DOCSLIB.ORG

Thinking About Language with Bourdieu: Pointers for Social Theory in the Language Sciences

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Thinking About Language with Bourdieu: Pointers for Social Theory in the Language Sciences Sociolinguistic ISSN: 1750-8649 (print) Studies ISSN: 1750-8657 (online) Article Thinking about language with Bourdieu: Pointers for social theory in the language sciences Linus Salö Abstract This paper presents Pierre Bourdieu’s sociological gaze, agenda and toolkit to scholars of language, so as to offer a social theoretical framework within which sociolinguistic questions can be fruitfully investigated. It outlines Bourdieu’s dual conception of social life and presents the key thinking tools – field and habitus – with which this dualism can be explored empirically. In addition, it locates work produced at the nexus of sociolinguistics and linguistic anthropology where Bourdieusian insights have been productively employed. It also discusses Bourdieu’s reputation as a macro theorist, and argues that this image must be supplemented with an understanding of his idea that social reality also has a mode of existence in people’s bodies, habitus, and practices. The paper argues that Bourdieu’s gaze and thinking tools import with them a solid social theoretical base of the comprehension of human practice, including linguistic practice, which therefore offers some purchase to account for the relationship between the market side of language and its embodied manifestations. KEYWORDS: SOCIAL THEORY, PIERRE BOURDIEU, RELATIONAL THINKING, FIELD, HABITUS, PRACTICE Affiliation KTH Royal Institute of Technology and Stockholm University, Sweden email: [email protected] SOLS VOL 12.3-4 2018 523–543 https://doi.org/10.1558/sols.32916 © 2019, EQUINOX PUBLISHING 524 SOCIOLINGUISTIC STUDIES 1 Introduction This paper outlines the impetus that the sociology of Pierre Bourdieu can give to sociolinguists and scholars of language alike. It does so with the modest aspiration that the gaze and thinking tools developed throughout Bourdieu’s research œuvre might spawn novel and productive ways of engaging with social theory. Since Bourdieu’s work has been known to language scholars for quite some time, the aim here is not so much to introduce Bourdieu but to deepen the sociolinguistic appraisal of his intellectual agenda. Thus, rather than focusing on widely employed pivotal concepts such as habitus, capital, field, and market per se, I shall draw attention to the epistemological foundations of such concepts, and the ‘metaprinciples for research’ (Swartz, 2013) they bring into the research prac- tice. In this spirit, continuing on the path set out by Hanks (2005), Grenfell (2011), Blommaert (2015), and others, I hold that a focus on Bourdieu’s thinking offers interesting inroads for theoretically solid investigations of language in social life. The backdrop of this endeavor is the circumstance – real or perceived – that several scholarly approaches to the study of language in society are in dire social theoretical straits. In the last few decades, a number of well-positioned scholars have argued that, counterintuitively, the socially interested language sciences are often weakly anchored in social theory. In the early 1990s, Cameron (1990:81, emphasis in original) critiqued (variationist) sociolinguistics for depending on ‘naive and simplistic social theory’ and for not being able to ‘relate the social to the linguistic’. In a similar vein, Williams (1992) produced a sociological critique of sociolinguistics (and the sociology of language), arguing in harsh tones that its social theoretical underpinnings had long been either absent or completely outdated. These are quite persistent issues. Reviewing the last few decades’ sociolinguistic work published in the flagship forum Journal of Sociolinguistics, longstanding editor Allan Bell stated that ‘Most sociolinguists are linguists by background rather than sociologists, thus we have not been strong on meshing our work with social theory’ (2016:395–396; see also Blommaert, 2018 for a kindred critique). Even though there are certainly notable exceptions to this description (e.g., Heller, 2011; Park and Wee, 2012), there are reasons to be concerned about this general state of affairs. Firstly, it is a commonplace that struggles unfolding over language are rarely about language alone (e.g., Woolard, 1998) or, as Bourdieu has put it, ‘Linguistic struggles may not have obvious linguistic bases’ (Bourdieu, 1993:80). If this is true – as many sociolinguists nowadays appear to believe it is – linguistic theory must be extended with credible ways of understanding human action and interpreting social phenomena to better grasp the interrelationship THINKING ABOUT LANGUAGE WITH BOURDIEU 525 between language and society. Secondly, social theory is, arguably, particularly vital in qualitative research trajectories, because theory constitutes a feature which renders scientific practice distinct from other knowledge-producing practices. Hence, as Gary Alan Fine has said, ‘Ethnographers differ from journalists mostly because of a six-letter word: theory’ (cited in Puddephatt, Shaffir, and Klenknecht, 2009:1). In this paper, I propose that the work of Bourdieu contains an invitation to language scholars to engage in social theory in productive ways – ways which inform our research and prod us into ‘thinking theoretically while we work ethnographically’ (Blommaert, 2005:228; see also Brubaker, 1993; Puddephatt, Shaffir, and Klenknecht, 2009). This is not a matter of adopting a theory. In general, I follow Broady (1991) in holding that Bourdieu does not offer a grand theory of society, but rather an envelope of epistemological outlooks and proce- dures for empirical scrutiny in the social sciences, including