- •Lecture 1 the essence of language communication
- •1.1 Communication Theory
- •1.2 Methods & Main Lines of Research in Communicative Studies
- •1.3 Defining Communication
- •Main Functions of Interpersonal Language Communication:
- •1.4 Typology of Communication
- •1.5 Models of Communication
- •1.6 Ethnography of Communication
- •References
- •Lectures 2 Language as the Medium of Human Communication.
- •Language from the Standpoint of Culture and Cognition
- •2. Spoken versus Written Language
- •3. Lexical Density
- •4. Indicating Status
- •5. Footing
- •6. Protecting Face
- •Lecture 3 Conversational Communication and Types of Communicative Messages:
- •Verbal, Non-Verbal.
- •The Process of Conversation.
- •2. Managing Conversation
- •3. Maintaining Conversation
- •4. The Nature of Verbal / Non-Verbal Messages
- •5. The Relative Importance of Verbal and Non-Verbal Communication
- •Lecture 4 Pragmatic Aspect of Language Communication
- •4.1 Defining Pragmatics
- •4.2 Cooperation and Implicature
- •4.3 Hedges
- •4.4 Speech Acts and Events
- •4.5 Conditions for the Performance of Speech Acts
- •4.6 Direct and Indirect Speech Acts
- •Lecture 5 Language Contact as an Outcome of Language Communication
- •5.1 The Subject Matter of Contact Linguistics
- •5.2 History of Research on Language Contact
- •5.3 The Field of Contact Linguistics
- •5.4 Types of Contact Situation
- •5.5 Language Creation: New Contact Languages
- •Lecture 6 Language Contact and Linguistic Variation: Style, Social Class, Sex, Gender, Ethnicity
- •6.1 Language and Social Class
- •6.2 Style
- •6.3 Style as the Second Main Dimension of Linguistic Variation
- •6.4 Function versus Structure
- •6.5 Overview of Approaches to Style
- •6.6 Language and Gender / Sex
- •Lecture 7 Language Contact and Linguistic Convergence
- •7.1 Sprachbund: Contact Across Contiguous
- •7.2 Substratum, Superstratum, Adstratum
- •7.3 Balkanisms as an Example of Language Convergence
- •7.4 Language Contact and Phonological Change
5.3 The Field of Contact Linguistics
The study of language contact is a fairlywell-defined field of study, with its own subject matter and objectives. It employs an eclectic methodology that draws on various approaches, including the comparativehistorical method, and various areas of sociolinguistics. It is this very interdisciplinary approach that defines it and gives it its strength. One of the clearest statements of the goals of this subdiscipline is the following, from Weinreich [24, p. 86]: “To predict typical forms of interference from the sociolinguistic description of a bilingual community and a structural description of its languages is the ultimate goal of interference studies”.
Though Weinreich focuses specifically on the phenomenon of bilingualism, his statement can apply equallywell to the study of all contact situations.Moreover, the field of contact linguistics is not limited to just the study of “interference”, but covers all the linguistic consequences of contact, including phenomena such as simplification and various other kinds of restructuring that characterize the outcomes of contact. In particular, he emphasizes that the components of an explanatory frameworkmust include “purely structural considerations…psychological reasons…and socio-cultural factors” [ibid., p. 44]. The need to explore the latter two types of factor arises from the fact that, first, contact situationswhich appear quite similar in terms of the linguistic inputs present can and do result in quite different linguistic outcomes. Moreover, for any given contact situation, predictions of contact-induced changes based solely on structural factors failmiserably.Weinreich’s outline of themain concerns of “interference” studies is worth quoting in full. He notes:
In linguistic interference, the problem of major interest is the interplay of structural and non-structural factors that promote or impede such interference. The structural factors are those which stem from the organization of linguistic forms into a definite system, different for every language and to a considerable degree independent of non-linguistic experience and behavior. The nonstructural factors are derived from the contact of the system with the outer world, from given individuals’ familiarity with the system, and from the symbolic value which the system as a whole is capable
of acquiring and the emotions it can evoke [ibid., p. 5].
It follows, first, that we need to distinguish among the various social contexts of language contact if we are to understand the nature and direction of contact-induced change. Second, it is necessary to examine, where possible, the actual speech behavior of persons in each contact situation in order to uncover the factors that motivate them to change their language in one way or another. Scholars have long been aware that differences in the social setting lead to differences in the outcomes
of contact. For instance, Wackernagel [25, p. 10] distinguished three kinds of contact situation –when a conquered group adopts the language of its conquerors, when the reverse occurs, and when there is mutual influence leading to a “mixed language”. Every outcome of language contact has associated with it a particular kind of social setting and circumstances that shape its unique character. The goal of contact linguistics is to uncover the various factors, both linguistic and sociocultural, that contribute to the linguistic consequences of contact between speakers of different language varieties.