DOCSLIB.ORG

History of Sociolinguistics

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
History of Sociolinguistics PART 1 History of Sociolinguistics 55434-Wodak-Chap-01.indd434-Wodak-Chap-01.indd 1 33/18/2010/18/2010 33:52:14:52:14 PPMM 55434-Wodak-Chap-01.indd434-Wodak-Chap-01.indd 2 33/18/2010/18/2010 33:52:15:52:15 PPMM 1 Ferguson and Fishman: Sociolinguistics and the Sociology of Language Bernard Spolsky 1.1 INTRODUCTION its social context’, and to explore the nature of the discipline that emerged, trying to explain why it is To introduce this handbook, the editors map out sometimes called ‘sociolinguistics’ and sometimes the gestation of sociolinguistics by focusing on six ‘the sociology of language’, terms occasionally of the ‘founding fathers’: William Labov, who used interchangeably (Paulston and Tucker, 1997)1 pioneered a school devoted to showing the rele- though elsewhere (Bright, 1992; Gumperz, 1971) vance of social determinants of variation for clearly distinguished. linguistic theory; Basil Bernstein, the British I shall also mention founders omitted from the sociologist whose work on class-related ‘codes’ selected six, such as William Bright, Allen led to a brief flirtation with American sociolin- Grimshaw, Einar Haugen, Uriel Weinreich and guists; Dell Hymes, whose adaptation of Roman Sue Ervin-Tripp2 who were also pioneers. Haugen Jakobson’s theory of communication (Jakobson, was, by 1963, a senior scholar: after 30 years as 1960) shaped the ethnography of communication chair of Scandinavian Studies at the University of and educational linguistics and who molded soci- Wisconsin, he was about to take up a chair in olinguistics by editing several pioneering volumes Scandinavian and Linguistics at Harvard. He had and the flagship journal Language in Society; taught a course on bilingualism at the 1948 John Gumperz, founder of interactional sociolin- Linguistic Institute, and his book on the Norwegian guistics; and Charles Ferguson and Joshua language in America (Haugen, 1953) established Fishman. All except Bernstein (although he was him as the leading authority on bilingualism and invited) attended the Linguistic Institute in language shift. He was the first linguist to write Bloomington in the summer of 1964, the land- about the ecology of language, the title of his 1972 mark event that launched the field. All (except collected papers (Haugen, 1972). His study of Bernstein again) served on the Committee on Norwegian language planning (Haugen, 1966) Sociolinguistics of the Social Sciences Research was a groundbreaking work. Council, established in 1963 to plan the 1964 A second major publication in 1953 was that of seminar and that operated until the early 1970s. Uriel Weinreich (1953a), a seminal work that is All participated in the many conferences and still regularly cited as the basis for understanding publications which fashioned sociolinguistics in language contact. Fishman (1997c), a friend of those years, and each continued to publish for his3 from Yiddish youth movement days, summa- the next 30 years, expanding their own interpre- rizes his work in sociolinguistics, starting with an tations of the field. My task in this chapter is to undergraduate paper in Yiddish on Welsh lan- describe and assess the specific contribution of guage revival (U. Weinreich, 1944), his doctoral Ferguson and Fishman to the ‘study of language in dissertation on Swiss bilingualism, a study of 55434-Wodak-Chap-01.indd434-Wodak-Chap-01.indd 3 33/18/2010/18/2010 33:52:15:52:15 PPMM 4 THE SAGE HANDBOOK OF SOCIOLINGUISTICS the Russian treatment of minority languages (Labov, 1966) that continues to encourage (U. Weinreich, 1953b), and the beginning of the study of socially-explainable language variation. language and culture atlas of Ashkenazic Jewry Gumperz and Hymes were editing the papers from published a quarter of a century after his prema- the 1963 American Association of Anthropology ture death. Fishman recalls a paper that the two of meeting (Gumperz and Hymes, 1972), which them did not write in 1954 on the societal nature remains a foundation text. Even without the of language; Weinreich’s draft was too linguistic seminar, research and publication in the field and Fishman’s too sociological to negotiate a were by then well underway. Bloomington 1964 common version. Weinreich visited the 1964 was a milestone rather than a starting point, but Linguistic Institute, delivering four