
- •Sociolinguistics Class: Lectures, Questions, Handouts and Articles Written and compiled by Todd m. Ferry Starobilsk Department of Lugansk National Pedagogical University
- •Introduction to the topic:
- •Sociolinguistics: syllabus
- •Introduction:
- •Use at least three sources.
- •Footnote all citations.
- •Language and culture
- •Doctrine of linguistic relavtivity
- •Chomsky
- •Sapir_whorf hypothesis
- •The point
- •In summation
- •Sociolinguistics—again
- •Language definition part II.
- •What is a variety? slide#2
- •Slide #3
- •Slide #4 and #5
- •Slide #6
- •Slide #7
- •**Please look at your hand out
- •Regional dialects
- •Isoglosses
- •Variables
- •Bet and better, sometimes pronounced without the “t” like be-h and be-hher
- •He don’t mean no harm to nobody
- •Idiolect: redirect to slide # 5
- •Problems with accent
- •Lecture 3: When Languages Collide
- •Review: code/language
- •Slide 1: code switching
- •Review: speech community
- •Code-mixing
- •Slide 4: surzhyk
- •Borrowing
- •Languages collide
- •Pidgins
- •Slide 5: pidgin
- •Slide 5.5 and slide 6
- •Slide 10: Hawaiian Pidgin-Creole
- •Hawiian Pidgin-Creole
- •Slide 11: hawaiian pidgin-creole history History
- •Slide 13: hawiian pidgin-creole grammar/pro. Pronunciation
- •Grammatical Features
- •Slide: 14 gullah language
- •African origins
- •Lorenzo Turner's research
- •Slide 15: gullah verbal system Gullah verbs
- •Gullah language today
- •Slide 18: language shift language shift
- •Language planning and policy
- •Implicit language policy
- •Language planning in ukraine
- •Ukrainian language (1917-1932) Ukrainianization and tolerance
- •Russian language (1932-1953)
- •Russian language 1970’s-1980’s
- •Independence to the present
- •Slide 23: census data
- •Social interaction
- •Speech acts
- •Or for example ordering food at a restaurant
- •Now, taking it a step farther, what if your speech act fails? What if you do not say, “It is getting cold in here,” so that your friend understands your meaning?
- •Speech as skilled work
- •Norms governing speech
- •1. Norms governing what can be talked about: taboos and euphemism.
- •2. Norms governing non-verbal communication: body language
- •What does eye contact mean?
- •Conversational structure
- •Turn-taking
- •4. Norms governing the number of people who talk at once:
- •5. Norms governing the number of interruptions
- •We can say it more clearly as: I respect your right to…
- •Solidarity and power
- •Greetings and farewells
- •Labov, linguistic variable, middle class
- •English poll
- •Pronunciation and class dropping the g
- •Norwich, england
- •Los angeles
- •Dropping the h
- •Dropping the r or r-lessness—intrusive r—rhoticity
- •Labov’s new york department store
- •British english r-Lessness
- •Other r-variations
- •Various social dialects
- •In britain cockney—london, england (class based social dialect)
- •Characteristics
- •Aspect marking
- •New York English and Southern American English
- •You and me and discrimination
- •Aave in Education
- •Gender discrimination
- •History
- •Affirmative positions
- •Neutral positions
- •Negative positions
- •Articles
- •Sociolinguistics
- •Walt Wolfram
- •Language as Social Behavior
- •Suggested Readings
- •Which comes first, language or thought? Babies think first
- •Americans are Ruining English
- •American English is ‘very corrupting’
- •One way Americans are ruining English is by changing it
- •A language - or anything else that does not change - is dead
- •Both American and British have changed and go on changing
- •Sociolinguistics Basics
- •What is dialect?
- •Vocabulary sometimes varies by region
- •People adjust the way they talk to their social situation
- •State of American
- •Is English falling apart?
