ANINTRODUCTION

TO SOCIOLINGUISTICS
Rubn Chacn Beltrn
UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL DE EDUCACIN
A DISTANCIA
 ACRONYMS U S E D IN T H I S BOOK

AAVE African American Vernacular English

AmE. American English
BrE. British English
CP Corpus Planning
EFL E n g l i s h as a F o r e i g n L a n g u a g e
Engl. English
EU European Union
FL Foreign Langauge
HCE H a w a i i a n Crele E n g l i s h
JP J a m a i c a n Patois ( o r P a t w a )
Ll F i r s t L a n g u a g e , w i t h reference t o the o r d e r o f acquisitioi
L2 Second o r A d d i t i o n a l Language, w i t h reference to the ord
acquisition
LWC Language of Wider C o m m u n i c a t i o n
ME Middle English
MnE Modern English
OE Od E n g l i s h
OHG Od H i g h Germn
PdE Present-day E n g l i s h
RP Received P r o n u n c i a t i o n
SL S e c o n d Language, w i t h reference to the I c a i n i n j j l o n U - x l
TP Tok P i s i n
UDLR Universal Declaration of Linguistic Rights
 INDKX

Acknowledgements ^

Acronyms

Index 1 1

Introduction

UNIT 1

1. I n t r o d u c t i o n : Key concepts i n s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s 23
2. S o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s vs. sociology o f language 24
3. The o r i g i n s o f s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s 26
4. Variation 26
5. S o m e instances o f v a r i a t i o n 28
6. Diachronic variation 29
7. Speech c o m m u n i t y ^2
8. D o i n g s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c research 35
9. Exercises ^
10. References 4 2
11. Resources o n the w e b 4 3