lectures on a significant one. semantic theory (U. Weinreich, 1966). His theory of semantics, Fishman suggested, was ‘profoundly cultural and socio-situational’, and so a comfort- ing antidote to the anti-sociolinguistic theory that 1.2 FISHMAN MEETS FERGUSON Chomsky was establishing.4 Weinreich had a strong influence on many of the founders, not least In his introduction to the festschrift for Ferguson’s on his student William Labov. Labov (1997: 147) 65th birthday (Fishman, Tabouret-Keller, Clyne, stresses the contribution to his own development Krishnamurti and Abdulaziz 1986: v), Fishman8 made by a teacher not much older than him and recalls his first contact with Ferguson: ‘It took especially the importance of Weinreich’s part in almost a month for Charles Ferguson and me to writing a paper which explained the relevance of realize that we were living next door to each other sociolinguistics to the understanding of language during the Summer Linguistic Institute of 1964 change (U. Weinreich, Labov and Herzog, 1968). at Indiana University.’ They had communicated A third founder was Susan Ervin-Tripp who briefly before that; during the summer, both in joined the Committee on Psycholinguistics as a the seminar that Ferguson chaired ‘primus inter graduate assistant. Her distinction between com- pares’, and with Fishman taking Ferguson’s pound and coordinate bilingualism (Osgood, course (101 Introduction to Linguistics), they 1954) led to much research and controversy. became ‘neighbors, colleagues, students (each Based at Berkeley after 1958, her interest in child acknowledging the other as teacher) and close language acquisition cross-culturally brought her friends, roles we have enacted, either repeatedly naturally into sociolinguistics (Ervin-Tripp, 1973). or continuously …’ She also joined the Committee on Sociolinguistics In May 1963, Fishman was not on the original in 1966 (Ervin-Tripp, 1997). list of scholars to be invited to Bloomington, The task I have been set in this chapter is made which included Gumperz, Haugen, Immanuel more complex by the need to distinguish individ- Wallerstein9 or Paul Friedrich, Steven E. Deutsch10 ual contributions from joint work and both from and Dell Hymes. In December, William Labov the working of the Zeitgeist,5 the difficult to docu- and William Stewart,11 both about to finish their ment formation of a consensus on next steps in a degrees, were added; a month later, Fishman was scientific field. All of the scholars I have named also invited (as were Heinz Kloss12 and Basil were already actively engaged in what is now Bernstein, all three considered sociologists rather describable as sociolinguistic research and publi- than linguists) (Committee on Sociolinguistics cation before 1964. Shuy (1997) notes that 1963–). Fishman had not been sure that he would Fishman first taught a course called ‘Sociology of be included – his only relevant publication was an Language’ at the University of Pennsylvania in article on the Whorfian hypothesis (Fishman, 1956 and continued to teach it at Yeshiva 1960), although he had earlier published articles University. Huebner (1996) that the term ‘socio- on Yiddish bilingualism, pluralism and minorities, linguistics’ was first used by Currie (1952) and and was just finishing his first major opus picked up by Weinreich (U. Weinreich 1953a: 99) (Fishman, 1966) which was to set the path for the and in articles in Word which Weinreich edited.6 host of studies of minority language maintenance The classic paper on diglossia (Ferguson, 1959) and loss that now dominate the sociolinguistic appeared there. At the 1962 LSA Linguistic research field. He later (Fishman, 1997a) recalled Institute, Ferguson taught a course with the simple that he was at Stanford rewriting Fishman (1966) title ‘Sociolinguistics’ and repeated it the follow- when he first heard about the 1964 seminar and ing summer and in the 1965 academic year at was encouraged to apply by Einar Haugen, also a Georgetown University. In 1964, Fishman had just fellow at the Center for Advanced Studies in the completed his pioneering study of language loyalty Behavioral Sciences. He phoned Ferguson whose in the USA (Fishman, 1966).7 Labov had published article on diglossia he knew; Ferguson ‘seemed a his Martha’s Vineyard study (Labov, 1962) and little cool on the phone’ but accepted the appli- was completing the New York dissertation cation. Ferguson quickly came to appreciate 