the social language sciences. Using these thinking tools effectively, I hold, requires an understanding of Bourdieu’s notion of dualism as a key epistemological preliminary from which his key concepts field and habitus derive. Like many other concepts in Bourdieu’s toolkit – interest, strategy, doxa, symbolic power, to name a few – these are ‘open concepts’ that are ill-suited to formalistic definitions (e.g., Broady, 1991; Wacquant, 1989b:5). I begin by presenting Bourdieu’s project and its relevance to studies of language in society. In exemplifying the applicability of Bourdieu’s thinking, I will make ample references to sociolinguistic work conducted at the Centre for Research on Bilingualism, Stockholm University, where the adoption of Bourdieusian thought increasingly stands out as a leitmotif. Next, I highlight some of the ways in which Bourdieu’s work may productively intersect with instances of the toolkit yielded out of the North American tradition of linguistic anthropology and recent advances in sociolinguistics. This is where I see my work as being theoretically positioned and, therefore, I exemplify throughout with references to my own work how such insights may be put to work in relation to a number of classic objects of sociolinguistic inquiry, such as competence and language choice. 2 Bourdieu: Epistemological preliminaries and thinking-tools for research Broadly, Bourdieu’s œuvre deals with practice and the workings of social worlds, including the study of culture, knowledge, social space, and symbolic power (Swartz, 1997 provides an overview). Broady (1983:21) foregrounds a two-sided strand with longstanding anchorage in Bourdieu’s work: on the one hand, the 526 SOCIOLINGUISTIC STUDIES study of social space and the systems of positions it comprises; on the other, the study of people’s dispositions – habitus – that is, the capital that agents come to embody throughout their life trajectories, and which therefore orients their present and forthcoming actions. One can add to this Bourdieu’s profound interest in academic knowledge itself – epistemic reflexivity (see Salö, 2018) – as one of the most distinctive features of his scientific project (Broady, 1991). By and large, then, Bourdieu’s framework offers an inroad into understanding why agents are what they are and do what they do. As Blommaert (2005) points out, many of Bourdieu’s ideas have developed through ethnographic work. Habitus, for example, emerged out of early ethno- logy: fieldwork in Algeria and France in the ’60s and onwards. This fact notwithstanding, Bourdieu is often – and, in part, rightly so – seen as a macro theorist. For many, his work is associated with a data-oriented quantitative approach, presented in the form of statistical visualizations of the topographies of social space, broad theorizing on symbolic power, markets, and so on. However, as I shall signpost here, this is only one side of Bourdieu and his contribution to research, and in line with the stance put forth by Lizardo (2008), analysts can appropriate the tools and perspectives that seem useful and omit the rest. Boldly, it may be argued that this position resonates well with Bourdieu’s own eclectic relationship to the authorship of his intellectual predecessors. As far as I’m concerned, I have very pragmatic relationships with authors: I turn to them as I would to fellows and craft-masters, in the sense those words had in the mediaeval guild – people you can ask to give you a hand in difficult situations. (Bourdieu, 1990:28) In other words, it is certainly possible to utilize Bourdieu in a strict, programmatic sense, for example, concerning the order in which the analytical moments should be enacted (e.g., Wacquant, 1989a). However, that is not the advantage that will be the focus of this paper, which is more attuned to making the case for the value brought forth by Bourdieu-the-epistemologist. In what follows, I begin by introducing the idea of relational thinking. 3 Relational
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]
  • The Commodification of Russian Around the World
    Edinburgh Research Explorer The commodification of Russian around the world Citation for published version: Ryazanova-Clarke, L & Muth, S 2017, 'The commodification of Russian around the world', International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, vol. 20, no. 4, 1, pp. 381-384. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2015.1115000 Digital Object Identifier (DOI): 10.1080/13670050.2015.1115000 Link: Link to publication record in Edinburgh Research Explorer Document Version: Peer reviewed version Published In: International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism General rights Copyright for the publications made accessible via the Edinburgh Research Explorer is retained by the author(s) and / or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing these publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. Take down policy The University of Edinburgh has made every reasonable effort to ensure that Edinburgh Research Explorer content complies with UK legislation. If you believe that the public display of this file breaches copyright please contact [email protected] providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Download date: 27. Sep. 2021 Introduction: The commodification of Russian around the world Sebastian Muth and Lara Ryazanova-Clarke This special issue is dedicated to the commodification of Russian – the language whose global sociolinguistic behavior had been increasingly attracting scholarly attention (Isurin 2011; Laitin 1998; Pavlenko 2008; Pavlenko et al. forthcoming; Ryazanova-Clarke 2014). When the disintegration of the Soviet Union became imminent in the early 1990s, a collection of papers on this subject would have been highly unusual.