12. F u r t h e r r e a d i n g s a n d questions 43
12.1. Text 1 4 3

12.2. Text 2 4 5

13. Key w o r d s 4 ^
 14
AN INTKODIK ||()N K ) S(>( 'lOI.IN illlSTICS

UNIT6

1. S o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s a n d language teaching/learning 159

2. C o m m u n i c a t i v e c o m p e t e n c e i n language teaching/learning 161
3. T h e s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c b e h a v i o r o f E n g l i s h s p e a k e r s : R u l e s o f
speaking 162
3.1. Address b e h a v i o r 162
3.2. T e l e p h o n i n g 164
4. S o c i o l i n g u i s t i c p e r s p e c t i v e s o n l a n g u a g e u s e i n i m m e r s i o n
classrooms 165
5. Analysis o f t h e E F L c l a s s r o o m language 167
6. I m p l i c a t i o n s f o r language t e a c h i n g 170 INTRODUCCION
7. P r a g m a t i c s i n language t e a c h i n g 171
8. L a n g u a g e i n t h e l a w 172
9. S t a n d a r d E n g l i s h a n d W o r l d Englishes 174
10. Exercises 178
11. References 181 i l n I >k aims at p r o v i d i n g the readers w i t h a general f r a m e w o r k f o r
12. Resources o n t h e w e b 182 lili 111< I \l a ncw discipline, sociolinguistics. The t r a i n i n g a n d knowledge
13. F u r t h e r readings a n d q u e s t i o n s 182 i M>\g a n d u s i n g these Unidades Didcticas can i n t r o d u c e the
13.1. Text 11 182 m i l i ni i i i i lie fascinating w o r l d o f languages i n i n t e r a c t i o n a n d m a y also
13.2. Text 12 183 * i l i 11 11 i c readers interest i n researching o t h e r aspeets o f t h i s field. This
14. K e y w o r d s 186 l i r. been conceived as a course b o o k for Sociolingstica Inglesa a n d
ll i 'i "\e luture language teachers a t elementary, secondary, university
Model exam
n i n i i i i i i g e d u c a t i o n levis w i t h a basic t r a i n i n g i n sociolinguistics,
187
\ 111 a i i c > n , language contact a n d language education as part o f their
K e y to the e x e r c i s e s 193 |tii i M I i i H U l < i r their t e a c h i n g tasks i n the language classroom.
A i unsiderable variety o f ways i n w h i c h language a n d society are
Glossary 199 " i i i n c < led a n d i n t e r a c t is p r e s e n t e d i n t h i s b o o k . T h e r e are m a n y
i i l l ' i v l a t i o n s b e t w e e n language a n d society a n d s o m e o f t h e m w i l l
C o n c e p t u a l ndex 217 I" |n i i l c d in these pages. Social c o n f i g u r a t i o n a n d o r g a n i z a t i o n also
i ' n- l i n g u i s t i c s t r u c t u r e a n d usage s h o w i n g t h a t t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p
M I . I I I I . ' C a n d society is b i d i r e c t i o n a l . The varieties t h a t people
111. i \ v e a I some o f t h e speaker's v a r i a b l e s s u c h as age, geographic,
. I i n e l l i u i c o r i g i n , a n d gender. T h e q u e s t i o n o f l a n g u a g e c h o i c e is
il i l i i i i c n i i o n i n g b e c a u s e i t m a y n o t o n l y d e t e r m i n e t h e use o f a
l i l i l i ode b u t also t h e c h o i c e o f some words instead o f others, o f
nuil I n d u r e s o l p r o n u n c i a r o n o r even rules o f speaking.
linguistics a n d p s y c h o l i n g u i s t i c s are closely r e l a t e d d i s c i p l i n e s .
ii' I. i l w i i h l h e social a n d i n d i v i d u a l side o f h u m a n behavior. These
i i " . i . . i n - p o r t r a y e d i n t h i s b o o k , s o m e u n i t s d e a l w i t h t h e social
i i ol l u i g u a g e , i.e. language as p a r t o f social r e l a t i o n s a n d as a
i " I i o m m u n i c a t i o n a n d i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h other h u m a n beings,
 16 AN IN I KODIK I ION TO SOCIOLINGUISTICS
whereas some o t h e r u n i t s s h o w a greater c o n c e r n for the o t h e r side o f the
same c o i n , i.e., the i n d i v i d u a l dimensin o f language a n d , therefore, deal
w i t h aspects s u c h as c o d e - s w i t c h i n g , b i l i n g u a l i s m a n d diglossia.
T h e f i e l d o f s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s is very w i d e - r a n g i n g a n d t o u c h e s m a n y
d i f f e r e n t aspects o f language a n d society. A s e l e c t i o n has been m a d e o n
the basis o f the objectives set for this subject i n t h e c u r r i c u l u m o f Filologa
Inglesa. T h e f a c t t h a t t h e s u b j e c t Sociolingstica Inglesa probably
constitutes the first encounter o f many students w i t h this b r a n c h o f
linguistics has also been taken i n t o account. Sociolinguistics is a n extensive
a n d i n t e r d i s c i p l i n a r y f i e l d , t h e f u l l scope o f w h i c h is d i f f i c u l t t o cover i n
a c o u r s e l i k e t h e o n e f o r w h i c h t h i s b o o k has b e e n d e s i g n e d . T h i s fact
a c c o u n t s f o r t h e need t o select some t o p i c s i n preference t o o t h e r s a n d ,
i n the case o f t h i s b o o k , a clear i n c l i n a t i o n t o w a r d s a p p l i e d issues c a n be
perceived m a i n l y because t h e y are aspects t h a t f u t u r e language teachers
m a y need t o face i n t h e i r classrooms.
The p a r t i c u l a r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f distance l e a r n i n g a n d t e a c h i n g have
also s h a p e d t h e f i n a l c o n f i g u r a t i o n o f t h i s b o o k . E a c h u n i t e n d s w i t h
references t o t h e glossary, as w e l l as s o m e exercises t h a t a i m a t h e l p i n g
students reflect o n sociolinguistic issues. O n m a n y occasions, the solutions
t o these exercises are n o t p r o v i d e d f o r t w o reasons. O n t h e o n e h a n d , as
i n d i c a t e d above, these are open-ended questions that d o n o t have a single
answer. P r o v i d i n g a n a n s w e r w o u l d have a m i s l e a d i n g effect as i t m i g h t
lead the students t o t h i n k t h a t there is one response t h a t prevails over t h e
others. O n the o t h e r h a n d , students have access t o a discussion f o r u m o n
the w e b page f o r t h i s subject a n d c a n exchange t h e i r answers a n d
c o m m e n t s . I n t h i s way, a n e n r i c h i n g a n d v a l u a b l e debate c a n take place.
T h e structure of this book
T h i s b o o k has b e e n a r r a n g e d i n six u n i t s a n d s t a r t s w i t h a g e n e r a l
i n t r o d u c t i o n t o key concepts i n sociolinguistics t h a t w i l l a l l o w t h e student
t o a p p r o a c h t h i s n e w f i e l d o f s t u d y a n d r e s e a r c h . T h e r e a d e r w i l l be
brought i n t o t o u c h w i t h the general field o f sociolinguistics, although
m o s t examples a n d references w i l l be t a k e n f r o m E n g l i s h o r m u l t i l i n g u a l
contexts where E n g l i s h is s o m e h o w involved. M o v i n g o n f r o m these i n i t i a l
t h e o r e t i c a l l y - b a s e d p r i n c i p i e s , s o m e a p p l i e d aspects o f s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c
study are considered i n the last u n i t s so that the cise c o n n e c t i o n between
this f i e l d o f s t u d y a n d everyday life c a n be perceived.
U n i t 1 deals w i t h s o m e i n t r o d u c t o r y aspects o f s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s l i k e
the d c l i n i t i o n a n d c o n f i g u r a t i o n o f t h i s d i s c i p l i n e , i t s r e l a t i o n t o
I N I K O H I K "l'ION 17
<>l language, the s y n c h r o n i c a n d the d i a c h r o n i c perspectives
I<>|'v
I and the explanation a n d exemplification of what i s
\ . n i . i l i o n
Ii i r d a speech c o m m u n i t y . F i n a l l y , t h e s t u d e n t i s p r e s e n t e d w i t h
M I I I I I a p p r o a c h e s i n s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c r e s e a r c h t h a t w i l l give h i m / h e r a n
i i l l sense o f t h e scope o f t h e f i e l d a n d i t s p o t e n t i a l r e p e r c u s s i o n s o n
i vday life.
i m i 2 concentrates o n a key concept f o r sociolinguistics namely
111 111< n i a n d the d e s c r i p t i o n o f some variables t h a t clearly d e t e r m i n e , o r
H . I. i . t n i i n e d by, v a r i a t i o n l i k e s t y l e , r e g i s t e r a n d gender. Speech
m o d a t i o n is also dealt w i t h i n t h i s u n i t as i t p o r t r a y s t h e speakers'
11111 111111 u (o a v o i d o r r e s p o n d t o v a r i a t i o n differences b y a speaker.
I includes a d e s c r i p t i o n o f p i d g i n s a n d creles i n some parts o f
iiit 3
i l n w < I d . Special a t t e n t i o n is p a i d to English-based creles a n d examples
n . | n i ivided i n H a w a i i a n Crele E n g l i s h , J a m a i c a n Patwa a n d Tok Pisin.
Mi p i u c e s s o f d e c r e o l i z a t i o n is also d e p i c t e d i n t h i s u n i t a n d s o m e
l i n p l u a l i o n s f o r t h e use o f p i d g i n s a n d creles i n f o r m a l e d u c a t i o n a r e
l 'i i scnled.
I 1 4 centers o n s o m e s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c aspects t h a t p o r t r a y the social
iiii
m i ilie i n d i v i d u a l dimensin o f t h i s b r a n c h o f l i n g u i s t i c s a n d deals w i t h
n.ilism, code choice, diglossia, m u l t i l i n g u a l i s m a n d language contact
l n \i ious scenarios.
U n l l 5 p r e s e n t s s o m e a p p l i e d aspects o f s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s t h a t c a n
rl i n i l v have s o m e b e a r i n g o n t h e w e l l f a r e o f h u m a n i t y a n d t h e
l o p i n e n t o f o u r society as is the case o f b i l i n g u a l e d u c a t i o n , language
i l i " . 11 id policy as t w o ways o f i n t r o d u c i n g s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c aspects i n
Uves I n this u n i t , some p r a c t i c a l instances o f b i l i n g u a l e d u c a t i o n a n d
i . i j ' c policy are p o r t r a y e d i n places l i k e Canad, A u s t r a l i a a n d I n d i a ,
i m i i l n s u n i t , the c u r r e n t s i t u a t i o n o f t h e E U i n r e l a t i o n t o language
p i I I H s i s analyzed.
i'nii 6 also i n t r o d u c e s s o m e a p p l i e d issues i n s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s a n d
ili 11 ibes I he interface b e t w e e n s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s a n d language t e a c h i n g ,
ipproaching the analysis o f classroom discourse a n d language
li < 1111 111 o i i . Some references t o related disciplines l i k e discourse analysis
u n I i > i . i r i n a d e s are i n c l u d e d i n t h i s u n i t . To e n d t h i s selection o f t o p i c s ,
' ilher interesting aspects are presented: forensic l i n g u i s t i c s a n d W o r l d
l'.lif.lislies.
Finally, a glossary w i t h s o m e k e y t e r m s i n t h e f i e l d i s p r e s e n t e d t o
I H i l \t concepts f o r t h i s s u b j e c t w h i c h w i l l pave t h e w a y f o r
l u i l u r e a d i n g .
 AN INTRODIK 1 ION TO SOC'IOI.INGUISTICS
P u r p o s e o f this b o o k
Language a b i l i t y is p a r t o f h u m a n beings a n d p a r t o f the d e v e l o p m e n t
o f o u r societies, o u r p e r s o n a l lives a n d o u r r o l e i n society. T h i s b o o k tries
to provide the reader w i t h some b a c k g r o u n d knowledge o n the m a i n
p r i n c i p i e s a n d lines o f research that m a y h e l p t h e m reflect o n some basic
s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c p r i n c i p i e s t h a t g o v e r n h u m a n i n t e r a c t i o n , i n general, a n d
the E n g l i s h - s p e a k i n g w o r l d , i n particular. T h e ultmate g o a l is t o help the
r e a d e r d e v e l o p t h e necessary receptiveness t o p e r c e i v e t h e presence o f
sociolinguistic principies i n their oral and w r i t t e n interaction w i t h other
speakers o f E n g l i s h .
H o w to u s e this b o o k
T h i s b o o k has been especially designed f o r distance l e a r n i n g students
w h o w i l l n o t have t r a d i t i o n a l classes i n w h i c h m o s t o f the contents f o r the
subject are i n t r o d u c e d b y t h e teacher. T h i s p a r t i c u l a r s i t u a t i o n presents
s o m e d i s a d v a n t a g e s because t h e l e a r n e r has t o be l a r g e l y a u t o n o m o u s
a n d f o l l o w t h e i n s t r u c t i o n s g i v e n i n t h e course b o o k to f i n d t h e response
t o m a n y issues t h a t , i n a d i f f e r e n t l e a r n i n g s i t u a t i o n , w o u l d be r e a d i l y
a n s w e r e d b y t h e teacher. W h i l e s t u d y i n g t h i s subject, s t u d e n t s w i l l need
t o m a k e use o f different resources, especially the Internet, t o f i n d examples
o f w h a t o t h e r w i s e m i g h t seem r a t h e r c r y p t i c t h e o r e t i c a l d e s c r i p t i o n .
Distance l e a r n i n g also has m a n y advantages f o r t h e l e a r n e r w h o i n a
subject l i k e t h i s w i l l need t o c o m b i n e t h e g u i d a n c e p r o v i d e d i n t h i s b o o k
w i t h f u r t h e r readings, I n t e r n e t search a n d active p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the
d i s c u s s i o n f o r u m . I n t h i s way, learners w i l l have t h e chance t o feed t h e i r
o w n c u r i o s i t y even b e y o n d t h e scope o f t h i s subject a n d , t h e y w i l l also be
s h o w n the w a y to intgrate research as p a r t o f t h e i r o w n l e a r n i n g process.
Active p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the d i s c u s s i o n f o r u m w i l l keep s t u d e n t s i n t o u c h
w i t h o t h e r students f a c i n g t h e same questions a n d the t e a c h i n g t e a m t h a t
will monitor it.
E a c h u n i t finishes w i t h a list o f k e y w o r d s w h i c h are dealt w i t h i n t h e
u n i t they a c c o m p a n y a n d w h i c h are d e f i n e d at the e n d o f t h e b o o k i n t h e
g l o s s a r y . S t u d e n t s are r e q u e s t e d t o go t h r o u g h these key w o r d s before
e n g a g i n g i n t h e r e a d i n g o f e a c h chapter. K n o w i n g t h e m e a n i n g o f these
w o r d s before t h e y start r e a d i n g w i l l enable s t u d e n t s t o w o r k t h r o u g h t h e
discussion i n the chapter w i t h o u t h a v i n g to break off to consult the
glossary. I n the same way, a r e v i e w o f these same t e r m s is r e c o m m e n d e d
w h e n t h e y f i n i s h each u n i t .
l l is suggested, t h e n , t l i a l s t u d e n l s read llie w l i o l e c h a p t e r s t r a i g h t
l l i r o u g h i n o r d e r t o h a v e a n o v e r v i c w o l the t o p i c s d e a l t w i t h a n d , at a
I . I I I T stage, go b a c k t o s t u d y each s e c t i o n i n m o r e d e t a i l a n d d o the
exercises p r o p o s e d f o r each section i n each chapter. S o m e o f the answers
li ii i hese e x e r c i s e s are p r o v i d e d i n the s e c t i o n 'Key to t h e exercises'. O n
m a n y o c c a s i o n s , as t h e s e exercises h a v e a n o p e n a n s w e r a n d r e q u i r e
students to express t h e i r o w n p o i n t o f view, students s h o u l d m a k e use o f
llie d i s c u s s i o n f o r u m c r e a t e d f o r t h i s s u b j e c t t o e x c h a n g e a n d d i s c u s s
.uiswers.
A p a r t f r o m t h e exercises a n d a c t i v i t i e s i n c l u d e d at t h e e n d o f each
chapter, some r e a d i n g is p r o v i d e d so t h a t students c a n have access t o key
t e x i s i n the field o f sociolinguistics. D u e t o space restrictions a n d the length
ul t h e s u b j e c t Sociolingstica Inglesa ( o n e s e m e s t e r ) , o n l y a l i m i t e d
s e l e c t i o n o f r e a d i n g s c o u l d be i n t r o d u c e d . H o w e v e r , s t u d e n t s a r e
eiieouraged to read f u r t h e r i n the w o r k s f r o m w h i c h these fragments have
been t a k e n as w e l l as c o n s u l t i n g o t h e r references p r o v i d e d at t h e e n d o f
each c h a p t e r . S o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s is a b r a n c h o f l i n g u i s t i c s t h a t d u e t o i t s
i n i i r d i s c i p l i n a r y n a t u r e r e q u i r e s f r o m t h e s t u d e n t a b r o a d perspective:
ihe m o r e the students r e a d a b o u t the t o p i c , the w i d e r t h e i r perspective.
In t h e R e s o u r c e s o n t h e w e b s e c t i o n , a n u m b e r o f i n t e r e s t i n g w e b
sites are suggested f o r each u n i t . The use o f the I n t e r n e t a n d w e b resources
seeins c r u c i a l f o r the s t u d y o f this d i s c i p l i n e because i t a l l o w s reference
10 a u t h e n t i c s a m p l e s o f l a n g u a g e t h a t p o r t r a y d i f f e r e n t i n s t a n c e s o
sociolinguistic v a r i a t i o n (for example, w h i l e s t u d y i n g p i d g i n s a n d creles
11 w o u l d be i m p o r t a n t t o see web-based p u b l i c a t i o n s i n a g i v e n p i d g i n o
Crele). U s i n g w e b sites a n d resources has o n e c h i e f d r a w b a c k a n d t h a
is that w e b l i n k s s o m e t i m e s change o r are r e - d i r e c t e d t o a d i f f e r e n t site
The w e b l i n k s selected t o a c c o m p a n y t h i s subject are c o n s i d e r e d stable
in the sense t h a t they have been w o r k i n g f o r some years, a n d are expected
lo be k e p t o n w o r k i n g i n t h e f u t u r e .
S t u d e n t p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the d i s c u s s i o n f o r u m is also e n c o u r a g e d a
sii idents w i l l need t o access a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n t h a t w i l l be posted o r
l lie w e b f o r t h e i r study.
 I. I N T K O D U C T I O N :
M Y C O N C E P T S IN SOCIOLINGUISTICS

