Sociolinguistics Lecture 3
Moazzam Ali
Language Contact & Language Choice
‘who speaks what language to whom and when’ (Fishman 1965)
Languages in Contact
Language contact means a contact between different languages, especially when at least one
of the languages is influenced by such contact. This influence takes place typically when the
languages are spoken in the same or adjoining regions and when there is a high degree of
communication between the people speaking them. (Longman Dictionary of Applied
Linguistics)
“A term used to apply to the situations where two or more groups of speakers who do not
have a native language in common are in social contact with each other or come into such
contact.” Trudgill (2003)
Causes of Contact

Migration

Conquest

Colonization

Trade/Commerce

Globalization/Communication
Outcomes of Contact

Multilingualism/Bilingualism

Codeswitching

Pidgin & Creoles

Language Shift/ Death / Maintenance

Diglossia
Monolingualism/Bilingualism/Multilingualism

6000 languages and 160 nation states

Multi/Bilingualism as a norm

Trudgill’s definition
1
Sociolinguistics Lecture 3
Moazzam Ali
Bilingual Competence

Native like proficiency

Native like control over two languages and equal mastery of two languages.
OR
Ability to communicate
(Bloomfield)

Bilingual is a person with at least minimum competence in four basic language skills,
(J. Macnamara)

Trudgill (1992:13) defines bilingual as ‘the ability of an individual to speak two or
more languages’

Weinreich (1968:5) takes bilingualism as ‘the practice of alternately using two
languages’.

Grosjean (1997) defines bilingualism as ‘the use of two (or more) languages in one's
everyday life, not knowing two or more languages equally well and optimally’.
Language in a Bilingual Mind and Bilingual Models for Language Access

Separate Underlying Model (SUP)

Common Underlying Model

Integration Model and Integration Continuum
separation
interconnection
integration
Types of Bilingualism
2
Sociolinguistics Lecture 3
Moazzam Ali

Simultaneous bilinguals

Compound bilinguals.

Coordinate bilinguals

Subordinate bilingual

Additive bilingualism

Subtractive bilingualism

Bimodal bilingualism
Benefits of Bilingualism

Communication

Cultural advantage

Cognitive advantage
Bilingualism and Education
Approaches regarding the bilingualism within the school/educational context range from
“supporting” to “disapproving” and a third one that is “neutral”.
Monolingualism and Style Variation
Communication/Accomodation Theory (Howard Giles, 1973)
Audience Types (Allan Bell, 1984)
The audience design framework distinguishes between several kinds of audience types based on
three criteria from the perspective of the speaker: known (whether an addressee is known to be
part of a speech context), ratified (the speaker acknowledges the listener’s presence in the speech
context), or addressed (the listener is directly spoken to). The impact of audience members on
the speaker’s style-shifting is proportional to the degree to which the speaker recognizes and
ratifies them. Bell defined the following audience types:

Addressee – listeners who are known, ratified, and addressed

Auditor – listeners who are not directly addressed, but are known and ratified

Overhearer – non-ratified listeners of whom the speaker is aware

Eavesdropper – non-ratified listeners of whom the speaker is unaware
3
Sociolinguistics Lecture 3
Moazzam Ali
Nikolas Coupland (1985, 2001) analysed the speech of DJ on Radio Cardiff
Language Crossing and Styling the Other (Ben Rampton)
Bilingualism and Language Variation
Bilingualism and Language Attitudes/Folk Linguistics
Matched Guise Tests
Matched guise: the same speaker would be audio-recorded reading a passage in two or more
different language varieties and listeners were asked to evaluate each speaker along several
dimensions.

Lambert (1960) ---Canada

Howard Giles--- ‘RP’ and Regional Dialects

Garrett et al. --- Factors skewing the Matched Guise Test Results
Codeswitching
“The alternative use by bilinguals of two or more languages in the same conversation”
(Milroy and Muysken, 1995)
Types of Codeswitching

Structural—Intersentential and Intra-sentential

Functional—Situational and Metaphorical

Gumperz (1972) in Norway, Hemnesberget, Ranmal and Bokmal
 Markedness model of conversational code-switching. (Myers-Scotton)

code-switching as a series of unmarked choices between different languages.

code-switching itself as an unmarked choice

codeswitching as a marked choice

code-switching as an exploratory choice.
Codeswitching and Language Shift

Susan Gal (1979) in Oberwart; Hungarian and German
4
Sociolinguistics Lecture 3
Moazzam Ali
Factors Causing Language Alteration

Social Factors (Interlocutor, Topic, Place)