55434-Wodak-Chap-01.indd434-Wodak-Chap-01.indd 4 33/18/2010/18/2010 33:52:15:52:15 PPMM FISHMAN, FERGUSON: THE SOCIOLOGY OF LANGUAGE 5 Fishman’s potential contribution: in a letter written 1.3 ORGANIZING A NEW FIELD in 1965 trying unsuccessfully to persuade Fishman to stay on the Committee of Sociolinguistics, he Left to work alone, there is little doubt that the wrote, ‘Of all the members, you are most probably founders of sociolinguistics would have continued the only one whose primary interest is in the field their individual scholarly paths investigating the of sociolinguistics, and your publications in the complex relations between language and society, field have been the most extensive. You are con- and the structure and interplay of the two systems cerned with both “macro” and “micro” and with evolved to deal with the evolutionary inadequacies relating the two’ (Committee on Sociolinguistics of human physiology, rejecting the ideology estab- 1963–) (letter from Ferguson in Ethiopia dated lished in mainstream linguistics by Chomsky’s 25 November 1965). lack of interest in meaning and his focus on the Fishman did not know what the seminar was competence of an ‘idealized monolingual’. Each going to be like, but he was willing to put up with of them had come with a different goal and was a hot uncomfortable summer in Bloomington in attracted by a different inspiration.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Language and Identity in Linguistic Ethnography
    Paper Language and identity in linguistic ethnography by © Miguel Pérez-Milans (The University of Hong Kong) [email protected] April 2015 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/ This is the early draft of a contribution to S. Preece (ed) The Routledge Handbook of Language & Identity. (New York & London: Routledge) Language and identity in linguistic ethnography Miguel Pérez-Milans The University of Hong Kong (Hong Kong SAR) Abstract The study of language and identity from the perspective of linguistic ethnography (LE) has received increasing attention during the last decade. Resting upon the social and discursive turns in the social sciences, LE has ontological and epistemological consequences for the way researchers approach language, culture and community, and it has been especially relevant to instability and unpredictability in late modernity. LE originated in the UK, but scholars elsewhere are now drawing it into a fuller account of political economy, a move outlined in the latter part of this paper. 1. Introduction Linguistic ethnography (LE) is a relatively new term that originated in the United Kingdom (UK) and broadly speaking, designates “a particular configuration of interests within the broader field of socio- and applied linguistics [which constitute] a theoretical and methodological development orientating towards particular, established traditions but defining itself in the new intellectual
    [Show full text]
  • 71 What Do You Lose When You Lose Your Language?1
    Stabilizing Indigenous Languages What Do You Lose When You Lose Your Language?1 Joshua Fishman The first paper that I wrote in 1948 on native languages had to do with what is the impact of bilingualism on students. There were still parents then who were concerned that if their children learned another language it would ruin their English accent. If you would hear the tones of another languages every time they spoke English, how would they get a job and what would people think of them? Today, forty-five years later, we are still not “home” at convincing public opinion and the authorities that it is worth having all the languages we have today. Therefore, I want to start with this question, “What is lost when a lan- guage is lost?” It is amazing how people are uncomfortable about answering that question. I remember my mother always telling me, “When you start off a talk, make sure people know what the question is and ask a good question. A good question is worth everything.” And I would say to her, “Ma, you know, Americans, they start off a conference with a joke. You have to tell a joke for people to know that you’re about to speak?” She said, “Jokes? Ask a good ques- tion” That is an old Jewish tradition, if you have a good question, you have something worthwhile to worry about. Attitudes toward language-loss depend on your perspective. When a lan- guage is lost, you might look at that from the perspective of the individual.