    [Show full text]
  • Social Dimensions of Language Change
    Social dimensions of language change Lev Michael 1 Introduction Language change results from the differential propagation of linguistic vari- ants distributed among the linguistic repertoires of communicatively inter- acting individuals in a given community. From this it follows that language change is socially-mediated in two important ways. First, since language change is a social-epidemiological process that takes place by propagating some aspect of communicative practice across a socially-structured network, the organization of the social group in question can affect how a variant propagates. It is known, for example, that densely connected social net- works tend to be resistant to innovations, where as more sparsely connected ones are more open to them. Second, social and cultural factors, such as lan- guage ideologies, can encourage the propagation of particular variants at the expense of others in particular contexts, likewise contributing to language change. The purpose of this chapter is to survey our current understanding of the social factors that affect the emergence and propagation of linguistic variants, and thus language change, by bringing together insights from vari- ationist sociolinguistics, sociohistorical linguistics, linguistic anthropology, social psychology, and evolutionary approaches to language change. It is im- portant to note that there are, as discussed in Chapter 1, important factors beyond the social ones discussed in this chapter that affect variant propaga- 1 tion and language change, including factors related to linguistic production and perception, and cognitive factors attributable to the human language faculty (see Chapter 1). 1.1 Theorizing variation and language change As Weinreich, Labov, and Herzog (1968) originally observed, theories of lan- guage that assume linguistic variation to be noise or meaningless divergence from some ideal synchronically homogeneous linguistic state { to be elim- inated by `averaging' or `abstraction' { encounter profound difficulties in accounting for language change.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Causes of Language Frames, Biases, and Cultural Transmission
    Natural causes of language Frames, biases, and cultural transmission N. J. Enfield language Conceptual Foundations of science press Language Science 1 Conceptual Foundations of Language Science Series editors Mark Dingemanse, Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics N. J. Enfield, University of Sydney Editorial board Balthasar Bickel, University of Zürich, Claire Bowern, Yale University, Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen, University of Helsinki, William Croft, University of New Mexico, Rose-Marie Déchaine, University of British Columbia, William A. Foley, University of Sydney , William F. Hanks, University of California at Berkeley, Paul Kockelman, Yale University, Keren Rice, University of Toronto, Sharon Rose, University of California at San Diego, Frederick J. Newmeyer, University of Washington, Wendy Sandler, University of Haifa, Dan Sperber Central European University No scientific work proceeds without conceptual foundations. In language science, our concepts about language determine our assumptions, direct our attention, and guide our hypotheses and our reasoning. Only with clarity about conceptual foundations can we pose coherent research questions, design critical experiments, and collect crucial data. This series publishes short and accessible books that explore well-defined topics in the conceptual foundations of language science. The series provides a venue for conceptual arguments and explorations that do not require the traditional book- length treatment, yet that demand more space than a typical journal article allows. In this series: 1. N. J. Enfield. Natural causes of language. Natural causes of language Frames, biases, and cultural transmission N. J. Enfield language science press N. J. Enfield. 2014. Natural causes of language: Frames, biases, and cultural transmission (Conceptual Foundations of Language Science 1). Berlin: Language Science Press.
    [Show full text]
  • Language Variation and Ethnicity in a Multicultural East London Secondary School
    Language Variation and Ethnicity in a Multicultural East London Secondary School Shivonne Marie Gates Queen Mary, University of London April 2019 Abstract Multicultural London English (MLE) has been described as a new multiethnolect borne out of indirect language contact among ethnically-diverse adolescent friendship groups (Cheshire et al. 2011). Evidence of ethnic stratification was also found: for example, “non-Anglo” boys were more likely to use innovative MLE diphthong variants than other (male and female) participants. However, the data analysed by Cheshire and colleagues has limited ethnographic information and as such the role that ethnicity plays in language change and variation in London remains unclear. This is not dissimilar to other work on multiethnolects, which presents an orientation to a multiethnic identity as more salient than different ethnic identities (e.g. Freywald et al. 2011). This thesis therefore examines language variation in a different MLE-speaking adolescent community to shed light on the dynamics of ethnicity in a multicultural context. Data were gathered through a 12-month ethnography of a Year Ten (14-15 years old) cohort at Riverton, a multi-ethnic secondary school in Newham, East London, and include field notes and interviews with 27 students (19 girls, 8 boys). A full multivariate analysis of the face and price vowels alongside a quantitative description of individual linguistic repertoires sheds light on MLE’s status as the new London vernacular. Building on the findings of Cheshire et al. (2011), the present study suggests that language variation by ethnicity can have social meaning in multi-ethnic communities. There are apparent ethnolinguistic repertoires: ethnic minority boys use more advanced vowel realisations alongside high rates of DH-stopping, and the more innovative was/were levelling system.