- •Sapir–Whorf hypothesis From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- •[Edit] History
- •[Edit] Experimental support
- •[Edit] Criticism
- •[Edit] Linguistic determinism
- •[Edit] Fictional presence
- •[Edit] Quotations
- •[Edit] People
- •[Edit] Further reading
- •[Edit] External links Speech act From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- •[Edit] Examples
- •[Edit] History
- •[Edit] Indirect speech acts
- •[Edit] Illocutionary acts
- •[Edit] John Searle's theory of "indirect speech acts"
- •[Edit] In language development
- •[Edit] In computer science
- •Performative utterance From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- •[Edit] Austin's definition
- •[Edit] Distinguishing performatives from other utterances
- •[Edit] Are performatives truth-evaluable?
- •[Edit] Sedgwick's account of performatives
- •[Edit] Naming
- •[Edit] Descriptives and promises
- •[Edit] Examples
- •[Edit] Performative writing
- •[Edit] Sources
- •Intas Project: Language policy in Ukraine
- •Resolution On The Oakland "Ebonics" Issue Unanimously Adopted at the Annual Meeting of the Linguistic Society of America Chicago, Illinois January 3, l997
- •Selected references (books only)
- •From “Ukrainian language” in Wikipedia Ukrainianization and tolerance
- •[Edit] Persecution and russification
- •[Edit] The Khrushchev thaw
- •[Edit] The Shelest period
- •[Edit] The Shcherbytsky period
- •[Edit] Gorbachev and perestroika
- •[Edit] Independence in the modern era
- •Dialects of Ukrainian
- •[Edit] Ukrainophone population
- •Questions from articles for seminars
- •Sociolinguistics Discussion Questions for Seminar Two:
- •Sociolinguistics Discussion Questions for Seminar Three:
- •Handouts Lecture 1. Definitions, Chomsky and Sapir-Whorf
- •Social interaction
- •The norms governing speech
- •We can say it more clearly as: I respect your right to…
- •Aave aspectual system
- •Additional materials Dialect Map of American English
- •Southeastern dialects:
Norwich, england
A similar pattern in g-dropping as was found in Labov’s New York study, was found in the Norwich, England study:
|
Casual speech |
Careful speech |
Reading |
Middle-middle class |
28% |
3% |
10% |
Lower middle class |
42% |
15% |
10% |
Upper working class |
87% |
74% |
15% |
Middle working class |
95% |
88% |
44% |
Lower working class |
100% |
98% |
66% |

SLIDE: TRUDGILL CHART (7)
One of the variables Trudgill studied was the final consonant in words like walking and running.
Trudgill's study discovered the following:
1. In all social classes, the more careful the speech, the more likely people were to say walking rather than walkin'.
2. The proportion of walkin' type forms was higher in lower social classes.
3. The nonstandard -in' forms occurred much more often in men's speech than in women's, and this was true for all social classes.
4. When women were questioned about what they thought they were saying, they tended to say they used the standard -ing forms more often than they really did.
5. When men were questioned about what they thought they were saying, they tended to say they used the nonstandard -in' forms more often than they really did.
Overall g-dropping rates seem to be somewhat higher in Norwich compared to New York. However, the general pattern of dependence on social status and formality is maintained.
Similar studies have been done in many places, for many linguistic variables other than g-dropping, and the pattern is always the same: there is a sort of systematic analogy between social class and formality.
SLIDE: Los Angeles Study (8)
Los angeles
Class is not the only social variable that tends to work this way. Another study of g-dropping, this time in Los Angeles, compared males and females of similar socio-economic status. Male speakers (other things equal) tend to use more informal (or lower-class) modes of speech than females do, and this study was no exception. At the same time, for both males and females, the percentage of g-dropping was greater in joking than in arguing:
|
Joking |
Arguing |
Males |
46% |
24% |
Females |
28% |
21% |
The difference between joking and arguing might be because joking creates a more informal speech style, or it might because there is a dimension of friendliness or intimacy that can also be involved in such things.
But, more generally, you drop your g’s in informal settings and usually keep them in more formal settings. This is a difference in register. Your class level also usually suggests how formal you have to be and how informal you can be. People in the working classes do not usually need to be as formal as people in the aristocracy.