DOCUMENT IIIESUME AL 001 422 ED 022 156 By- Shuy. Roger W.; And Others FIELD TECHNIQUES IN AN URBANLANGUAGE STUDY. URBAN LANGUAGESERIES. Center for Applied Linguistics, Wadington,D.C. Pub Date 69 Note-139p. Massachusetts Ave., NM., Washington. Available from-Publications Section, Centerfor Applied Linguistics, 1717 DC. 20036 (S3D0). EDRS Price W-$0.75 HC Not Availablefrom EDRS. INTERVIEWS.*FIE1.11STLOIES, LANGUAGE CLASSIFICATION. De_wiptors -*DIALECT STLOIES. FIELD *RESEARCH AWARD DIALECTS. RESEARCHCRITERIA. *RESEARCH DESIGN,RESEARCICRS. *URBAN LANGUAGE METHODOLOGY. RESEARCH SKILLS.SOCIOLINGUISTICS, URBAN CLLTURE, Identifiers-Detroit, *Detroit DialectStudy This volume is a report of themethodology employed by theDetroit Dialect Study staff in their survey ofDetroit speech. 1966-67. As astudy of one approach to sociolinguistic fieldwork, this report isdescriptive rather thantheoretical In order to provide a practical basis forlarge-scale urban languagestudy: The authors discuss of fieldwork and give suchdetailed -descriptions oftheir work as be useful in similar projects.The general objectives ofthe study were (a) to descrbe the specializedlinguistic features of the varioussub-cultures of Detroit, (b) to determine the mostefficient methods of gatheringdata on urban language patterns and of storing,retrieving, and analyzingsuch data, and (c) to provide accurate and usefuldata for educational programs.The major chapters in this volume are concernedwith general aims. samplingprocedures and research orientation, the questionnaire.the actual fieldwork, design fieldwork design, fieldworker 012 and fieldwork evaluation. Forother volumes in the UrbanLanguage Series see ED 927 and ED 013 455. (JD) FIELD TECHNIQUES IN AN URBAN LANGUAGESTUDY ROGER W. SHUY WALTER A. WOLFRAM WILLIAM K.. RILEY U.S. DEPARTIMIT OF HEALTH,EDUCATION a WELFARE oma OF EDUCATION IRON THE . TINS DOCUMENT NAS KENIMMO EXACTLY AS ECEIVED 01 OPINIONS PERSON OR ORGANIZATION0116111AINI6 IT. POINTS Of VIEW REPOSER! OFFICIAL OFFICE OfEDUCATION 1 STATED DO NOT NECESSAMLY -POSITION 01 POLICY. AL401422 4,q0Milli ED 0 2 21 56 ,,, ,,,,,,,,,00,11.40051.,.000.40,40nogetoierrilOr URBAN LANGUAGESERIES ROGER W. SHUY, GENERALEDITOR THE SOCIAL STRATIFICATIONOF ENGLISH IN NEW YORK CITY WILLIAM LABOV CONVERSATIONS IN A NEGROAMERICAN DIALECT TRANSCRIBED & EDITED BY BENGT LOMAN FIELD TECHNIQUES IN ANURBAN LANGUAGE STUDY ROGER W. SHUY WALTER A. WOLFRAM WILLIAM K. RILEY FIELD TECHNIQUES IN AN URBAN LANGUAGESTUDY ROGER W. SHUY WALTER A. WOLFRAM WILLIAM K. RILEY CENTER FOR APPLIED LINGUISTICS : 1968 AL 001422 "PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THISCOPYRIGHTED BEEN G NTED MA IAL BY MICROFICH ONL H BY TO ERIC AND RGANI IONS OPERATI UNDER AGREEMENTS WITH THE U. S. OFFICEOF EDUCATION. FURTHER REPRODUCTION OUTSIDETHE ERIC SYSTEM REQUIRES PERMISSION OF THECOPYR IGHT OWNER." CopyrightED 1968 by the Center for AppliedLinguistics 1717 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W.,Washington, D.C. 20036 Library of Congress Catalog Card Number:68-56142 Printed in the United States ofAmerica. Price: $3.00 Designed by Frank A. Rice INTRODUCTION TO THE SERIES The Urban Language Series isintended to make available the results of recent sociolinguisticresearch concerned with the position and role of language in alarge metropolitan area. The series includes descriptionsof certain aspects of urban language, particularly English, aswell as theoretical consid- erations relevant to suchdescriptions. The series also in- cludes studies dealing withfieldwork techniques, matters of pedagogy and relationships of urbanlanguage study to other disciplines. Where appropriate and feasible,accompanying tape recordings will bemade available. Specifically excluded from consideration are aspects ofEnglish as a second language or second languagelearning in general. It is hoped that the Urban LanguageSeries will prove use- ful to several different kinds ofreaders. For the linguist, the series will provide data forthe study of language perfor- mance and for the developmentof linguistic theory. Histor- ically, linguists have formulated theoryfrom individual rather than group performance. They have had to generalize about what constitutes "standard" or"non-standard" from intu- itive judgments or from verylimited data. This series is designed to make available largeportions of language data as well as analyses in order to broadenthe knowledge from which linguistic generalizations may come. For the sociologist the series willprovide access to the nature of social stratificationby means of language. It vi INTRODUCTION TO THE SERIES is the contention of somescholars that a person's useof language is one of the mostimportant cues to his social status, age, race or sex. For the educator, theseries will offer amongother