/high solidarity ↔ distant/low
solidarity); status scale (superior/high status ↔ subordinate/low status); formality
scale (formal/high formality ↔ informal/low formality); referential & affective
scales (high info content ↔ low info content [referential]; low affective content ↔
high affective content [affective])
(E.g.: ZaireStandard Zairean Swahili + French + Indoubil)
Domains of language use: Certain social factors turn out to be important in
accounting for lg. choice. A number of typical interactions have been identified as
relevant in describing patterns of code choice in many speech communities. They are
known as domains of lg. use. A ~ involves typical interactions btw. typical
participants in typical settings (e.g.: family, friendship, religion, education,
employment). — That is, ~ draws on 3 important social factors in code choice:
participants, setting/scene & topic. (Other important components of speech
situations: ends [functions & outcomes], act sequence [content, form],
key/tone/mood/manner, instrumentalities [channelverbal, nonverbal, face-to-face,
written; codelg./variety used], norms of interaction & interpretation, genre.) The
form that talk takes in any context is called a register.
Diglossia: (e.g.: Eggenwill [Switzerland]=>local Swiss German + standard German).
2 senses:
1. original, narrow sense: 2 distinct varieties of the same lg. are used in the
community, with 1 regarded as a high (H) and the other a low (L) variety;
they complement each other, each variety is used for distinct functions; noone uses the H variety in everyday conversation. The 2 varieties are
linguistically related, the degree of difference in pronunciation of H & L
varies from place to place, the grammar differs too (often H is
grammatically, morphologically more complicated). Most of the vocab. is
the same, but H includes many more formal & technical terms, L has words
for everyday objects. Attitudes to a ~ situ. are complicated. People generally
admire the H variety, it has prestige, it is described and ‘fixed’/standardized
in grammar books & dictionaries. Attitudes to the L variety are varied and
often ambivalent. ~ is characteristic of speech communities; individuals
may be bilingual (e.g.: Haiti).
extended scope: generalized to cover any situation where 2 languages are
used for different functions in a speech community, esp. where 1 lg. is used
for H functions & the other for L functions. There’s a division of labour
btw. the 2. Other features of the ‘classic’ diglossia are relevant, but not very
crucial. People may also be attached to the L variety, literature is in H rather
than L, but there may be rich oral lit. in L.L lg.-es are also increasingly
being codified & standardised.
Polyglossia: a community regularly uses more than 2 lg.-es more than 2 distinct
codes or varieties are used for clearly distinct purposes or in clearly distinguishable
situations.
Code-switching or code-mixing: People sometimes switch code within a domain or
social situation. When there’s some obvious change in the situ., such as the arrival of
a new person, it’s easy to explain the switch. Other reasons/motivations for
switching:
signalling group membership & shared ethnicity or solidarity with an addressee,
reflecting status relations, formality (more formal: H, less formal situ, e.g.
friends: L) When people switch from 1 code to another for reasons which can be
clearly identified, it’s sometimes called situational switching. Conversational ~:
motivated y factors in the conversation itself.
reported speech, ‘mot juste’ switch, metacognitive switch
To discuss a particular topic
Affective reasons: to express disapproval, anger, etc.
Metaphorical switching: switching for rhetorical reasons drawing on the
associations of both codes.
A rapid switch is sometimes called ‘code-mixing’ a speaker mixes up codes
indiscriminately or ‘cos of incompetence. This kind of switching is itself a specific
sociolinguistic variety.
People may also borrow words from another lg. But borrowings are very different
from code switches, for example, in form: these are adapted to the speaker’s 1st lg.
People are often unaware of the fact that they code switch. When their attention is
drawn to this fact, they tend to apologize for it, condemn it or generally indicate
disapproval. Reactions to ~ are negative in many communities.
II) Language maintenance and shift in different communities:
Migrant minorities: (e.g. Hindus in GBGujerati + Eng.)
The order of domains in which lg. shift occurs may differ for different individuals &
different groups, but gradually over time the lg. of the wider society displaces the
minority lg. In countries like England, Australia, New Zealand & the USA, one of
the 1st domains in which children of migrant families meet Eng. is the school & TV.