    [Show full text]
  • Language Change and Social Networks
    COMMUNICATIONS IN COMPUTATIONAL PHYSICS Commun. Comput. Phys. Vol. 3, No. 4, pp. 935-949 April 2008 Language Change and Social Networks Jinyun Ke1,∗, Tao Gong2 and William S-Y Wang2 1 English Language Institute, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48104-2028, USA. 2 Language Engineering Laboratory, Department of Electronic Engineering, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong. Received 5 August 2007; Accepted (in revised version) 27 August 2007 Communicated by Dietrich Stauffer Available online 11 December 2007 Abstract. Social networks play an important role in determining the dynamics and outcome of language change. Early empirical studies only examine small-scale lo- cal social networks, and focus on the relationship between the individual speakers’ linguistic behaviors and their characteristics in the network. In contrast, computer models can provide an efficient tool to consider large-scale networks with different structures and discuss the long-term effect of individuals’ learning and interaction on language change. This paper presents an agent-based computer model which simu- lates language change as a process of innovation diffusion, to address the threshold problem of language change. In the model, the population is implemented as a net- work of agents with age differences and different learning abilities, and the population is changing, with new agents born periodically to replace old ones. Four typical types of networks and their effect on the diffusion dynamics are examined. When the func- tional bias is sufficiently high, innovations always diffuse to the whole population in a linear manner in regular and small-world networks, but diffuse quickly in a sharp S-curve in random and scale-free networks.
    [Show full text]
  • Can Threatened Languages Be Saved? Reversing Language Shift, Revisited: a 21St Century Perspective
    MULTILINGUAL MATTERS 116 Series Editor: John Edwards Can Threatened Languages Be Saved? Reversing Language Shift, Revisited: A 21st Century Perspective Edited by Joshua A. Fishman MULTILINGUAL MATTERS LTD Clevedon • Buffalo • Toronto • Sydney Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Can Threatened Languages Be Saved? Reversing Language Shift Revisited: A 21st Century Perspective/Edited by Joshua A. Fishman. Multilingual Matters: 116 Includes bibliographical references and index. 1. Language attrition. I. Fishman, Joshua A. II. Multilingual Matters (Series): 116 P40.5.L28 C36 2000 306.4’4–dc21 00-024283 British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A CIP catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. ISBN 1-85359-493-8 (hbk) ISBN 1-85359-492-X (pbk) Multilingual Matters Ltd UK: Frankfurt Lodge, Clevedon Hall, Victoria Road, Clevedon BS21 7HH. USA: UTP, 2250 Military Road, Tonawanda, NY 14150, USA. Canada: UTP, 5201 Dufferin Street, North York, Ontario M3H 5T8, Canada. Australia: P.O. Box 586, Artarmon, NSW, Australia. Copyright © 2001 Joshua A. Fishman and the authors of individual chapters. All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced in any form or by any means without permission in writing from the publisher. Index compiled by Meg Davies (Society of Indexers). Typeset by Archetype-IT Ltd (http://www.archetype-it.com). Printed and bound in Great Britain by Biddles Ltd. In memory of Charles A. Ferguson 1921–1998 thanks to whom sociolinguistics became both an intellectual and a moral quest Contents Contributors . vii Preface . xii 1 Why is it so Hard to Save a Threatened Language? J.A.
    [Show full text]
  • Macro-Sociolinguistics Page 1 MACRO SOCIOLINGUISTICS
    MACRO SOCIOLINGUISTICS: INSIGHT LANGUAGE Rohib Adrianto Sangia Abstract: Language can be studied internally and externally. As externally, Sociolinguistics as the branch of linguistics looked or put position in relation to language speakers in the community, because in human society is no longer as individuals, will remain as a social community. Sociolinguistics concerns with two aspects of civilization, language and society, there are appropriate terms which are micro and macro in sociolinguistics. The main differences of them are micro-sociolinguistics or sociolinguistics –in narrow sense- is the study of language in relation to society, while macro-sociolinguistics or the sociology of language is the study of society in relation to language. Macro-sociolinguistics focuses such as social factors, exactly the interaction between language and dialect, the study of the decline and stabilization of minority languages, bilingualism developmental stability in a particular group. Keywords: Language, Sociolinguistics, Macro Sociolinguistics, Bilingualism. INTRODUCTION Language is a communication tool that people use to interact with each other. By mastering the language of humans can know the content of the world through science and new knowledge and had never imagined before. As a means of communication and interaction that is only possessed by humans, language can be studied internally and externally (Thomason and Kaufman, 1988: 22). Internally means the study made against internal elements such as language course, the structure of phonological, morphological, and syntactical alone. While externally meaningful study was conducted to things or factors outside the language, but in the use of language itself, speech community or the environment. Language may refer to the specific capacity in humans to obtain and use a complex system of communication, or to a specific agency of a complex communication system.