I anguage is c o m m o n l y used t o convey m e a n i n g b u t t h a t is n o t a l l w e

Ule l a n g u a g e for. L a n g u a g e is u s e d f o r a n u m b e r o f t h i n g s o t h e r t h a n
t r u n s m i t t i n g a v e r b a l message, a m o n g t h e m , t o i n i t i a t e , m a i n t a i n a n d
11| i erve social relationships w i t h other m e m b e r s o f the society. Therefore,
language s h o u l d be u n d e r s t o o d as a s o c i a l p h e n o m e n o n t h a t relates the
i ii ukers to their societal e n v i r o n m e n t a n d t h e i r k i n s h i p to o t h e r m e m b e r s
ni I h e speech c o m m u n i t y . As a r e s u l t o f t h e c o m p l e x i t y o f h u m a n
Pi lal l o n s h i p s , w e d o n o t s p e a k i n t h e s a m e w a y t o a c l a s s m a t e as t o a
pi i ifessor. Parents do n o t speak i n the same w a y t o t h e i r o f f s p r i n g as they
do i " t h e i r parents, o r t h e i r boss. B u t , o u r w a y o f t r a n s m i t t i n g messages
i lepends, o f course, n o t o n l y o n linguistic m a t t e r s b u t also o n non-linguistic
s u c h as b o d y l a n g u a g e , c o n t e x t u a l a n d s i t u a t i o n a l f a c t o r s , a m o n g
Others.
S o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s c a n be d e f i n e d as a f i e l d o f r e s e a r c h a n d s t u d y t h a t
deals w i t h the r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n l a n g u a g e a n d society. I t copes w i t h t h e
I inds/links t h a t c a n be f o u n d b e t w e e n one o r m o r e languages a n d t h e i r
i r . c i s w h o live w i t h i n a specific speech c o m m u n i t y . S o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s
nes the societal a n d l i n g u i s t i c p a t t e r n s t h a t g o v e r n o u r b e h a v i o r as
u n - H I I K T S o f h u m a n society a n d h o w t h e y affect i n t e r a c t i o n .
S o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s is a r e l a t i v e l y n e w f i e l d . I n t h e 50's a n d 60's,
ilinguists began to oppose Chomsky's a b s t r a c t i o n of language.
I I isky a i m e d at finding basic g r a m m a t i c a l structures that c o u l d account
li ti i he existence o f s t r u c t u r e d patterns across languages r e l y i n g o n " i d e a l "
mi I i ve* speaker's i n t u i t i o n s t o d e s c r i b e a n d i n t e r p r e t l a n g u a g e .
' . i K l o l i n g u i s t s , however, t r i e d t o find t h e reasons f o r l i n g u i s t i c v a r i a t i o n s
n i s i ii i . i l a n d e n v i r o n m e n t a l c o n d i t i o n s . C h o m s k y was c o n c e r n e d w i t h the
Ideal speaker/listener c o m m u n i c a t i o n i n a completely homogeneous speech
I I n n i n u n i t y w h o k n o w s t h e language as a n a t i v e speaker ( r a t h e r a fuzzy