In many minority families, Eng. gradually infiltrates the home through the children.
There’s pressure from a wider society, too. Typically, migrants are virtually
monolingual, their children are bilingual, & their grandchildren are monolingual in
the lg. of the ‘host’ country. Lg. shift may take 3-4 generations to occur.
Non-migrant communities: Political, economic & social changes can also lead to
lg. shift. (E.g.: Oberwart [Felsőőr] shift from Hungarian to German.) H lg. —
diglossia situation — H used in more & more domains (school, official transactions,
economic advancement, etc.) — L used in homes, for friendly transactions, used for
social & affective functions — domains of H continue to expand, gradually displaces
L. In general, the more domains in which a minority lg. is used, the more likely it
will be maintained. Domain compartmentalisation= keeping domains of use of the 2
lg.-es separate — assists resistance to infiltration from the dominant lg. Domains of
resistance: home, religion, sometimes education, work.
Migrant majorities: Lg. shift occurs also when the migrant group moves out of their
original country. E.g. most Aboriginal people in Australia & many American Indians
in the USA have lost their lg.-es over 4-5 generations of colonial rule. The result of
colonial, economic & political control wasn’t diglossia, but over time the
communities shifted to the coloniser’s lg. & their own lg.-es died out. When lg. shift
occurs, it is almost always shift towards the lg. of the dominant powerful group. A
dominant group has no incentive to adopt the lg. of a minority. The dominant lg. is
associated with status, prestige & social success.
Language death and language loss: When all the people who speak a lg. die, the lg.
dies with them. When a lg. dies gradually, as opposed to all its speakers being wiped
out by a massacre or epidemic, the process is similar to that of lg. shift: the functions
of the lg. are taken over by another lg. The lg. usually retreats until it’s used only in
the home.
Lg. shift generally refers to the process by which 1 lg. displaces another in the
linguistic repertoire of a community, & to the result of this process.
Lg. death occurs when a lg. is no longer spoken naturally anywhere in the world.
Factors contributing to language shift:
Economic, social & political factors: obtaining well- paid jobs; allegiance to the
government; fitting in.
Demographic factors: resistance to lg. shift tends to last longer in rural (e.g.:
Ukrainians in the Canadian farmlands; the Jabbalis in Dhofar) than in urban
areas. Social integration leads to lg. shift; social isolation may result in
resistance to it. Improved roads, buses, TV, telephone, Internet are agents of lg.
shift. Where there is a large number of speakers of the minority lg., lg. shift is
the slowest. Accelerates lg. shift: intermarriage (mothers tend to accelerate lg.
shift or slow it down if her native lg. is that of the minority).
Attitudes and values: Lg. shift tends to be slowest where the minority lg. is
highly valued, seen as a symbol of ethnic identity. Positive attitudes support
efforts to use the minority lg. (E.g.: Fr. is spoken by a minority in Quebec
(Canada) & Maine (USA) ‘cos Fr. has international prestige.)
Language maintenance and revival: Where lg. is considered to be an important
symbol of a minority group’s ethnic identity, the lg. is likely to be maintained longer.
Other factors contributing to lg. maintenance:
degree and frequency of contact with the homeland
families of a minority group live near each other
institutional supporteducation, law, administration, religion, the media are
crucial domains in this respect
Sometimes a community becomes aware of the fact that its lg. is in danger of
disappearing, & takes deliberate steps to revitalise it. The success of such efforts depends
largely on how far lg. loss has already occurred & how strongly people want to revive the
lg. (E.g.: Irish, Welsh, Scottish, Maori, Hebrew.)
III) Linguistic varieties and multilingual nations:
Over half the world’s population is bilingual and many people are multilingual.
Sociolinguists have developed a number of ways of categorising languages, according to
their status and social functions.