    [Show full text]
  • From Ancient Manuscripts to Modern Dictionaries Perspectives on Linguistics and Ancient Languages
    From Ancient Manuscripts to Modern Dictionaries Perspectives on Linguistics and Ancient Languages 9 Series Editor Terry C. Falla Editorial Board Index Editor James K. Aitken Georgia Kate Kelly Aaron Michael Butts Daniel King Wido van Peursen Perspectives on Linguistics and Ancient Languages (PLAL) contains peer-reviewed essays, monographs, and reference works. It focuses on the theory and practice of ancient-language research and lexicography that is informed by modern linguistics. From Ancient Manuscripts to Modern Dictionaries Select Studies in Aramaic, Hebrew, and Greek Edited by Tarsee Li Keith Dyer gp 2017 Gorgias Press LLC, 954 River Road, Piscataway, NJ, 08854, USA www.gorgiaspress.com Copyright © 2017 by Gorgias Press LLC All rights reserved under International and Pan-American Copyright Conventions. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning or otherwise without the prior written permission of Gorgias Press LLC. 2017 ܒ 1 ISBN 978-1-4632-0608-6 ISSN 2165-2600 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Society of Biblical Literature. International Meeting. | Li, Tarsee, editor. | Dyer, Keith D., 1951- editor. Title: From ancient manuscripts to modern dictionaries : select studies in Aramaic, Hebrew and Greek / edited by Tarsee Li & Keith Dyer. Description: Piscataway, NJ : Gorgias Press, [2017] | Series: Perspectives on linguistics and ancient languages, ISSN 2165-2600 ; 9 | Includes
    [Show full text]
  • AN INTRODUCTION to SOCIOLINGUISTICS Blackwell Textbooks in Linguistics
    AN INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLINGUISTICS Blackwell Textbooks in Linguistics The books included in this series provide comprehensive accounts of some of the most central and most rapidly developing areas of research in linguistics. Intended primarily for introductory and post-introductory students, they include exercises, discussion points and suggestions for further reading. 1. Liliane Haegeman, Introduction to Government and Binding Theory (Second Edition) 2. Andrew Spencer, Morphological Theory 3. Helen Goodluck, Language Acquisition 4. Ronald Wardhaugh and Janet M. Fuller, An Introduction to Sociolinguistics (Seventh Edition) 5. Martin Atkinson, Children’s Syntax 6. Diane Blakemore, Understanding Utterances 7. Michael Kenstowicz, Phonology in Generative Grammar 8. Deborah Schiffrin, Approaches to Discourse 9. John Clark, Colin Yallop, and Janet Fletcher, An Introduction to Phonetics and Phonology (Third Edition) 10. Natsuko Tsujimura, An Introduction to Japanese Linguistics (Third Edition) 11. Robert D. Borsley, Modern Phrase Structure Grammar 12. Nigel Fabb, Linguistics and Literature 13. Irene Heim and Angelika Kratzer, Semantics in Generative Grammar 14. Liliane Haegeman and Jacqueline Guéron, English Grammar: A Generative Perspective 15. Stephen Crain and Diane Lillo-Martin, An Introduction to Linguistic Theory and Language Acquisition 16. Joan Bresnan, Lexical-Functional Syntax 17. Barbara A. Fennell, A History of English: A Sociolinguistic Approach 18. Henry Rogers, Writing Systems: A Linguistic Approach 19. Benjamin W. Fortson IV, Indo-European Language and Culture: An Introduc- tion (Second Edition) 20. Liliane Haegeman, Thinking Syntactically: A Guide to Argumentation and Analysis 21. Mark Hale, Historical Linguistics: Theory and Method 22. Henning Reetz and Allard Jongman, Phonetics: Transcription, Production, Acoustics and Perception 23. Bruce Hayes, Introductory Phonology 24.