things a description of the verythings which are most crucial to the classroomthelinguistic correlates which separate the acceptedfrom the unaccepted. Although the value of focussedattention on the special problems of urban language hasbeen recognized for some time, To relatively few substantialstudies have been published. pioneering venture a certaindegree, this series represents a on the part ofthe Center for AppliedLinguistics. Roger W. Shuy Director, SociolinguisticsProgram Center for AppliedLinguistics FIELD TECHNIQUES IN ANURBAN LANGUAGE STUDY PREFACE THIS VOLUME is essentially a report of themethodology employed in the survey of Detroit speech carried outin 1966-67 by the staff of the Detroit Dialect Study. The research was done through Michigan StateUniversity under contract with the Cooperative ResearchBranch of the U.S. Office of Education. As a methodological study, this work is generally descriptive rather thantheoretical in order to provide a practical base for large-scale urbanlanguage study. Principles of fieldwork have been accentuatedbut seemingly trivial details are also included since the authorsfeel that such detaEs are essential to successfulfieldwork. The following description is not necessarily tobe considered as a model for all future fieldwork inurban areas. It is, rather, the embodiment of on :.approach to the problems posed by large-scale research projects in sociolinguidtics. The Detroit study realized at least some of thedimensions of the problems in research of this sort and proposed cer- tain answers to these problems. It is hoped that future research projects will build on this work. In September 1967, the final report ofthe Detroit Dialect Study was submitted to the U.S. Office of Education, at which ttme the data (tape recordings,field transcriptions and demographic materials) were transferred to the Center for Applied Linguistics in Washington, D.C., wherethey are now housed. Further analyses of these data are currently PREFACE being carried out by the staff of the Sociolinguistics Program of the Center for Applied Linguistics, and various publications are forthcoming in the Urban Language Series. The authors are indebted to many people for their assistance during the planning, execution and writing of this study. To our informants, anonymous but greatly appreciated, we owe special thanks. We are also indebted to the fieli- workers, who contributed particularly during the fieldwork training sessions; Dana Downing, who developed the social status scale; and Edward N. Adams, who was responsible for the computer programming. Invaluableeditorial assistance have been generously provided by Frank A. Rice and Allene Guss of the Center for Applied Linguistics. Washington, D.C. July 1968 CONTENTS Introduction to the Series Preface ix A 1 1: General Aims 1 2: Sampling Procedures 4 3: Fieldwork Design 20 4: Fieldworker Orientation 29 5: The Questionnaire 39 6: Fieldwork 58 7: Fieldwork Evaluation 115 1: GENERAL AIMS educators, and others have Sociologists, psychologists, suggested a number ofindices of socialstratification, based on such factors as aperson's occupation, education, attitudes, abilities, andthe like. But to the linguist significant as an index none of theseindices seems as only does based on a person's useof language, for not language underly the verystructure ofcommunication, but of consciousness. it also frequentlylies beneath the surface under a In March 1966, theDetroit Dialect Study, contract with theU.S. Office of Educationadministered investigation by Michigan StateUniversity, embarked upon an of social aimed at discoveringthe linguistic correlates stratification in Detroitspeech. The broad objectives of the Study were: features (1) To describe thespecialized linguistic of the various Englishspeaking sub-cultures of Social Detroit. At the 1964 Conference on Dialects and LanguageLearning in Bloomington, Indiana, linguists,sociologists and educators agreed that a soundprocedure for any kindof the English languageengineering must begin with actual speech of thevarious classes, age groups, rac,-, occupation groupsand in-migrants. Once the phonology, grammar,and lexicon have been 2 GENERAL AIMS adequately described, pedagogical applications can be made with efficiency and accuracy. (2) To determine the most efficient methods of language data gathering in an urban area. It is clear that each urban area is a complex of various in-migrations and social layerings. The speech situation in Detroit, for example, is quite different from that of other metropolitan areas. This is not to say, however, that similar techniques of linguistic data gathering cannot be used in various urban areas. A second objective in this investigation was to deter- mine which methods of linguistic fieldwork are most productive with