Vernacular languages: The term vernacular is used in a number of ways. It
generally refers to a lg. which hasn’t been standardised & which doesn’t have official
status. (E.g.: Buang in Papua New Guinea.) ~s are usually the 1 st lg.-es learned by
people in multilingual communities & they are often used for a relatively narrow
range of informal functions. 3 components of the meaning of the term ~:
- the most basicrefers to the fact that a vernacular is an uncodified or
unstandardised variety
- the 2nd refers to the way in which it is acquired: in the home as a 1 st variety
- the 3rd is the fact that it’s used for relatively circumscribed functions
Some have extended the term to refer to any lg. which isn’t the official lg. of a
country. (E.g.: US Eng.=a dominant group  Spanish=a Chicano child’s
vernacular.) This term generally refers to the most colloquial variety in a person’s
linguistic repertoire. By extension, the term has been used to refer in a monolingual
community to the most informal & colloquial variety of a lg. which may also have a
standardised variety. (‘vernacularisation’: Hebrew no native speakers = Ø vern. lg.
 developed for use as the national lg. of Israel)
Standard languages: The term standard is even more slippery than vernacular
‘cos it too is used in many different ways by linguists:
1. a ~ variety is generally on which is written and which has undergone some
degree of regularisation, or codification (in a grammar or dictionary); it’s
recognised as a prestigious variety or code by a community, & is used for H
functions alongside with a diversity of L varieties. ( very general def.! Only a
minority of the world’s lg.-es are written! Even smaller minority are
standardised!)
2. Always a particular dialect which has gained its special position as a result of
social, economic & political influences. (Eng.: 15th century; similar
developments: Italy, Spain, France, Romania.)
Lingua francas: L.f. = a lg. of communication btw. 2 people (‘common
language’), a lg. serving as a regular means of communication btw. different
linguistic groups in a multilingual speech community. (E.g.: Northwest Amazon =>
Indians living along the Vaupés river  lg.-es: Tuyuka, Paneora, Tukano [=very
useful lg. for communicating with a wider group = l.f. of the area.] A~ is a lg. used
for communication btw. people whose 1st lg.-es differ. In some countries the most
useful & widely used l.f. is an official or national lg. (e.g.: Tanzania  Swahili; PNG
 Tok Pisin=New Melanesian). ~s often develop initially as trade lg.-es. From a
linguistic & sociolinguistic point of view, the most interesting ~s are pidgin and
creole lg.-es.
Pidgins and creoles: Most people find them amusing
- A pidgin is a lg. which has no native speakers. They develop as a means of
communication btw. people who don’t have a common lg. They seem
particularly likely to arise when 2 groups with different lg.-es are
communicating in a situation where ther’s also a 3rd dominant lg. Initially, they
have a narrow range of functions => specific purposes: trade or administration,
buying & selling grains, animal hides. They have simplified structures & a small
vocabulary; Ø inflections to mark plural or to signal the tense of the V; Ø affixes
to mark gender.
Both sides contribute to the sounds, vocab. & grammatical features. Where there
is a prestigious world lg. + a local vernacular, the prestige lg. tends to supply
more of the vocab., while the vern. lg.-es have more influence on the grammar of
the developing pidgin.
These lg.-es don’t have high status or prestige, & to those who don’t speak them,
thy often seem ridiculous lg.-es (‘mongrel jargons,’ ‘macaroni lingos’). Pidgins
often have a short life.
- A creole is a pidgin which has acquired NSs. They are learned by children as
their 1st lg. & used in a wide range of domains (e.g.: Tok Pisin). Wider range of
functions, expanded structure & vocab., not so negative attitudes.
- Origins & endings:
 Proto-pidgin origin (RELEXIFICATION HYPOTHESIS): over 100 have
been identified, but most (about 85) are based on 1 of 7 European lg.es: Eng (35), Fr (15), Portuguese (14), Sp (7), Ger (6), Dutch (5), It (3).
Some linguists claim that all pidgins & creoles had a common origin
(Portuguese pidgin).
 LANGUAGE BIOPROGRAM HYPOTHESIS: each pidgin arises & develops
independently.
 Decreolisation: basilectmesolectacrolect => standard
- Characteristics of stable pidgins:
 Phonology: number of vowels is reduced, usually to 5; distinctive
vowel length tends to be lost; tendency towards 2-syllable words.
 Morphology: drastic reduction in morphological complexity &
irregularity; gr’l categories signalled by free morphemes; little fixity in
word classes.