24
AN IN I KODIK IION 1 () S<)( lOI.INCilllS TICS
concept, i n fact), t h a t is to say, perfectly. This m o n o l i t h i c view o f the native
s p e a k e r h a s n o t h i n g t o d o w i t h t h e c o n c e p t i o n o f t h e n a t i v e speaker i n
s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s w h e r e social a n d n o n - l i n g u i s t i c factors are c o n s i d e r e d o f
key i m p o r t a n c e for c o m m u n i c a t i o n . W h a t is m o r e , C h o m s k y s d e s c r i p t i o n
o f a n a t i v e speaker i n a homogeneous speech c o m m u n i t y is far f r o m b e i n g
c o n s i d e r e d c o m m o n p l a c e o r even r e a l . Speech c o m m u n i t i e s are n o t easy
to d e l i m i t a n d g e o g r a p h i c a l p r o x i m i t y is n o t a l w a y s a v a l i d c r i t e r i o n i n
o r d e r t o f i n d a reliable defnition. Does a n E n g l i s h speaker f r o m E d i n b u r g h
speak t h e same w a y as s o m e o n e f r o m d o w n t o w n L o n d o n o r L i v e r p o o l ?
U n d o u b t e d l y they speak the same language, E n g l i s h , b u t t h e i r use is q u i t e
different. A n d , do a l l three speakers belong to the same speech c o m m u n i t y ?
T h e y h a v e spoken E n g l i s h since c h i l d h o o d a n d they live i n the same
c o u n t r y w i t h the same c u l t u r a l b a c k g r o u n d . As regards the second issue,
the three a f o r e m e n t i o n e d speakers c a n consider themselves native speakers
of the s a m e language, E n g l i s h , i n spite of clear societal o r d i a l e c t a l
variation.
F r o m t h e very b e g i n n i n g a b r e a k c o u l d be p e r c e i v e d b e t w e e n t h e
a p p r o a c h e s and m e t h o d s used b y generativists a n d s o c i o l i n g u i s t s i n t h e i r
quest f o r l a n g u a g e n a t u r e a n d d e v e l o p m e n t . D e l l H y m e s ( 1 9 7 1 ) c o i n e d
the t e r m communicative competence as opposed t o C h o m s k y s l i n g u i s t i c
c o m p e t e n c e . C o m m u n i c a t i v e c o m p e t e n c e refers n o t o n l y t o t h e h u m a n
a b i l i t y t o u s e the l a n g u a g e i n d i f f e r e n t s i t u a t i o n s a n d u n d e r d i f f e r e n t
c i r c u m s t a n c e s b u t i t also refers t o o t h e r n o n - l i n g u i s t i c aspects w h i c h are
also p a r t o f t h e c o m m u n i c a t i o n p r o c e s s , s u c h as: silence, t u r n - t a k i n g ,
v o l u m e , a m o u n t o f t a l k , w o r d choice, gestures, etc. A l l o f these b e i n g p a r t
o f t h e c o m m u n i c a t i o n process a n d c o m p l e t i n g p u r e l y l i n g u i s t i c aspects
s u c h as p h o n o l o g y , m o r p h o l o g y a n d syntax. H y m e s ' c o n t r i b u t i o n t o t h e
f i e l d o f s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s has b e e n p a r a m o u n t a n d t h e c o n c e p t o f
c o m m u n i c a t i v e competence is n o w a d a y s w i d e s p r e a d i n o t h e r d i s c i p l i n e s
a n d reas o f r e s e a r c h . I n c h a p t e r 6 w e w i l l see t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f
c o m m u n i c a t i v e competence a n d later developments o f the construct i n
second l a n g u a g e t e a c h i n g a n d l e a r n i n g .
2. S O C I O L I N G U I S T I C S V S . S O C I O L O G Y O F L A N G U A G E
W h e n i n the late 60 s s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s f i r s t d e v e l o p e d as a n a c a d e m i c
l i e l d o f s t u d y , t w o ames w e r e g i v e n t o t h i s s t i l l i n c i p i e n t d i s c i p l i n e :
s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s and sociology of language, and b o t h terms were used
i n t e r c h a n g e a b l y . The a i m o f s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s is t o investgate a n d describe
the r e l a t i o n s h i p between language a n d society a n d the stress is p l a c e d o n
25
UNIT i
l.mi'.uage a n d i t s r o l e w i t h i n c o m m u n i c a t i o n . S o c i o l o g y o f l a n g u a g e ,
l i . iwever, centers o n t h e s t u d y o f society a n d h o w w e c a n u n d e r s t a n d i t
l l n o i i g h t h e s t u d y o f l a n g u a g e , t h a t is, h o w w e c a n u n d e r s t a n d
y n K . l i n g u i s t i c b e h a v i o r b y m e a n s o f the s t u d y o f l i n g u i s t i c features.
D e p e n d i n g o n t h e scope o f t h e a n a l y s i s , s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s m a y t r y t o
inalyze specific differences o f a g r o u p o f speakers i n a speech c o m m u n i t y
|t a m i c r o level. I n t h i s case t h e analysis w o u l d refer to speech differences
i n p i o n u n c i a t i o n , g r a m m a r , a n d v o c a b u l a r y w i t h i n a single speech
I o m m u n i t y i n o r d e r t o d e t e r m i n e s o m e f e a t u r e s s u c h as e d u c a t i o n a l
bal k g r o u n d , e c o n o m i c status o r social class. I n I n d i a , f o r e x a m p l e , there
i i . m a n y castes ( t r a d i t i o n a l social classes i n t h e Hind society) a n d there
. i i e d i s t i n c t l i n g u i s t i c features t h a t d i s t i n g u i s h one f r o m another.
A n o t h e r p o s s i b i l i t y w o u l d c o m p r i s e a m u c h b r o a d e r scope o f analysis.
S o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s c a n also r e f e r t o a m a c r o l e v e l a n d i n t h a t case w h a t
Interests t h e researchers is l a n g u a g e v a r i a t i o n as a h u m a n p h e n o m e n o n
that affects l a r g e p a r t s o f t h e p o p u l a t i o n . T h a t w o u l d be t h e case, f o r
mstance, o f l a n g u a g e m a i n t e n a n c e w h e n large p o p u l a t i o n s m i g r a t e t o a
different p l a c e a n d t h e l a n g u a g e is p r e s e r v e d because o f s o c i a l f a c t o r s .
Keeping t h e i r language c a n be seen as a sign o f i d e n t i t y t h a t distinguishes
t h e m f r o m o u t s i d e r s o r as a s o u r c e o f p o w e r as t h e y c a n c o m m u n i c a t e
w Ithout b e i n g u n d e r s t o o d a n d t h i s c a n serve t r a d e purposes, f o r instance.
I i ean also h a p p e n t h a t t h e language j u s t disappears (language a t t r i t i o n )
l.eeause i t b e c o m e s a l o w - p r e s t i g e language. A n o t h e r reason m a y be t h a t
llie c o m m u n i t y w i s h e s t o b l e n d i n t o the d o m i n a n t c u l t u r e o r t h a t t h e
a m o u n t o f speakers decreases as they g r o w od a n d die. A l l i n a l l , m a c r o -
< H i o l i n g u i s t i c s applies t o w i d e - r a n g i n g h u m a n p h e n o m e n a a n d is o f t e n
referred t o , as s t a t e d before, as s o c i o l o g y o f l a n g u a g e .
Some other authors prefer to talk about micro-sociolinguistics and
macro-sociolinguistics a n d m a k e a d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n these t w o p a r t s o f
sociolinguistics. Sometimes t h e first is associated w i t h discrete p o i n t cases
a n d studies ( m i c r o - s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s ) whereas the second is connected w i t h
wide r a n g i n g s i t u a t i o n s . B o t h tendencies, however, are c o n c e r n e d a b o u t
the same p h e n o m e n o n l a n g u a g e a n d s o c i e t y a l t h o u g h at a d i f f e r e n t
II ale. M i c r o - s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s i n v o l v e s t h e use o f a l a n g u a g e as a w h o l e
together w i t h a n o t h e r c u l t u r a l p h e n o m e n o n t h a t d e t e r m i n e s t h e use o f
language, w h e r e a s m a c r o - s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s deals w i t h language p l a n n i n g ,
language policy, etc. I n Hudson's (1980: 4-5) w o r d s sociolinguistics is " t h e
s i u d y o f language i n r e l a t i o n t o society, a n d t h e sociology o f language is
llie s t u d y o f society i n r e l a t i o n t o language".
 26
AN INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLINGUISTICS
3. T H E O R I G I N S O F S O C I O L I N G U I S T I C S
S o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s has spread i n the last t h i r t y years together w i t h o t h e r
branches o f l i n g u i s t i c s s u c h as p s y c h o l i n g u i s t i c s , p r a g m a t i c s a n d a p p l i e d
l i n g u i s t i c s w h i c h , far f r o m h a v i n g a descriptive o r h i s t o r i c a l a p p r o a c h t o
language s u c h as pur o r t r a d i t i o n a l l i n g u i s t i c s (syntax, p h o n e t i c s , etc.)
m a i n t a i n an interest i n the i n t e r d i s c i p l i n a r i t y of the field a n d the
c o n t r i b u t i o n o f o t h e r b r a n c h e s o f t h e h u m a n i t i e s t o l i n g u i s t i c s , s u c h as:
psychology, p r a g m a t i c s , history, g e n d e r studies, etc. T h i s n e w b r a n c h o f
linguistics emerged together w i t h o t h e r developments of applied linguistics
and was often considered a "step c h i l d " , u n t i l i t f i n a l l y became a
Consolidated f u l l y a c k n o w l e d g e d f i e l d o f research. I t c o m p r i s e s v a r i o u s
reas o f s t u d y a n d research l i k e h i s t o r i c a l a n d c o m p a r a t i v e l i n g u i s t i c s ,
dialectology, a n d a n t h r o p o l o g y .
I n Europe, sociolinguistics started w i t h the study of historical
linguistics a n d l i n g u i s t i c geography, a s o u n d t h e o r e t i c a l b a c k g r o u n d w i t h
three m a i n fields o f interest: dialectology, r e g i o n a l languages a n d the
l i n g u i s t i c s i t u a t i o n o f c o l o n i z e d c o u n t r i e s ( C a l v e t , 2 0 0 3 ) . I n t h e USA,
however, the s t u d y of sociolinguistics emerges f r o m the contact of
linguistics w i t h o t h e r disciplines s u c h as a n t h r o p o l o g y a n d sociology. The
e t h n o g r a p h i c a p p r o a c h o f a n t h r o p o l o g i s t s , m e t h o d o l o g y used i n s o c i a l
sciences a n d t h e analysis o f l i n g u i s t i c r e a l i z a t i o n .
Nowadays, s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s is n o t o n l y a t r u l y Consolidated d i s c i p l i n e
b u t i t can also be divided i n t o subfields, such as pragmatics, language gender
studies, p i d g i n a n d crele studies, language p l a n n i n g a n d p o l i c y studies,
a n d e d u c a t i o n o f l i n g u i s t i c m i n o r i t y studies, etc. ( B r a t t Paulson & Tucker,
2 0 0 3 ) . A c c o r d i n g t o S h u y ( 2 0 0 3 : 15), t h e m o r e r e c e n t d e v e l o p m e n t s o f
discourse analysis a n d pragmatics are considered as p a r t of sociolinguistics
by some scholars whereas others consider t h e m reas o f study i n themselves.
I n the same w a y there is no f u l l agreement o n w h e t h e r language change is
p a r t o f sociolinguistics o r the o t h e r way r o u n d . This s i t u a t i o n accounts for
the variety of approaches a n d perspectives towards a discipline that becomes
m o r e a n d m o r e i m p o r t a n t these days a n d w h i c h n o w goes f r o m t h e
theoretical perspective to the applied t r e n d i n the f o r m of applied
sociolinguistics.
4. VARIATION
S o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s is all about v a r i a t i o n . F r o m a s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c p o i n t o f
v i e w t h e m o s t i m p o r t a n i s o n r e o l i n f o r m a l i o n is l l i e w a y s o c i a l a n d
27
l n i n i i o n . i l factors affect language a n d m a k e i t vary. F o r e x a m p l e , w h e n
I I |u*( iple meet a n d s t a r t t a l k i n g a b o u t , let's say, t h e weather, t h e y s t a r t
I I n i ) ' i n l o r m a t i o n a b o u t t h e i r i n t e r l o c u t o r as t h e y s o r t o u t t h e
lllloi n i . i l i o n c o n t a i n e d i n t h e i r speech. One o f t h e f i r s t features t h a t c a n
IIIIII i unes be i d e n t i f i e d is t h e o r i g i n , i.e., w h e r e does t h a t p e r s o n c o m e
' i vi-i i g r a p h i c v a r i a t i o n ) . I f b y a n y chance w e h a p p e n t o d i s t i n g u i s h
i li'iii lea I tires o f his/her speech, w e w i l l be able t o d e t e r m i n e his/her place
i i H iy,\ very precisely, i f t h a t is n o t t h e case, w e m a y j u s t ascertain some
f i l m .it i n istias a n d t h a t w i l l give us a r o u g h idea. T h e same c a n h a p p e n
lien specific d i f f e r e n c e s a r e a s s o c i a t e d , w i t h i n a s p e c i f i c s p e e c h
i m i l y , w i t h social, e c o n o m i c a l , p o l i t i c a l , r e l i g i o u s , c u l t u r a l o r a n y
llln i i i u a t i o n a l b a c k g r o u n d . Obviously, l i n g u i s t i c v a r i a t i o n does n o t o n l y
M I I I ' I I people f r o m different speech c o m m u n i t i e s b u t also affects t h e w a y
|M'n| ile speak o r react towards someone elses speech, for example, i n terms
ol pender. I n m o s t societies w e c a n i d e n t i f y clear differences i n t h e w a y
MI ii. a n d females speak a l t h o u g h i n w e s t e r n societies these differences
*' i mi so evident. I n t e r m s o f p o w e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s t h e w a y people use the
1
I I age is affected b y t h e social c o n n e c t i o n b e t w e e n t h e m , f o r e x a m p l e
In iw i-eii a teacher a n d a s t u d e n t , a n d b e t w e e n a boss a n d a n e m p l o y e e ,
i li
l l ' l i i ' . go t o t h e exercises s e c t i o n a n d do exercise 1.)
A n o l h e r aspect o f v a r i a t i o n is t h a t i t has c e r t a i n b o u n d s . A speaker
ni vary his/her speech i n s o m e degree, especially t o a d h e r e t o c e r t a i n
IH Inl, economic, religious, etc. class, b u t s/he c a n n o t vary i t b e y o n d certain
In mis o t h e r w i s e s/he w o u l d be u n g r a m m a t i c a l and/or i n c o m p r e h e n s i b l e .
i " ukers have k n o w l e d g e o f these l i m i t s , o f t e n u n c o n s c i o u s l y , a l t h o u g h
c o t h e r p r o b l e m s w o u l d be t o d e t e r m i n e h o w t h i s k n o w l e d g e is
iiUlined a n d h o w i t can be described. I t is m u c h m o r e subtle t h a n o t h e r
" ' i il n o r m s s u c h as t h o s e o f t u r n - t a k i n g i n c o n v e r s a t i o n o r s o c i a l
I 'i li.ivior. A t t h i s p o i n t , i t w o u l d be necessary t o p o i n t o u t t h a t l i n g u i s t i c
in'i M I S are q u i t e o f t e n m o r e u n d e r s t a t e d t h a n o t h e r s o c i a l c o n v e n t i o n s ,
lieh as lable m a n n e r s a n d , therefore, h a r d e r t o describe, o r even perceive.
Ii )' es w i t h o u t saying t h a t t h e y are also h a r d e r t o l e a r n and/or a c q u i r e i n
i l " ' ase o f a S e c o n d L a n g u a g e as t h e l e a r n e r does n o t o n l y need to learn
iln i o d e , i.e. t h e l a n g u a g e b u t also h o w t o use i t p r o p e r l y i n d i v e r s e
l l t u a t i o n s . S o c i a l c o n v e n t i o n s are u s u a l l y l e a r n e d o r a c q u i r e d d u r i n g
i h i l d h o o d a n d adolescence b u t these rules can vary f r o m c u l t u r e to culture
ai II I as languages often reflect the w a y t h e i r users u n d e r s t a n d a n d perceive
Mu I I lives, i t is o f t e n t h e case t h a t S e c o n d L a n g u a g e l e a r n e r s , i n t h e i r
i. i l i o n s lask o f l e a r n i n g a n o n - n a t i v e language, also need t o l e a r n social
 and linguisdc convendons. At times, and dcpending on die affinity between
the languages i n contact, i t c a n be easy to iner l i n g u i s t i c f o r m s a n d uses
f r o m the first language, b u t i t is often n o t so obvious. As a s i m p l e example
E n g l i s h speakers u n d e r s t a n d v e r b a l politeness d i f f e r e n t l y t h a n S p a n i s h
speakers, a n d i n terms o f frequency B r i t i s h E n g l i s h speakers t e n d to t h a n k
m o r e frequently, i n everyday situations, t h a n Peninsular Spanish speakers.
(Please, go t o t h e exercises section a n d do exercise 2.)
A l l i n a l l , the a i m o f s o c i o l i n g u i s t s is t o describe t h e v a r i a t i o n s w i t h i n
a language a n d m a t c h these v a r i a t i o n s w i t h t h e different g r o u p s o f people
that use t h e m , as w e l l as the c o r r e s p o n d i n g situations. So, sociolinguistics
deals e s p e c i a l l y w i t h v a r i a t i o n , a m o n g g r o u p s , a m o n g s i t u a t i o n s a n d
a m o n g places, a n d the task o f t h e s o c i o l i n g u i s t is t o find r e g u l a r p a t t e r n s
of v a r i a t i o n i n use.
6, M A C I I R O N I C VARIATION
Languages change over t i m e a n d i n the same w a y that some centuries
uro languages as G e r m a n i c developed i n t o n e w languages such as English,
(erman a n d N o r w e g i a n , i n a f e w c e n t u r i e s w e w i l l p r o b a b l y speak a
I i n g u a g e t h a t w i l l n o t be E n g l i s h , S p a n i s h o r F r e n c h , b u t a m i x t u r e o f
111, ni a l l , e s p e c i a l l y g i v e n t h e c u r r e n t p h e n o m e n o n o f g l o b a l i z a t i o n .
I mguages are i n a c o n s t a n t flux because people use t h e m endlessly a n d
ili. c o n t i n u o u s use m a k e s t h e m change. S p a n i s h , f o r example, was once
| v a r i e t y o f L a t i n b u t a f t e r c e n t u r i e s o f use i t d e v e l o p e d i n t o a n e w
liinguage as i t was w i d e s p r e a d a n d standardized. I n the same way, E n g l i s h
k| not always been the same. I f we t r y t o r e a d a n Od E n g l i s h (OE) text
can appreciate h o w t h e language has c h a n g e d i n t h e last centuries.
Pronunciation also changes i n all languages, b u t i t does not vary randomly
L i ause the sounds o f r e l a t e d languages (a s o u n d change m a y take m a n y
I i d e s o r even m a n y c e n t u r i e s t o c o m p l e t e ) c o r r e s p o n d t o others i n
a