    [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]
  • Sociolinguistic Influence in the Use of English As a Second Language (ESL) Classroom: Seeing from OGO’S Perspective
    ELSYA: Journal of English Language Studies Vol. 1, No. 1, February 2019 , pp. 28-32 Available online at: http://ojs.journal.unilak.ac.id/index.php/elsya Sociolinguistic Influence in the Use of English as a Second Language (ESL) Classroom: Seeing from OGO’s Perspective Lana Hasanah 1, Siska Pradina 2, Almira Hadita 3, and Wella Cisilya Putri 4 1,2,3 State High School 3, Pekanbaru, Indonesia 4 State High School 7, Pekanbaru, Indonesia [email protected] ARTICLE HISTORY ABSTRACT Received : 3 May 2019 This paper aims to provide a brief overview and review of the research conducted by Revised : 26 May 2019 Ofodu Graceful Onovughe (OGO) under the title Sociolinguistic Input and English as Accepted : 27 May 2019 Second Language Classrooms published by the Canadian Center for Science and Education. This article also intended to provide a brief review of the sociolinguistic KEYWORDS influences of the use of the second most significant language in the class. Using qualitative descriptive analysis, this study managed to see that OGO‘s research used survey within a Sociolinguistics population of all middle school students in the Akure Ondo Regional Government, Nigeria Perspective (N= 240 students). Of the five existing hypotheses, the findings revealed that parents‘ Parents’ Occupation occupation is a significant sociolinguistic influence on the use of English among middle Article Review school students, followed by gender, age, religion, and classes. This current paper English as a Second Language (ESL) evaluated how OGO‘s research is represented in his article. Results reveal the strengeths, weaknesses, and the flaws of the article. 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Confessional Reflexivity As Introspection and Avowal
    Establishing the ‘Truth’ of the Matter: Confessional Reflexivity as Introspection and Avowal JOSEPH WEBSTER University of Edinburgh The conceptualisation of reflexivity commonly found in social anthropology deploys the term as if it were both a ‘virtuous’ mechanism of self‐reflection and an ethical technique of truth telling, with reflexivity frequently deployed as an moral practice of introspection and avowal. Further, because reflexivity is used as a methodology for constructing the authority of ethnographic accounts, reflexivity in anthropology has come to closely resemble Foucault’s descriptions of confession. By discussing Lynch’s (2000) critical analysis of reflexivity as an ‘academic virtue’, I consider his argument through the lens of my own concept of ‘confessional reflexivity’. While supporting Lynch’s diagnosis of the ‘problem of reflexivity’, I attempt to critique his ethnomethodological cure as essentialist, I conclude that a way forward might be found by blending Foucault’s (1976, 1993) theory of confession with Bourdieu’s (1992) theory of ‘epistemic reflexivity’. The ubiquity of reflexivity and its many forms For as long as thirty years, reflexivity has occupied a ‘place of honour’ at the table of most social science researchers and research institutions. Reflexivity has become enshrined as a foundational, or, perhaps better, essential, concept which is relied upon as a kind of talisman whose power can be invoked to shore up the ‘truthiness’ of the claims those researchers and their institutions are in the business of making. No discipline, it seems, is more guilty of this ‘evoking’ than social anthropology (Lucy 2000, Sangren 2007, Salzaman 2002). Yet, despite the ubiquity of its deployment in anthropology, the term ‘reflexivity’ remains poorly defined.