Dynamic Factors (Identity, Solidarity)
To study Social Factors we use Allocative Paradigm
To study Dynamic Factors we use Interactionist Paradigm
Codeswitching—Diglossia
“Diglossia is a relatively stable situation in which, in addition to the primary dialects of the
language (which may include a standard or regional standards), there is a divergent, highly
codified (often grammatically more complex) superposed variety,…which is learned largely by
formal education and is used for most written and formal spoken purposes but is not used by any
sector of the community for ordinary conversation.” Ferguson (1959, p.336)
Historical Development of the Concept of Diglossia

Psichari (1928)—Dimotiki & Katharévusa in Greece

Marçais (1930)—Classic Arabic & Vernacular Arabic in Arab World

Ferguson (1959)—‘Diglossia’ in Word Journal

Joan Rubin (1960)— Guaraní & Spanish in Paraguay

Fishman (1967)—Yoruba & English in Nigeria
Domain
Domain
Interlocutor
Place
Topic
Family
Parent
Home
How to be a good son or daughter
Friendship
Friend
Beach
How to play a certain game
Religion
Priest
Church
How to be a good Christen
Education
Teacher
School
How to solve an algebra problem
Employment
Employment
Workplace
How to do your job most effectively
The Scheme of Relationships in Fishman’s (1972) Domain Analysis
5
Sociolinguistics Lecture 3
Moazzam Ali
Characteristics of Diglossia
1. Function
2. Prestige
3. Literary heritage
4. Acquisition
5. Standardization
6. Stability
7. Lexicon
Fishman’s taxonomy of Diglossia
Fishman's 1980 taxonomy of ``kinds of linguistic relationships between H's and L's" is worth
stating in full:
(a) H as classical, L as vernacular, the two being genetically related, e.g. classical and vernacular
Arabic, classical or classicized Greek (Katarevusa) and demotiki,
(b) H as classical, L as vernacular, the two not being genetically related, e.g. Loshn koydesh
(textual Hebrew/Aramaic) and Yiddish (Fishman, 1976) (or any one of the several dozen other
non-semitic Jewish L's, as long as the latter operate in vernacular functions rather than in
traditional literacy-related ones (Weinreich, 1980).
(c) H as written/formal-spoken and L as vernacular, the two being genetically unrelated to each
other; e.g. Spanish and Guaraní in Paraguay (Rubin, 1972)
(d) H as written/formal-spoken and L as vernacular, the two being genetically related to each
other; e.g. Punjabi and Urdu in Pakistan.
Bilingualism and Diglossia

Bilingualism with Diglossia

Bilingualism without Diglossia

Neither Bilingualism nor Diglossia

No Bilingualism but Diglossia
Polyglossia

Double Overlapping Diglossia
Abdul Aziz Mkilifi (1978) describe the situation in Tanzania as Triglossia but more porofoundly
6
Sociolinguistics Lecture 3
Moazzam Ali
as a “situation of intersection between two developing diglossic situations, one involving Swahili
and some vernacular and the other involving Swahili and English.”

Double Nested Diglossia
The situation in Khalapur India, a rural village, north of Dehli described by Gumperz (1964) can
be called double nested diglossia.
Language
Status
Name
Function
Hindi
H (H)
Oratorical
Formal
Hindi
H (L)
Conversational
Formally Informal
Khalapur
L (H)
Saf Boli
Informally Formal
Khalapur
L (L)
Moti Boli
Informal (servants)
Diglossia in Pakistan
Both the types of Diglossia are truly portraying the diglossic situation prevalent in Pakistan. Double
Nested Diglossia is true to small geographical boundaries where it is easier to study language variations
and functional distinctions. It is also restricted to two languages. Above mentioned Triglossia is closer to
the situation in Pakistan. The situation in Pakistan is “situation of intersection between two developing
diglossic situations, one involving Urdu and some vernacular and the other involving Urdu and English.”
At the moment Urdu is involved in two diglossic systems: as the H language with the various vernaculars
as Lows (L), and as the L-Language with English as the H. The people learn vernacular languages first at
home before beginning school, although most of them learn some Urdu as well. This of course is the
typical pattern of acquisition for L varieties. In primary school Urdu is the medium of instruction, either
from the beginning or after the vernacular has been used in the first grades. The introduction of the new
language variety in school is the typical of the acquisition of a H variety. Urdu is a school language only.
In this manner, the vernacular—Urdu diglossia pattern is established. The secondary schools offer
English as a subject and medium of instruction. It quickly gains the status of H variety. It is the language
of higher education in particular and success in general. In this situation Urdu becomes the L-variety.
Urdu is the language of culture and communication at National level. Urdu is the H variety with respect to
the vernaculars and L with respect to English.
Code-switching/Code-insertion/Borrowing
7
Sociolinguistics Lecture 3
Moazzam Ali
8