ipi tarently systematic ways. This p h e n o m e n o n is referred to as 'sound shift'.

5. S O M E I N S T A N C E S O F V A R I A T I O N
L a b o v ( 2 0 0 3 ) states t h a t s t y l e s h i f t i n g is u s u a l l y c o r r e l a t e d t o t h e
a m o u n t o f a t t e n t i o n t h a t t h e speaker pays t o h i s speech. I n A m e r i c a n
E n g l i s h , f o r instance, the s p e l l i n g <th-> i n w o r d s l i k e thing a n d that c a n
be p r o n o u n c e d as s m o o t h f r i c a t i v e [ 0 ] o r [ ] , as a l i g h t l y o r s t r o n g l y
a r t i c u l a t e d a l v e o l a r p l o s i v e [ t ] , as a b l e n d o f these t w o v a r i a n t s , o r n o t
p r o n o u n c e d at a l l i n u t t e r a n c e s s u c h as Gimme 'at book (Give me that
book). These f o r m s are used at d i f f e r e n t levis f o r different social g r o u p s
a n d d i f f e r e n t regions.
Tlie D a n i s h scholar Rasmus Rask a n d his follower the Germn l i n g u i s t
facob G r i m m i n the first q u a r t e r of the 19th century succeeded i n s h o w i n g
the i c l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n G e r m a n i c (as G o t h i c o r Od E n g l i s h ) a n d t h e
l lassical I n d o - E u r o p e a n l a n g u a g e s ( G r e e k , L a t i n a n d S a n s k r i t ) . T h e y
. i .i u luded t h a t G e r m a n i c was p a r t o f t h e I n d o - E u r o p e a n language family.
I Ii.'v a c c o u n t e d f o r t h e differences b e t w e e n G e r m a n i c a n d t h e classical
|l uages t h r o u g h a set o f s o u n d changes. They noticed, for instance, that
P i o l o - I n d o - E u r o p e a n voiceless stops b e c o m e voiceless fricatives. E.g.:

I n B l a c k E n g l i s h V e r n a c u l a r , f o r instance, w e c a n see s o m e m a r k e r s
Cireek Latin Gothic Od E n g l i s h present-day E n g l i s h
w h i c h are c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f t h i s e t h n i c l i n g u i s t i c v a r i e t y l i k e t h e " d o u b l e
n e g a t i v e " i n E n g l i s h o f t e n u s e d b y n o n s t a n d a r d speakers t o express
water pater fadar fceder 'father'
negatives e m p h a t i c a l l y i n sentences s u c h as: Nobody don't know about
htis tres preis pri 'three'
that (Nobody knows anything about that). O t h e r p e c u l i a r i t i e s o f B l a c k
English Vernacular i n the U n i t e d States is the absence o f final t h i r d person
s i n g u l a r <s> (e.g. She want, he walk) a n d the d r o p p i n g o f t h e v e r b to be They also discovered t h a t P r o t o - I n d o - E u r o p e a n v o i c e d stops b e c o m e
i n present tense w h e n used as a c o p u l a , (e.g. They real fine).
i . ili eless stops. E.g.:
W o r d c h o i c e also d e t e r m i n e s style s h i f t i n g as t h e l i n g u i s t i c ' d o m a i n '
( h o m e , n e i g h b o r h o o d , j o b , c h u r c h , store, s c h o o l , etc.) settles t h e degree
of f o r m a l i t y i n t h e w o r d s used as w e l l as t h e a m o u n t o f c o l l o q u i a l i s m s i n Latin Gothic Od E n g l i s h present-day E n g l i s h
(ireek
a speakers speech.

lli'lul decem taihun ton 'ten'

(Please go t o t h e exercises sections a n d d o exercises 3 a n d 4.)
 30
INI I I 31

xxx^Br b e c o m evocedstops \ limnber o f changes between, f o r example, Od E n g l i s h a n d M o d e r n English

un due to loss o f m o r p h o l o g i c a l i n f l e c t i o n s . E.g.:

Greek Latin Od E n g l i s h (OE) Mit heardum bendum

Gothic Od E n g l i s h
present-day E n g l i s h
( i e r m a n (G) M i t h a r t e n Bndern
phrd fer baira beoru ' I carry' Present-day E n g l i s h ( P d E ) W i t h h a r d bonds

In this example, b o t h Od E n g l i s h a n d Germn s h o w t h e dative p l u r a l

A n o t h e r rea o f l i n g u i s t i c change is s y n t a x . Syntactic c h a n g e affects
| lldiug, whereas M o d e r n E n g l i s h o n l y presents the p l u r a l m a r k e r <-s>.
the p a t t e r n i n g o f sentences. One instance o f syntactic change is the altering
of w o r d order f r o m Proto-Indo-European to most contemporary Indo- Semantic change offers t h e m o s t o b v i o u s instances as i t is one o f the
E u r o p e a n languages. P r o t o - I n d o - E u r o p e a n was an Object-Verb (OV) Muist sensible reas i n t h i s respect, as e v e n i n s h o r t p e r i o d s o f t i m e (a
language. One example t o illustrate this p a t t e r n is the the r u n i c i n s c r i p t i o n lllel une o r less) w o r d s m a y v a r y t h e i r m e a n i n g s t o t a l o r p a r t i a l l y because
o n t h e f a m o u s G a l l e h u s h o r n ( J u t l a n d ) w h i c h dates t o t h e 5 t h c.: ir c l o s e l y c o n n e c t e d w i t h everyday usage a n d t h e c o n t e m p o r a r y
n l i m e . There are changes i n m e a n i n g a n d use. Changes i n w o r d m e a n i n g
Ek HlewagastiR Holtijaz horna tawido
jJN caused b y t h e m e e t i n g o f n e w d e m a n d o f t h e l e x i c a l r e s o u r c e s o f a
('I, H l e w e g a s t i R o f Holt/son o f H o l t c a r v e d this h o r n ' ) . I ineuage. Change o f m e a n i n g is closely r e l a t e d t o social changes.

Semantic change c a n be d i v i d e d i n t o v a r i o u s categories. F o r example,

T h e s y n t a c t i c o r d e r o f t h e i n s c r i p t i o n is S O V (horna is t h e object a n d
tawido t h e v e r b ) . iln 11 c a n be c h a n g e s i n t h e r a n g e o f m e a n i n g s o f a w o r d b y m e a n s o f
pilera! i z a t i o n o r s p e c i f i c a t i o n ; n e w m e a n i n g s c a n be a d d e d o r lost, etc.
P r e s e n t - d a y E n g l i s h has c h a n g e d f r o m P r o t o - I n d o - E u r o p e a n i n i t s 'Iiere are s o m e i n t e r e s t i n g examples o f g e n e r a l i z a t i o n a n d s p e c i f i c a t i o n .
u n d e r l y i n g s y n t a c t i c s t r u c t u r e . I n Od E n g l i s h , f o r example, t h e p a t t e r n w In n C h a u c e r spoke o f 'disease' he d i d n ' t n e c e s s a r i l y m e a n a n i l l n e s s
S V O a f f e c t e d o n l y t o t h e m a i n clause a n d i t was d i f f e r e n t i n t h e " 1 , ( 1 by i n f l e c t i o n b u t a n y k i n d o f d i s c o m f o r t a n absence o f 'ease'(as
subordnate clause ( S O V ) , as i t o c c u r s i n present-day Germn, b u t o v e r llldi i d dis-ease' suggests). F o r the E l i z a b e t h a n s science m e a n t w h a t w e
t i m e i t has r e g u l a r i z e d a n d n o w the same p a t t e r n is used b o t h i n t h e m a i n
Miran by knowledge.
a n d i n t h e subordnate clause. There has been a g r a d u a l s h i f t f r o m O V t o
V O i n t h e clause. I I n - Od E n g l i s h w o r d mete was cognate w i t h Od H i g h German/Middle
I l i i ' l i ( . e r m a n maz 'food, m e a l , m e a l t i m e ' a n d was used t o refer to f o o d o f
MilV k i n d ( s i m i l a r t h e n t o O E fda > M E fde > P d E food). M E mete c o u l d
Example: In M . . l t o speak o f specific types o f f o o d w h e n m o d i f i e d b y a n o t h e r w o r d
C, 1 1 l n i llcsch-mte 'flesh f o o d ' = ' m e a t ' (as o p p o s e d t o f i s h ) . I t t h e n b e c a m e
English
T h a t is the b o o k s h o p w h e r e I b o u g j i t v c n r r j ^ . laled to 'flesh o f animis used as f o o d = meat'. A n o t h e r e x a m p l e o f
|ii lali/ation occurs w i t h t h e Od E n g l i s h w o r d tld, cognate w i t h Germn
S V o
Germn i i v m a l l y m e a n i n g ' t i m e i n general', 'a p e r i o d o f t i m e ' , a n d also 'hour'.
Das ist der Buchgescheft, w o i c h d d r ^ h g , ^ ^
1 i i l d be e m p l o y e d besides t h e t e r m time. I n M i d d l e E n g l i s h i t b c g a n
lli I - a s s o c i a t e d w i t h o t h e r m e a n i n g s a n d d i f f e r e n t i a t e d f r o m time.
s 0 v

I i i l u a l l y ts m e a n i n g w a s r e d u c e d t o M n E tide. T h e Od E n g l i s h w o r d
/</*'/ ( PdE feather) is c o g n a t e w i t h O H G (Od H i g h G e r m n ) federa a n d
ii-.ei I in M i d d l e E n g l i s h i n sentences s u c h as ' w r i t e w i t h fetheres'. T h i s
> ^ 1 ^ ^ Z ' * ? - .o p e -
i i l i l was laler r e p l a c e d b y pen ( P d E p e n n e ) , t h e L a t i n w o r d (penna) f o r
r e s n l d a y