 Syntax: widespread SVO word order; lack of number distinction in Ns;
Ns used instead of pronouns, etc.
IV) Sex- and age-related linguistic behaviour:
The linguistic forms used by women & men contrast — to different degrees — in all
speech communities. It’s claimed that women are more linguistically polite than men, &
that men & women emphasize different speech functions.
Sex-exclusive speech differences: Women & men don’t speak in exactly the
same way as each other in any community. (E.g.: Amazon Indians  mother’s lg. is
different from father’s ‘cos men must marry outside their own tribe & each tribe is
distinguished by a different lg.) There are communities where the lg. is shared by
men & women, but particular linguistic features occur only in the women’s or only in
the men’s speech: small pronunciation differences or differences in word-shape
(morphology). E.g.: Yana (N-Am. Indian lg.)different affixes; Japanese some of
men’s forms are longer, female forms are frequently prefixed by o-. Sex-exclusive
speech forms reflect sex-exclusive social roles.
Sex-preferential speech features: In Western communities, where women’s &
men’s social roles overlap, the speech forms they use also overlap: they don’t use
different forms. They use different quantities or frequencies of the same forms. E.g.:
Eng.  women use more –ing [ŋ] pronunciations & fewer –in’ [in] than men.
Women tend to use more of the standard forms, men use more of the vernacular
forms.
Sex and social class: The linguistic features which differ in women’s & men’s
speech in Western communities are usually features which also distinguish the
speech of people from different social classes. In every social class, men use more
vernacular forms than women. In the lowest social groups, women’s speech seems to
be closer to that of men within the same group, so in these classes, class membership
seems to be more important than gender identity.
Explanations of women’s linguistic behaviour: various views why women use
more standard forms than men:
- Role as guardian of society’s valuessociety expects ‘better’ behaviour BUT:
it’s NOT TRUE for all social groups.
- Subordinate groups must be polite BUT: it’s not immediately evident why
polite speech should equal standard speech.
- Vernacular forms express machismo; standard forms tend to be associated with
female values and femininity.
- Women are more status conscious; in assigning women to a particular social
class, researchers often used the woman’s husband’s occupation as a major
criterionBUT not all women marry men from the same social class
miscategorization is a plausible explanation of their speech behaviour.
Most people use more vernacular forms in more relaxed contexts.
Features of women’s lg.: (Robin Lakoff)
- lexical hedges or fillers (you know, sort of, well, etc.)
- tag questions (She’s very nice, isn’t she?)
- rising intonation on declaratives (it’s really good)
- ‘empty’ adjectives (divine, charming, cute)
- precise colour terms (magenta, aquamarine)
- intensifiers (I like him so much.)
- ‘hypercorrect’ grammar
- ‘superpolite’ forms (indirect requests, euphemisms)
- avoidance of strong swearwords (fudge, my goodness)
-
emphatic stress (It was a BRILLIANT performance.)
Age-related features of speech: One of the most obvious difference btw. the
speech of men & women is the pitch of their voice. Most people believe this
difference develops at puberty, male voices sound lower in pitch than women voices,
adult voices sound deeper than children’s. Social & cultural factors also play an
important role here: it’s more masculine to speak with a lower-pitched voice. There
are other features of people’s speech which vary at different ages: vocab.,
pronunciation, grammar can also differentiate age groups. These are age-graded
patterns (e.g.: swearword vocab., slang)
Age and social dialect data: Most social dialectologists have found that
adolescents use the highest frequencies of vernacular forms. Like slang, these forms
are markers of group membership: they are solidarity markers (e.g.: NY gang
members delete –ed signalling past tense much more often than adults from the same
social group). Some researchers have noted that as people get older, their speech
simply becomes less dialectal & more standard (e.g.: young children in Detroit & the
Appalachian region of Am. use multiple negation more frequently than adolescents,
adolescents use it more frequently than adults). There’s general agreement that in
their ‘middle years’ people are most likely to recognize the society’s speech norms &
use more standard forms.
Age grading and lg. change: it’s easy to confuse patterns of lg. change with
speech patterns which vary with different age groups.