    [Show full text]
  • Joshua A. Fishman: a Scholar of Unfathomable Influence Nancy H
    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons GSE Publications Graduate School of Education 2017 Joshua A. Fishman: A Scholar of Unfathomable Influence Nancy H. Hornberger University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/gse_pubs Part of the Bilingual, Multilingual, and Multicultural Education Commons, Curriculum and Social Inquiry Commons, Educational Assessment, Evaluation, and Research Commons, Educational Psychology Commons, Language and Literacy Education Commons, Social and Philosophical Foundations of Education Commons, and the Sociology Commons Recommended Citation Hornberger, N. H. (2017). Joshua A. Fishman: A Scholar of Unfathomable Influence. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 243 17-28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/ijsl-2016-0043 This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/gse_pubs/475 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Joshua A. Fishman: A Scholar of Unfathomable Influence Abstract In personal tribute to Joshua A. Fishman, I tell a few stories about this remarkable scholar as I got to know him – a glimpse of the person behind the great ideas that have so powerfully shaped our thinking. My many vivid memories of things Fishman said or wrote in my personal encounters with him – often pithy one-liners – are testimony to the power of his mind and voice, his spirit and soul. From my first year of Ph.D. study when I took his course Sociology of Bilingual Education at the 1980 Linguistic Society of America Summer Institute at the University of New Mexico in Albuquerque, through our interactions over the succeeding decades at conferences and talks, in personal visits and interviews, and around publications he invited me to write or vice versa, Fishman’s influence on my own academic career was enduring and profound.
    [Show full text]
  • Heritage Languages in North America: Sociolinguistic Approaches
    journal of language contact 11 (2018) 201-207 brill.com/jlc Heritage Languages in North America: Sociolinguistic Approaches Joshua R. Brown University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire [email protected] Joshua Bousquette University of Georgia [email protected] Presentation This special issue of the Journal of Language Contact focuses on heritage lan- guages in the United States. Heritage languages offer new opportunities and pose new theoretical, empirical and methodological questions, in that tradi- tional lines of inquiry cannot be directly imported from the study of monolin- gual speakers alone; and even in comparison to other bilingual communities, the social contexts and patterns of language use over the lifespan do not map onto traditional L1/L2 models. The last two decades have witnessed an increased interest in formal and experimental research on heritage languages, building on both recent scholarship with wide-reaching implications (e.g., Benmamoun et al., 2013; Montrul, 2008), as well as foundational, twentieth-century works on immigration, migration, and language contact in the American context (e.g., Haugen, 1953; Weinreich et al., 1968). In addition to documenting language use in individual communities in language contact situations, the field of heritage language linguistics must engage with: • previous scholarship and approaches to the study of language use, which must be adapted or amended for the study of heritage languages; • the role of English in heritage language bilingualism in the u.s. as an enrich- ing or limiting factor; • the role of the pre-immigration sociolinguistic context and variety, both in the first (founder) generation of immigrants, and the possible continued exposure to the monolingual standard of the homeland; © Joshua R.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction: Sociolinguistics and Computer-Mediated Communication
    Journal of Sociolinguistics 10/4, 2006: 419–438 Introduction: Sociolinguistics and computer-mediated communication Jannis Androutsopoulos University of Hannover, Germany This theme issue of Journal of Sociolinguistics comprises a number of empirical studies focusing on a range of ways in which people use language in computer-mediated communication (CMC). This introduction contextualizes the contributions to this issue by providing an outline of linguistically focused CMC studies. A critique of the research on the ‘language of CMC’ is given, and aspects of CMC research from a sociolinguistic viewpoint are presented: the move from the ‘language of CMC’ to socially situated computer- mediated discourse; its grounding in the notion of online community; and the application