|| i i l i e i ' .
 There are pairs (sometimes evcn trios) ol words w i l h identical or
similar referential meanings but with different stylistic meaning. The use
ol one or the other depends on the communication situation. E.g.:
ask: request (French requte);
answer. reply (French rpliquer) respond (Latn).
belly: abdomen ( < Latn), stomach
stomachus).
The w o r d stock can also be expanded. Words can be borrowed from
other languages, new words can be coined or invented, and new terms
can be created by means of derivation and compounding of existing words.
Specially these days, due to the constant phenomenon of globalization
and widespread media such as televisin and the Internet, new words are
quickly introduced from other languages (borrowings). I n the same way,
words that used to be part of a specific j a r g o n are now commonplace
because they have been introduced i n new domains or disciplines (this is
specially noticeable i n the language of computers w i t h words such as:
navigator, web, etc.).
Native words can pass out and be replaced by words f r o m other
languages or dialects as, for example, the Od English term earm 'poor',
Early Modern English armlcerm, replaced i n Middle English by the French
w o r d pvere, poure. There is also semantic differentiation of originally
synonyms, native words and loanwords. One example is the M o d e r n
English w o r d heaven w h i c h comes f r o m OE heofon, whereas PdE sky
comes from Od Norse sky 'cloud'.
(Picase, go to the exercises section and do exercises 5 and 6 . )
7. S P E E C H C O M M U N I T Y
Several attempts have been made to define what a speech community
is but, as frequently happens w i t h other linguistic terms (for example,
dialect), i t is not easy to find a comprehensive definition .
For general linguistics, a speech community is a group of people that
share the same language or dialect i n a specific setting which can be cise,
i v . l l v d ffi i l U t i w l f i ' n g u i s t i c s , a n d i n s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s , t h a t are
C O m m n y U s e d
al y d f f i c u l t t o d e f i n e u n a m b i g u o u s l y i n s p i t e o f t h e f a c t t h a t t h e y ar e c o r e c o n c e p t s i n
l i e l d Speech community, t o g e t h e r w i t h language, dialect, varietyand
un li .is ;i city or a neighborhood; o broad, such as a whole country. For
M U lolinguistics, the issue is a bit more complex than that given the fact
ili.ii societal and extra linguistic factors are taken into account. We can
llnil instances of speech communities that are very different among them,
In i .iiise the degree of complexity depends on the number of variables
I I I M ilved i n the social and linguistic interaction, some of w h i c h are the
(< French estomac < Latn | * rbal repertoire (i.e. the set of languages, dialects, registers, etc.) and the
11 ilr repertoire (i.e. the relationship among interlocutors, such as parent-
> luid, leacher-student, employer-employee).
Ihe definition of speech community needs to be sufficiently flexible
|nd .ibslract to include social groupings as dissimilar as neighborhoods
u n rountries as speech communities. A basic component for a speech
imunity to be considered as such, is the fact of sharing at least one
liiiiguuge and, therefore, the term refers to a group of people that could
| i iiniiuinicate i n the same language. Members of a speech community are
h d by a common end whi c h, i n t u r n , w i l l be different to the ends of
i ither people or groups. Each individual can therefore be a member of a
ipeech c o m m u n i t y on some occasion and a member of another speech
11 iininiinity on another occasion depending on his/her end. The underlying
i .ii lonal is that because of specific transitory interests people need to
lilcnly themselves as part of a group or speech community and sometimes
* I i >l hers, or be seen as part of group. All this depending on the situational
i ontext. So, each i n d i v i d u a l has his/her o w n verbal repertoire (verbal
v.H leties) and each speech community has its own speech repertoire.
Ii is important to take into account that speech communities do not
m i i-ssarily correspond w i t h political boundaries (Swedish is spoken in
'.urden but i t is also spoken i n some parts of Finland), religions (Turkish
K spoken i n Turkey but also i n some parts of Greece, Bulgaria and
Rumania) or cultures (Bengali is spoken by two groups, i n Bangladesh
mu in India (West Bengal).
I anguages are often used by groups of people that share a physical
i Ontext b u t also a n u m b e r of social norms. The relationship among
1
members of a speech community allows the categorization of differences
.iniong the several users and v a r i a t i o n according to certain social
11 iiulitionings such as age, gender, job, educational background, etc. These
|M >ups of people share at least one language or variety and also some rules
iind norms for the correct use i n communication.
As was suggested above, speech c o m m u n i t i e s do not need to be
e r m s l n
native speaker Ts inonolingual, as a matter of fact, bilingual or trilingual speech communities
. i i c as common as monolingual ones. Kachru (2001) distinguishes lour
 AN I N I K O D I K I'ION TO SOCIOLINGUISTICS
m a j o r types o f speech c o m m u n i t i e s : m u l t i l i n g u a l , b i l i n g u a l , m o n o l i n g u a l
a n d diglossic speech c o m m u n i t i e s .
a) A m u l t i l i n g u a l s p e e c h c o m m u n i t y recognizes m o r e t h a n t w o
o f f i c i a l l a n g u a g e s as i t h a p p e n s i n S w i t z e r l a n d w h e r e F r e n c h ,
Germn a n d I t a l i a n are official languages a n d are r e g u l a r l y spoken
i n some parts of the c o u n t r y w h i l e n o t i n others (for example, i n
Z u r i c h m o s t p e o p l e use Germn w h e r e a s i n G e n e v a m o s t p e o p l e
s p e a k F r e n c h ) . I n m u l t i l i n g u a l c o u n t r i e s a c o n t a c t l a n g u a g e is
c o m m o n l y a d o p t e d as a n ' o f f i c i a l ' language for p r a c t i c a l purposes
as, f o r instance, E n g l i s h i n I n d i a a n d R u s s i a n i n the f o r m e r USSR.
b) A b i l i n g u a l s p e e c h c o m m u n i t y acknowledges t w o languages w i t h
a n o f f i c i a l s t a t u s as i n Canad o r i n B e l g i u m . I n Canad,
b i l i n g u a l i s m c a n be seen i n s o m e p a r t s o f t h e c o u n t r y b u t t h e r e
are also c o m m u n i t i e s t h a t are e s s e n t i a l l y m o n o l i n g u a l , i n e i t h e r
E n g l i s h o r F r e n c h . I n Brussels, for example, there are clear
d i v i s i o n s i n t e r m s o f reas w h e r e one language o r t h e o t h e r is used
but b i l i n g u a l i s m / m u l t i l i n g u a l i s m is also c o m m o n . F o r instance,
a Brussels c i t i z e n m a y w a k e u p i n his/her h o m e t o w n , have
b r e a k f a s t w i t h h i s F l e m i s h s p e a k i n g f a m i l y , t h e n go t o w o r k t o a
d i f f e r e n t p a r t o f the c i t y w h e r e F r e n c h is spoken, use t h i s language
i n t h e p u b l i c t r a n s p o r t a n d t h e n get t o h i s w o r k i n g - p l a c e w h e r e
s/he is r e q u i r e d t o speak E n g l i s h .
S p a n i s h is t h e o f f i c i a l l a n g u a g e i n S p a i n b u t i n s o m e p a r t s o f
t h e c o u n t r y s u c h as t h e B a s q u e C o u n t r y , C a t a l o n i a , a n d G a l i c i a
there are t w o o f f i c i a l languages a n d m o n o l i n g u a l speakers of
S p a n i s h o r B a s q u e / C a t a l a n / G a l i c i a n c a n be f o u n d as w e l l as
b i l i n g u a l speakers.
c) A m o n o l i n g u a l s p e e c h c o m m u n i t y has o n l y one official language,
as P o r t u g a l does f o r e x a m p l e , b u t t h i s c o n c e p t i o n is s o m e t i m e s
m i s l e a d i n g since m o n o l i n g u a l speakers c a n also have a r e p e r t o i r e
o f styles, registers o r dialects t h a t m a y be u t t e r l y d i f f e r e n t f r o m the
standard.
d) A d i g l o s s i c c o m m u n i t y w o u l d be o n e w h e r e t w o l a n g u a g e s o r
varieties are f u n c t i o n a l l y c o m p l e m e n t a r y . Diglossia often
d i s t i n g u i s h e s b e t w e e n t w o v a r i e t i e s ; one w h i c h is u s e d i n f o r m a l
c o n t e x t s ( h i g h v a r i e t y ) a n d a n o t h e r one t h a t is used i n c o l l o q u i a l
speech ( l o w v a r i e t y ) . A r a b i c - s p e a k i n g c o m m u n i t i e s , f o r e x a m p l e ,
r e g u l a r l y d i s t i n g u i s h b e t w e e n Classical a n d c o l l o q u i a l A r a b i c .
35
i'n-li.-.-.ia is o f t e n i n t e r t w i n e d w i t h b i l i n g u a l i s m / m u l t i l i n g u a l i s m . I n
I i icaking S w i t z e r l a n d , f o r instance, c h i l d r e n l e a r n t h e l o w variety
h i intsch, i n c l u d i n g s o m e r e g i o n a l dialects o f S w i s s ) a n d l a t e r
l l u \. i | i i i n - t h e h i g h v a r i e t y . S o m e t h i n g s i m i l a r h a p p e n s i n t h e USA
p a n i s h - s p e a k i n g i m m i g r a n t f a m i l i e s . Very o f t e n c h i l d r e n l e a r n
i >", 11 | i t h e i r p a r e n t s as t h e i r m o t h e r t o n g u e a n d later, w h e n they
ll i i I l i d , they l e a r n E n g l i s h w h i c h w i l l p r o b a b l y be t h e language they
Will need m i'veryday life. As a result, adolescents a n d a d u l t s raised u n d e r
i i n d i l i o n s m a y use S p a n i s h w i t h t h e i r p a r e n t s a n d g r a n d p a r e n t s
Imi I i i i l i . l i at w o r k , o r even w i t h t h e i r s i b l i n g s .
\ an be d e d u c e d f r o m t h e p r e v i o u s d e s c r i p t i o n , i t is n o t easy l o
i i iln w l i a l can be considered a speech c o m m u n i t y b u t there are general
111 es ihat help. A c c o r d i n g t o Spolsky (1998: 25) the speech c o m m u n i t y
un l i m i i a t i o n o f l o c a t i o n o r size b u t i t entails a c o m p l e x i n t e r l o c k i n g
M i MI K ol c o m m u n i c a t i o n , t h e i r m e m b e r s s h a r i n g the knowledge of
II.ice use patterns as w e l l as a t t i t u d e s t o w a r d s others a n d themselves,
ilso s h a r i n g a set o f language varieties ( o r repertoires) a n d n o r m s f o r
- 1111 111. M embers o f t h e same speech c o m m u n i t y do n o t even need to