V) Language change:
In reality, it’s not so much that lg. itself changes, as that speakers & writes change the
way they use the lg. Speaker innovation is a more accurate description than lg. change.
Lg. changes in 3 major ways which are inter-related: over time, in physical space &
socially. Lg. change (=variation over time) has its origins in spatial (or regional) & social
variation. (E.g.: New Zealand  new, nuclear were once pronounced as [nju:] &
[nju:kliə]; now young people increasingly use [nu:] & [nu:kliə].)
Post-vocalic [r]  in many parts of England & Wales, standard Eng. has lost the
pronunciation of [r] following vowels (start, star)begun in 17th c., still in progress.
Accents with post-vocalic [r] are called ‘rhotic’.usually regarded as rural &
uneducated.
A great deal of linguistic variation is stable but some is an indication of linguistic change
in progress. The patterns of deletion of the regular past tense affix (-ed) are stable in
Eng.-speaking communities. The substitution of a glottal stop for [t] in certain positions is
an example of change in Norwich, for instance. The vernacular forms [-in] vs [-ing] and
[h]-dropping are examples of stable variants.
From group to group: Many linguists have used the metaphor of waves to
explain how ling’c changes spread through a community. Any particular change
typically spreads simultaneously in different directions, though not necessarily at the
same rate in all directions. Social factors such as age, status, sex & region affects the
rates of change & the directions in which the waves roll most swiftly. In any speech
community, different waves intersect. When a change is a prestigious one, it usually
starts at the top of the speech community — in the most formal style of the higher-
status group — and spreads downwards. A vernacular change, such as the
centralisation in Martha’s Vineyard, or the spread of the glottal stop, tends to begin
A
in people’s more informal/casual style. Innovating groups who start such a change
tend to be around the middle social class range—in the upper working/lower middle
B
social class, for example. Ans, as one may expect, younger people tend to adopt new
changes more quickly than older people do, and use them more frequently.
From style to style: In the speech of a particular individual, a change spreads
from one style to another (e.g. from more formal speech to more casual speech),
while at the same tim it spreads from 1 individual to another within a social group,
and subsequently from 1 social group to another.
From word to word (LEXICAL DIFFUSION): Sound changes also spread from 1
word to another. Sound changes spread through different words one by one. This is
called lexical diffusion. When a sound change begins, all the words with a particular
vowel don’t change at once in the speech community. (Belfast vowel change
affected the vowel in pull before put, & put before should; New Zealand vowel
change currently in progress is the merging of vowels in word pairs like beer & bear,
which used to be distinct.)
Comparing the speech of people from different age groups at a given time can be a useful
clue to lg. change, this method is called the apparent-time method. Differences between
the speech of older people and young people are often interpreted as signs of lg. change
in progress. Younger people tend to use more of the newer or innovative forms, and the
older speakers use more of the older, conservative forms, the ones they adopted in their
own teenage years.
When the change involves spread of a prestige form it is easy to see the evidence of its
spread, the use of these forms in the speech of younger people is a clue that a new form is
being introduced. It is much more difficult to identify a change when it involves the
introduction or spread of a vernacular form, because the normal age-grading pattern for
such forms involves a higher incidence among younger people. A peak of use in young
adults’ speech is a likely pattern for a socially prestigious form entering the community, a
peak in middle age is the normal pattern for a prestigious form variable, and a peak in
old age suggests a change in progress with old people using the highest frequencies of
form which is disappearing.
Differences in men’s and women’s speech is another source of variation which results in
lg. change. In general, women tend to introduce the prestige/standard form, whereas men
tend to introduce new vernacular forms.
Evidence suggests that face-to-face interaction is more important than exposure to the
new form in the media.
VI) Cross-cultural communication:
We adapt our talk to suit our audience & talk differently to children, customers and
colleagues. We use lg. differently in formal & casual contexts. The purpose of talk also
affects its form. Another relevant factor is politeness.
The functions of speech:
- Expressive utterances express the speaker’s feelings (I’m feeling great
today.)very fundamental function of lg.!