of sociolinguistic methodologies to its study. It is argued that CMC provides a new empirical arena for various research traditions in sociolinguistics; conversely, sociolinguistics can contribute to the interdisciplinary theorizing of CMC by demonstrating the role of language useandlinguisticvariabilityintheconstructionofinterpersonalrelationships and social identities on the Internet. KEYWORDS: Computer-mediated communication, sociolinguistics ‘WEBSLANG’ AND ‘NETSPEAK’: CHALLENGING NEW LANGUAGE MYTHS In early 2005 the Bild, Germany’s most popular tabloid newspaper, launched on its website a series of quizzes dedicated to language use on the Internet. Bearing headings such as ‘Do you understand Internet slang?’ and ‘Do you speak Chattish?’ these quizzes consist of a mixture
    [Show full text]
  • Iswitch: Spanish-English Mixing in Computer-Mediated Communication
    journal of language contact 9 (2016) 23-48 brill.com/jlc iSwitch: Spanish-English Mixing in Computer-Mediated Communication Cecilia Montes-Alcalá Georgia Institute of Technology [email protected] Abstract Technology, and the Internet in particular, have rapidly transformed the means of com- munication in the 21st century, opening the door to a novel and fertile ground of research. What takes place when bi- or multilingual individuals sit at the keyboard has been the focus of several studies exploring computer-mediated communication (cmc). However, there appears to be a lack of research dealing specifically with Spanish- English language mixing online, a surprising fact given that Spanish is the third lan- guage of the Internet and its use has grown 800% in the last decade. The present work analyzes and compares data from three different sources of cmc (e-mail, blogs, and social networks including Facebook and Twitter) among Spanish-English bilinguals in an attempt to further explore the still relatively new field of “electronic code-switch- ing”. The study aims to outline the reasons behind bilingual individuals’ language mix- ing online, hypothesizing that it will accomplish many of the socio-pragmatic functions traditionally ascribed to oral code-switching along with, perhaps, other uses idiosyn- cratic of cmc. Furthermore, it intends to emphasize the cultural nature of code-switch- ing, a crucial component that has often been overlooked in the search for grammatical constraints. Keywords code-switching – language mixing – computer-mediated communication (cmc) – bilingualism – Spanish-English * I am sincerely grateful to María Victoria Yépez Lasso and Leyre Goitia Pastor for their active and voluntary collaboration in the data gathering for the e-mail corpus and also to my stu- dents Casey Aultman, Cody Fortune, and Jordan Kor for their assistance in collecting and coding the data in the social media corpus.
    [Show full text]
  • The Limits of Meaning: Social Indexicality, Variation, and the Cline of Interiority
    The limits of meaning: Social indexicality, variation, and the cline of interiority Penelope Eckert Language, Volume 95, Number 4, December 2019, pp. 751-776 (Article) Published by Linguistic Society of America For additional information about this article https://muse.jhu.edu/article/743105 Access provided at 17 Dec 2019 23:13 GMT from Linguistic Society of America THE LIMITS OF MEANING: SOCIAL INDEXICALITY, VARIATION, AND THE CLINE OF INTERIORITY Penelope Eckert Stanford University The structural focus of linguistics has led to a static and modular treatment of meaning. View - ing language as practice allows us to transcend the boundaries of subdisciplines that deal with meaning and to integrate the social indexicality of variation into this larger system. This article presents the expression of social meaning as a continuum of decreasing reference and increasing performativity, with sociolinguistic variation at the performative extreme. The meaning potential of sociolinguistic variables in turn is based in their form and their social source, constituting a cline of ‘interiority’ from variables that index public social facts about the speaker to more inter - nal, personal affective states.* Keywords : variation, social meaning, semantics, pragmatics, iconicity, indexicality, semiotics ‘I have resisted the term sociolinguistics for many years, since it implies that there can be a successful linguistic theory or practice which is not social.’ (Labov 1972:13) 1. Introduction . Language is a social practice, a dialectic between structure and agency: structure constrains action, and action in turn reproduces structure. As Giddens (1984:2) puts it, ‘In and through their activities agents reproduce the conditions that make these activities possible’.
    [Show full text]