    [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]
  • The Society of Linguistic Anthropology
    Anthropology News February 2000 SECTION NEWS Emory U, Georgia Institute of Technology and in anthropology is marginal and he considers his anthropological approaches. Likewise, I have International Society for the Study of Narrative main interests as sociolinguistics. learned greatly from their dedication to studies of Literature will sponsor an International Confer- At the U of Auckland, until very recently, lin- NZ English, Maori and languages of the Pacific. ence on Narrative Apr 6-9,2000. See the Meeting guists belonged to two departments: English and Calendar for further details. Anthropology. Now, all linguists belong to a Us@l Addresses. Susan Gal, SLA Presidenl;.Dept Lmguistics Dept. I still have limited knowledge of of Anth, U of Chicago, 1126 E 59th St, Chicago IL Sociolinguistics and Anthropology in these liiguists, but my understanding is that 60637-1539; [email protected]. New Zealand those who were under the English department Alessandm Wanti, Journal of Linguistic An- are mostly formal (Chomskian) people, whereas thropology Edim; Dept of Anth, UCLA,CA 90095- By Yukako Sunaoshi (V of Auckland, New Zealand) those who were under the Anthropology depart- 1553; [email protected]. As an American-trained sociolinguist, I wasn’t ment are mostly descriptive people. It should be Laura Milk, SLA Progrmn Orgrmizer;.Dept of Soc sure what to expect when I first arrived in New noted, however, that many of these linguists are and Anthm, Lopla U, 6525 North Sheridan Road, Zealand. What I found was people doing very interested in the sociocultural aspects of language Chicago, IL 60626; tel 773/508-3469, fax 508- interesting work in sociolinguistics, but very little use and that the division between formal and 7099, lmil&[email protected].
    [Show full text]
  • Linguistic Anthropology in 2013: Super-New-Big
    AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST Linguistic Anthropology Linguistic Anthropology in 2013: Super-New-Big Angela Reyes ABSTRACT In this essay, I discuss how linguistic anthropological scholarship in 2013 has been increasingly con- fronted by the concepts of “superdiversity,” “new media,” and “big data.” As the “super-new-big” purports to identify a contemporary moment in which we are witnessing unprecedented change, I interrogate the degree to which these concepts rely on assumptions about “reality” as natural state versus ideological production. I consider how the super-new-big invites us to scrutinize various reconceptualizations of diversity (is it super?), media (is it new?), and data (is it big?), leaving us to inevitably contemplate each concept’s implicitly invoked opposite: “regular diversity,” “old media,” and “small data.” In the section on “diversity,” I explore linguistic anthropological scholarship that examines how notions of difference continue to be entangled in projects of the nation-state, the market economy, and social inequality. In the sections on “media” and “data,” I consider how questions about what constitutes lin- guistic anthropological data and methodology are being raised and addressed by research that analyzes new and old technologies, ethnographic material, semiotic forms, scale, and ontology. I conclude by questioning the extent to which it is the super-new-big itself or the contemplation about the super-new-big that produces perceived change in the world. [linguistic anthropology, superdiversity, new media, big data,
    [Show full text]
  • Curriculum Vitae of Andrew Lynch -2
    Andrew Lynch Department of Modern Languages & Literatures University of Miami PO Box 248093 Coral Gables, FL 33124 e-mail [email protected] online http://works.bepress.com/andrewlynch Education Ph.D., 1999 Hispanic & Lusophone Literatures, Cultures & Linguistics University of Minnesota M.A., 1995 Hispanic & Lusophone Literatures, Cultures & Linguistics University of Minnesota B.A., 1993 Spanish Language (major), German Language (minor), Translation (cert.) Summa cum laude University of North Carolina at Charlotte Study Abroad: Universidad de Cantabria, Spain Faculty positions Fall 2010- Associate Professor of Spanish and Latin American Studies, Present Graduate Faculty University of Miami Fall 2005- Assistant Professor of Spanish, Graduate Faculty Spring 2010 University of Miami Fall 2001- Assistant Professor of Spanish and Linguistics, Graduate Faculty Spring 2005 University of Florida Fall 1999- Visiting Assistant Professor of Spanish Spring 2001 University of Miami Research and teaching specializations Spanish in the United States; sociolinguistics/ language in society; language contact; linguistic dimensions of postmodernity; heritage language studies Editorial experience Editor in Chief, Heritage Language Journal, published by National Heritage Language Resource Center, University of California at Los Angeles. http://www.heritagelanguages.org/about.aspx?about Editorial Board, Lengua y Migración/Language and Migration Editorial Board, Diálogo de la Lengua Curriculum vitae of Andrew Lynch -2- Publications * refereed Books El español en contacto con otras lenguas (with Carol A. Klee). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 2009. Print. http://press.georgetown.edu/book/languages/el-español-en-contacto-con-otras- lenguas Reviewed by: Flores-Ferrán, Nydia. Spanish in Context 9 (2012): 356-359. Jansen, Silke. Revista Internacional de Lingüística Iberoamericana 16 (2010): 246-250.
    [Show full text]