-
Directive utterances attempt to get someone to do sg. (Clear the table.)
Referential utterances provide info (At the 3rd strike it will be 3 o’clock
precisely.)very fundamental function of lg.!
- Metalinguistic utterances comment on lg. itself (‘Hegemony’ isn’t a common
word.)
- Poetic utterances focus on aesthetic features of lg. (poem, ear-catching motto,
rhyme: Peter Piper picked a pack of pickled peppers.)
- Phatic utterances express solidarity & empathy with others (Hi, how are you,
lovely day, isn’t it!)conveys an affective or social message rather than a
referential one.
Of course any utterance may express more than 1 function, and any function may be
expressed by a stretch of discourse which doesn’t exactly coincide with an utterance.
Other identified functions:
- heuristic (concerned with learning: ‘tell-me-why’ function)
- commissives (promises & threats)
- performatives & declarations
- directives—direct: Sit down.
—indirect: Your legs must be tired. You must be worn.
NOT all communities follow the same patterns E.g.: eastern seaboard of USA: Black
male migrant agricultural workers—almost all directives are imperatives.
When we interact, we generally use lg. in complex ways, & this often involves expressing
several functions of lg. simultaneously (e.g.: Fire!—could act as an informative as well as
a directive to run or get out).
Politeness and address forms:
Politeness: involves taking account of the feelings of others. A polite person makes
others feel comfortable. Being linguistically polite involves speaking to people
appropriately in the light of their relationship to you. Inappropriate ling’c choices
may be considered rude. We need to understand the social values of a society in
order to speak politely.
Positive politeness: solidarity oriented, emphasizes shared attitudes & values. A shift
to a more informal style using slang & swear words will function similarly as an
expression of ~.
Negative politeness: pays people respect & avoids intruding on them. Indirect
directives express ~. It involves expressing oneself appropriately in terms of social
distance & respecting status differences. E.g.: using title + last name to your
superiors & older people you don’t know well.
Being polite may also involve the dimension of formality. Another factor which
contributes to the assessment of social distance is the type of relationship involved
(transactional relationships  emphasize social distance  favour TLN)
Linguistic politeness in different cultures: There are cross-cultural differences:
what’s appropriate in 1 community may not be appropriate in another. (E.g.:
Javanese politeness is a very complex ling’c matter, several factors.) Often
miscommunication based on cultural differences relate to different assumptions
deriving from different ‘normal’ environments. Learning another lg. involves a great
deal more than learning the literal meaning of the words, how to put them together,
and how to pronounce them. We need to know what they mean in the cultural context
in which they are normally used. And that involves some understanding of the
cultural & social norms of their users.
- Socioling’c rules for polite acceptance & refusal (e.g.: Western culture: people
expect to be provided with a rather specific reason for a refusal)
- Accepting an invitation (e.g.: for a dinner  appropriate formula at beginning of
meal: Buon appetito — It.; Bon appétit — Fr.)
- Problem of how to get enough to eat (e.g.: India, Taiwan, Arabic-speaking
world: impolite to accept food when 1 st offered—only 3rd offer is appropriate, &
only a 3rd refusal is considered definitely a refusal to the offerer)
- The ways of expressing the same speech act may differ quite markedly from 1
culture to another.
- Other problematic areas, e.g.: greetings (Maoriritual of encounter is a complex
procedure, there are even rules about who is eligible to contribute different
elements; sex, age & status of appropriate participants is predetermined.
VII) Context, style, and class:
Lg. varies according to its uses as well as its users, according to where it’s used & to
whom, as well as according to who is using it. The addressees & the context affect our
choice of code or variety, whether lg., dialect or style.
Addressee as an influence on style: The better you know someone, the more
casual & relaxed the speech style you will use to them. People use more standard
forms to those they don’t know well, and more vernacular forms to their friends.
Factors: relative social distance or solidarity, relative age, sex, social roles, whether
people work together or part of the same family.
Age of addressee: People generally talk differently to children & to adults.
