Sociolinguistics is the study of language in society. Sociolinguists view the social aspects of language as critical, since language is a social tool. Some other linguists divorce language from the social, assuming an “ideal speaker,” devoid of variation, and ignore any sort of variation as merely “noise.” In sociolinguistics, the “noise” is the point. People vary in the way they speak based on geography, age, gender, ethnicity, and even who they’re speaking to or what they’re speaking about. All of this variation forms patterns that tell us something about society, language change, and the structure of language.
I’m a graduate student in linguistics, two years into my PhD, with a BA and MA in linguistics. I’ve taken classes on just about every aspect of sociolinguistics, but my research has been more focused. Most of my work has been on ethnic dialects of American English, specifically varieties of American Indian English, African American English, and Latino English. I’ve also worked with Appalachian English, New York City English, the Coastal Plain dialect of North Carolina, and Dominican Spanish (and New World Spanishes in general).
So, yeah, if you have questions about language or what I do or why I do what I do or whatever… go for it.
What is your position the relationship between spoken language and written language? Do you believe that students (elementary, high school) who speak a dialect that has different usage rules (or very different usage rules) from Standard Written English should be forced to use SWE? What usage rules should apply in a speech (public speaking) course?
What is your stance on the homogenization of dialect due to mass media. I am a Canadian, and “hear” the various linguistic sounds of "Americans " from various regions when watching CNN and other USA sourced news.
One thing I have noticed over the years is the softening of dialect among these many varied sources. “Kinah hep yoo” has become “can I help you?”… or “T’was jus o’er der” has become “It was just over there” …
I blame this on the ubiquitous “flat midwestern dialect” used by many newscasters on TV, Radio and such…
Well, no one talks like they write and vice versa. If you’ve ever had to transcribe a conversation, that becomes painfully obvious. I don’t study the written language or how people with different dialects use written language; perhaps someone else does and will better answer your questions. But I’ll give it a shot.
I think force is too strong of a word. I think everyone should be taught how to write because, like it or not, knowing the standard is mighty important in this society.
Being able to speak the standard is also important for upward mobility. No one denies this. Is it telling that the standard is based on the middle class, white standard? You betcha. I don’t believe that the way we speak should be a gate keeping tool to keep people of color and poor people down. Education does tend to level a person’s dialect towards the standard, but speech alone is not entirely indicative of education.
I’ve never taken a public speaking course, but my understanding is that they’re used for learning how to give speeches and how to debate. In our middle class, white standard worldview, the standard is what is needed for such activities, so teaching the standard in a public speaking course makes sense to me.
I really don’t want this thread to turn into a prescriptivist versus descriptivist debate. We have plenty of those threads, and I think most people know what side of the fence I’m on.
I’ve always wondered if the emotional sounds we make are universal. Things like: ‘whoops’ :eek:, ‘gah’ :smack: , ‘wheew’ :rolleyes: , ‘mmm-mmm’ , ‘huhh?’ :dubious: , ‘awwwe’ , ‘wow’ etc.
That and " I’d like to perform oral sex on you" :o
TV does not affect spoken language, beyond spreading a few slang terms and such like. Interaction is key to language acquisition, and most of us do not carry on conversations with our TV. Or, if we do, the TV does not answer back. Unless you’re crazy. English, as a whole, is diverging more than it is converging, so even if the media were affecting language, it isn’t much. And this is more or less true. I think the homogenization people see is more due to increased education, which tends to eliminate a lot of nonstandard dialects in a speaker.
I know of one study, however, that shows that TV is affecting Canadian speech. There’s this thing called the “foreign a,” which is found in words borrowed into English, like pasta, taco, plaza, etc. In England and Canada, speakers tend to adopt the same vowel as *tack *for these words. USA’ers tend to adopt the vowel in cot. Canadians have, as of late, adopted the USA pronunciation in certain words, due to Taco Bell commercials and the like sneaking over the border. This indicates that it is possible for something more than slang terms to be spread via the TV, but I’ve heard of no other work that has proven any link to TV and language change, and many that have disproven it.
Hmm, not quite sure what you’re talking about here. Curse our written, unphonetic alphabet!
Like I said, for the most part, English dialects are moving away from each other. Access to education and physical mobility seems to have flattened out some people’s speech, but as long as people are separated by geography or social distances, there will be different dialects and different languages because interaction is key and language is intrinsic to identity. The way we speak says volumes about us, and we want to speak like the people we want to be like. Not everyone wants to be a flat Midwesterner.