Talking to younger sisters/brothers, 3 year-olds: sing-song intonation, ‘baby-talk.’
simpler vocab. & gr’l constructions (short, simple sentences; coordination; more
explicit references; high frequency words). The speech NSs use to foreigners who
don’t speak Eng. is also distinctive: ‘foreigner talk.’—features are similar to those
which characterize adults’ speech to children (high frequency vocab., fewer
contractions, use of Ns rather than pronouns, shorter sentences, simple grammar,
repetition).
(Social background of addressee: Differentiating features, e.g.: simplification
of consonant clusters ([la:st][la:s]; [nekst]—[neks]); pronunciation of [t] btw
vowels is voiced (meetingmeeding); definite article is omitted; contractions,
etc.typical of the contrasting styles of newsreaders on different New Zealand radio
stations.)
Accommodation theory:
- Speech convergence: when people talk to each other, their speech often becomes
more similar: each person’s speech converges towards the speech of the person
they’re talking to. This process is called speech accommodation.happens
when speakers like one another, 1 speaker has vested interest in pleasing the
other or putting them at ease.  usually a polite speech strategy  adopt speed
of speech, vocab., pronunciation, length of utterances, verbal fillers &
pragmatic particles, frequency of pauses, intonation, gr’l patterns used, voice
pitch.
- When people simplify their vocab. & grammar in talking to foreigners or
children, they’re converging downwards, when adopting a socially superior’s
talk features: converging upwards.
- Speech divergence: deliberately choosing a lg. not used by one’s addressee.
Accent divergence: working-class men often respond to university educated
students who join them just for the summer on the docks, factories, etc., by
increasing their swearing & using a higher frequency of vernacular forms.
People who aspire to a higher status will diverge upwards from the speech of
those from the same social class. Some divergent forms may be admired:
Brigitte Bardot’s & Maurice Chevalier’s Fr. accents.
- Overdoing convergence  offending listeners  patronising, ingratinating,
syncophatic, evidence that speaker is making fun of others
Context, style and class: The formality of the context & speakers’ relative
roles, statuses within the setting is also important.
William Labov — social dialect survey in NY — tried to elicit a wider range of
styles within the interview context  read aloud passages, set of word lists (e.g.
minimal pairs: pin—pen) => careful monitoring of both styles: speakers used fewer
vernacular forms; Interview/tape recording: relatively easy to elicit formal styles.
Eliciting more casual style (most relaxed, most basic style=vernacular), where
minimal attention is given to the monitoring of speechLabov used topics that
grabbed speakers’ attention, like being in danger of death, fights they had seen, etc.
Other strategies: taping groups of people, choosing very comfortable or an informal
setting, telling stories based on personal experience contribute to obtaining relaxed
speech.
Linguistic features of colloquial or casual style:
a. Pronunciation features ([h]-dropping, [in], etc.)
b. Grammatical features (was with plural subj. we; come (vs. came)
c. Use of me (vs. formal my), use of them (instead of those)
d. Animation for objects
Labov’s study another reading passage => designed to elicit the variable postvocalic [r]  5 speech styles for several social groups. People’s use of post-vocalic
[r] increases as they pay more attention to their speech, so it’s a sensitive marker of
class & style in NY. However, there’s a tendency of the lower middle class to
pronounce [r] even more often than the upper middle class in the 2 most formal
styles. LMC speakers out-perform UMC speakers, this is called hypercorrect
behaviour. — The LMC are overdoing it, go beyond the UMC norms to produce a
style which can be described, perhaps ironically, as ‘more correct’ than the standard:
hypercorrect speech or ‘super-standard’. It involves extending a form beyond the
standard.
Style in non-Western societies: e.g.: Japanese (+Tehran, +Javanese)special
set of gr’l contrasts for expressing politeness & respect for others.
Register:
Style: lg. variation which reflects changes in situational factors, such as
addressee, setting, task or topic. Some linguists describe this kind of lg. variation as
‘register’ variation. Others use the term ‘register’ more narrowly to describe the
specific vocab. associated with different occupational groups or specific situations
(e.g.: journalese, baby talk, legalese, the lg. of auctioneers & sports commentators,
pilots, criminals, etc.) Register = the lg. of groups of people with common interests
or jobs, or the lg. used in situations associated with such groups.