Can’t say as that I know much about emoticons and sound effects, but I do believe certain things, like laughing, blushing, and blow jobs as well as the sounds that accompany them, are pretty universal. I could be wrong, though. It’s an interesting question; maybe someone else knows.
I’m pretty sure “wow” is not universal, though probably with the accompanying facial expression, people would get the point.
Can you tell me if the verb “taken” or “takened” instead of “took” used in the past tense (without have, has or had) was ever an accepted or common use by immigrants from England, Ireland, Wales or Scotland?
Do you know of common Chickasaw words still in use today in West Tennessee?
Do you know of any reason for the pronunciation of the word quote as if it were a homonym with coat? (Infrequently in West Tennessee)
These three questions have bugged me for a long time. I honestly don’t expect you to be an expert on everything!
BTW, I do not believe that there is such a thing as “standard spoken English” when we speak of dialects. I acknowledge the notion of “standard broadcast dialect.”
Also, long ago in some psychology text I read that psychopaths don’t blush. But I guess even that is universal.
Can you tell me anything interesting about the connection between African American English and African dialects (my particular interest being dialects in the Fulfulde (Pulaar) and Wolof).
During my year based in Philly, I picked up “oops.” In Spanish it’s “uy.” So until Star Wars I came out, with an “oops” left in in the dubbing, people would stare any time I oopsed. Now they just think I’m a nerd, which after all is correct.
Since all sociolinguists are also trained in regular linguistics, stuff like the CIA and teaching English (or other language) as a second language and making up names for medicines and other business-type jobs are available. Sociolinguists in particular often work with educators to work on ways of teaching children who speak a non-standard dialect to learn a standard one. They also work with educators and speech therapists to understand how to differentiate dialectal features from actual speech pathologies. For years and years, African American kids were sent to speech pathologists to “fix” what was just aspects of their dialects.
But, yeah, most sociolinguistics goes on in academia, and that’s where I plan to stay. No one else will pay me to do the research I want to do.
I don’t know that much about English across the pond, but I do know that Appalachian dialects use nonstandard forms of “strong” verbs such as take and such like that they retained from the English spoken by their ancestors, who were often Ulster Scots. I can’t say off the top of my head if those forms in particular were used, but similar constructions definitely were. I’ll do a little poking around and see if I can’t find a better answer for you.
No, I don’t. You guys are asking hard questions!
Well, *coat *and *quote *are really similar. The only difference, usually, is a lip-rounding on the k-sound at the beginning of quote, which is an easy thing to lose and is the type of change that is common in the history of language. Is that an answer?
That’s a good point. When I use the word “standard,” I’m talking about that elusive dialect that successful people use. There is no single standard; it’s usually thought to vary by geographic region. But it’s a troubling word, since it’s never really been described. At least one scholar uses the term “mainstream US English” or MUSE, which I like. People just tend to have a better innate understanding of what is meant by “standard” than a made-up term.
We don’t really use words like “prominent” when talking about accents or dialects. I’m honestly not entirely sure what it could mean. Do you mean an accent that is least likely to bring about some sort of reaction from the listener, like if you hear it you don’t automatically think of some sort of stereotype (like slow Southerner, rude Northerner, etc)? If so, then the stereotypical Midwestern accent, the Broadcasting Standard, would probably be that, but I’m totally pulling that out of my ass.
I don’t know off the top of my head, but let me do a little digging and I’ll get back to you. I have just the book for it…
Interesting question. Mass media, as I said above, hasn’t had much of an effect at all. Instant communication, however, is a trickier thing. I’m not claiming any expertise on this, but such communication could have two, contradictory effects: spreading new forms or stopping new forms from occurring. The former happens when you’re talking on the phone with your friend who lives across the country or across the ocean, and she uses something cool and you pick it up, either consciously or not. It could slow down the spread of new forms because of the need to communicate. If the new form impedes communication, it might not be picked up. I would guess in general that mass communication would have a leveling effect, though how strong that effect is, I couldn’t tell you.
I’m basing this on my knowledge of isolated dialects. Isolated dialects are known for being both conservative and innovative. Take Appalachian dialects for instance. They were cut off from the outside world by mountains. These dialects retain a lot of features other forms of American English have lost but have created a lot of forms no other dialects have. But when isolated communities are no longer isolated, there are usually two reactions: either the speakers adopt outside linguistic norms or they hang on stronger to their dialect.
Most dictionaries, since Websters 3rd, at least, are trying to describe language as it is used rather than impose a standardized norm. Thus, I would guess that dictionaries have had no effect on the spoken language (though perhaps a big one on written language).
, ‘huhh?’ :dubious: , ‘awwwe’ 
, ‘wow’ etc.