i nprehensive k n o w l e d g e , or even h a n d l e , each o f t h e varieties
i II i loires t h a t are u s e d w i t h i n i t . Perhaps, b e l o n g i n g t o a p a r t i c u l a r
h . o i n m u n i t y is s o m e t h i n g t h a t , a p a r t f o r a c c o m m o d a t i n g s o m e
i il p r i n c i p i e s , r e q u i r e s t h e speakers' self a s c r i p t i o n t o i t o n a c c o u n t
i i i " i i s such as p e r s o n a l i d e n t i t y o r g r o u p a t t i t u d e .
ii > l o the exercises s e c t i o n a n d d o exercises 7, 8 a n d 9.)
ll DOINC S O C I O L I N G U I S T I C R E S E A R C H
Anv a d u l t speaker o f a language has a c c u m u l a t e d e n o u g h experience
|li I n. iw that t h e i r o w n language is n o t used i n the same w a y b y different
i ikrrs in their speech c o m m u n i t y . I t depends o n the i n t e r l o c u t o r s social
i|'i aphic b a c k g r o u n d a n d o t h e r factors such as age, sex o r education.
II cans that every speaker w i l l show some degree o f stylistic v a r i a t i o n
i i i II 11 ng o n (a) the relations of p o w e r o r s o l i d a r i t y w i t h the i n t e r l o c u t o r ;
11' i llie si n i a l context ( d o m a i n ) w h e r e the c o n v e r s a t i o n is t a k i n g place: al
i i - , i n s c h o o l , at t h e w o r k i n g place, n e i g h b o r h o o d ; a n d (c) the t o p i c :
Ii l l u lie, professional, t r i f l i n g . These variables determine t h a t a researcher
1111Mi lo scarch i n t o the m a t t e r a n d analyze the way people speak and why,
III m i l i to devise some w a y t o collect data w i t h a transparent, systematic
lllil i i n a i n h i g u o u s m e t h o d i n o r d e r t o get reliable non-biased data.
 S o e i o l i n g u i s t s at w o r k are l o o k i n g loi i o i n t n o n h a c c p l c d m i e s a n d
p a t t e r n s that a c c o u n t l o r v a r i a l i o n s in speei h (these can he i n the l o r m
ol p r o n u n c i a t i o n , w o r d c h o i c e o r g r a m m a t i c a l c o n i p l c x i t y , o r language
c h o i c e a m o n g o t h e r s ) b a s e d o n s o m e d e t e r m i n i n g l a c t o r s s u c h a age,
gender, level o f e d u c a t i o n , place o f o r i g i n , etc. a n d also d e p e n d i n g o n t h e
nature of the encounter (place a n d topic). Bearing this i n m i n d , the
s o c i o l i n g u i s t at w o r k m a y n e e d t o e l i c i t i n f o r m a t i o n o r j u s t o b s e r v e a
c o m m u n i c a t i v e s i t u a t i o n . S o m e o t h e r factors s u c h as v a l i d i t y c o m e i n t o
play because t h e s o c i o l i n g u i s t c a n n o t assume t h a t the i n f o r m a n t s are n o t
l y i n g o r s i m p l y p r e t e n d i n g a n accent o r u s i n g w o r d s different to t h e ones
they w o u l d use i n a r e a l s i t u a t i o n . T h i s is n o necessarily done o n p u r p o s e
b u t i t is p e r f e c t l y possible t h a t s o m e speaker, o n n o t i c i n g t h a t h i s speech
is b e i n g analyzed changes i t unconsciously, o r j u s t tries t o m a k e h i s speech
clearer, a n d t h a t i s p r e c i s e l y t h e base o f s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c r e s e a r c h . I t is
necessary t o get r e l i a b l e i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t t h e l i n g u i s t i c p h e n o m e n o n
w h i c h has e c o l o g i c a l v a l i d i t y , i.e. i t represents a t r u e s a m p l e o f t h e w a y
c o m m u n i c a t i o n takes place w i t h o u t any type o f interference o n t h e p a r t
o f the researcher.
Intrusin c a n r e s u l t n o t o n l y f r o m t h e presence o f t h e r e s e a r c h e r o r
a n y u n e x p e c t e d d e v i c e b u t also f r o m t h e a l t e r a t i o n , a l t h o u g h s u b t l e i t
c o u l d be, o f t h e s i t u a t i o n o r t h e e n v i r o n m e n t . T h i s b r i n g s a b o u t a
methodological p r o b l e m pointed out by W i l l i a m Labov and it concerned
h o w can w e observe the way people speak w h e n the researcher is n o t there
a n d i n s i t u a t i o n s t h a t m i g h t be prvate (e.g. at h o m e , business m e e t i n g )
and, therefore, d i f f i c u l t t o analyze. L a b o v refers t o t h i s bone o f c o n t e n t i o n
as t h e observer's p a r a d o x . N e v e r t h e l e s s , t h i s t y p e o f m e t h o d o l o g i c a l
p r o b l e m s are n o t exclusive t o s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c r e s e a r c h a n d there are ways
2
to m i n i m i z e it.
S o m e decades ago i t w a s a c o m m o n p r a c t i c e t o r e c o r d t e l e p h o n e o r
o t h e r types o f conversations w i t h o u t ask ing f o r p e r m i s s i o n . N o t w i t h -
s t a n d i n g e t h i c a l a n d legal issues arise o n t h e fairness o f u s i n g " h i d d e n "
devices o r s o u r c e s o f i n f o r m a t i o n s u c h as secret r e c o r d i n g s i n n a t u r a l
s e t t i n g s , t h e s o c i o l i n g u i s t needs t o f i n d a d e q u a t e m e c h a n i s m s t o e l i c i t
i n f o r m a t i o n t h a t is g e n u i n e a n d l a w f u l .
E a r l y s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c research w a s based o n t h e use o f q u e s t i o n n a i r e s
to collect data o n attitudes a n d behaviors where, for instance, the
2 I n English Language Teaching, the same issue arises w i t h regars to research w i t h i n
the classroom because students on knowing they are being observed may change their beha-
vior and their performance.
mi I I n i . m i l i a d l o choose one o p l i o n o u t o l several ones, l o r example l<>
I u n a l e o n e w o r d f r o m a n o t h e r o r o n e specific p r o n u n c i a t i o n l i o n i
nllii i . l l i i s technique is perfectly v a l i d a n d useful d e p e n d i n g o n the a i n i
MI I I H s t u d y a n d the t y p e o f subjeets (age, c u l t u r a l b o u n d s , place, e l e . )
mu o b v i o u s l y the d a t a o b t a i n e d is easily s t a t i s t i c a l l y a n a l y z a b l e . W h l l c
i v e n i e n t f o r g a t h e r i n g d e m o g r a p h i c d a t a o n the subjeets u n d e r
lllldv, i l n s research t e c h n i q u e presents several s h o r t c o m i n g s . O n the one
I I ii i i vates a very u n n a t u r a l s i t u a t i o n a n d i n f o r m a n t s m a y j u s t answer
n l i a ihey t h i n k t h e r e s e a r c h e r w a n t s t o k n o w , o r t h e o t h e r w a y r o u n d ,
llul o n the other h a n d , as t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e has been p l a n n e d i n advaiue
liten is l i l l l e r o o m , i f any, t o gather i n f o r m a t i o n t h a t has n o t been laken
l l l l n tu i m u ! w h e n i t was designed. Jn t h a t respect, the i n t e r v i e w poses
" > nlvantages due t o t h e f l e x i b i l i t y o f t h e s i t u a t i o n . Questionnaires are
useful for g a t h e r i n g d e m o g r a p h i c i n f o r m a t i o n f r o m the i n l o i inanls.
A n o t h e r p o s s i b i l i t y w o u l d be face-to-face i n t e r v i e w s (sociolingulstll
m i . i view) b u t we k n o w t h a t w h e n we are a s k i n g questions a n d recciviny
i c >ur i n t e r l o c u t o r ' s speech is b e i n g e i t h e r c a r e f u l l y p l a n n i i l i I I . i i
i . i un x l i l i e d because o f t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s a n d h e has a m o r e i a s n a l
lvle lliat he possibly uses w h e n he is a m o n g friends o r w i t h his/liei lamilv.
i \o h a p p e n t h a t the researcher concentrates his/her a t t e n t i o n o n
i h i n g w h i l e n e g l e c t i n g a n o t h e r i n t e r e s t i n g aspect. S o c i o l i n g u i s t i e
l l l l n views are t i m e - a n d effort-consuming, a n d not always suitable because
il lliev are n o t p r o p e r l y d i r e c t e d t h e y m a y n o t be a g o o d w a y t o e l i c i t
i n i . .1 n i . i i i o n . H o w e v e r , t h e r e are s o m e t e c h n i q u e s t h a t c a n be u s e d t o
lilil n i i i asual speech i n s u c h s i t u a t i o n s a n d , w h i c h c a n m i n i m i z e the
ence o f the i n t e r v i e w e r .
\ case i n p o i n t , i n t h e last few years n e w advances o n l e x i c o g r a p h y
\g to incorprate c o m m o n l a n g u a g e uses a n d h i g h f r e q u e n e y
litn I I I I V i n E n g l i s h L a n g u a g e Teaching m a t e r i a l s . So, t h e r e is a need n o t
ni i b i " analyze large w r i t t e n a n d s p o k e n c o r p o r a f r o m t h e m e d i a b u t it
i . I n l i m d a m e n t a l t o c o m p i l e a n d e x a m i n e d a t a c o m i n g f r o m everyday
| I I V I Ii To this a i m , a very recent research t e c h n i q u e consists i n p r o v i d i n g
mi i.mts w i t h s m a l l h i g h - c a p a c i t y M P 3 recorders t h a t they c a r r y all the
-ii ici w h i c h are r e c o r d i n g every t h i n g they say. I t seems t h a t after some
i 111 i f l a m i l i a r i z a t i o n , people t e n d to get used to t h e m a n d often forget
l u the fact t h a t t h e y are b e i n g r e c o r d e d . These i n f o r m a n t s d o n o t
I I ii.illv k n o w a b o u t the a i m o f research a n d , therefore, t h e v a l i d i t y o f the
lili I I H ' i I a n d t h e r e l i a b i l i t y o f t h e c o l l e c t e d d a t a increases.
I n the e a r l y 1970s W i l l i a m L a b o v c o n d u c t e d s o m e s e m i n a l research
111 i l i . . New York d e p a r t m e n t stores a n d collected non-intrusive responses.
38 AN INTUOIMK I ION TO SOCIOLINGUISTICS i

H e w a n t e d t o f i n d o u t w h y t h e f i n a l Irl is n o t always p r o n o u n c e d i n f i n a l I M IU I S I S
p o s i t i o n i n w o r d s s u c h as car o r bar. L a b o v selected three stores located
i n different reas o f the c i t y a n d w h i c h entailed (a) a fashionable s h o p p i n g I vit.iI\e llie l o l l o w i n g conversations f r o m Tom Sawyer. W h a t can
rea; (b) a middle-class store; a n d , (c) a store d e a l i n g i n l o w - p r i c e goods. ihoul the i n t e r l o c u t o r s ? H o w ?
A n i n t e r v i e w e r s y s t e m a t i c a l l y asked q ue s t ions t o salespeople at t h e three
stores a n d he s h o w e d t h a t v a r i a t i o n w a s s y s t e m a t i c d u e t o a m a t t e r o f
I
social status. H e w o r k e d o n t h e a s s u m p t i o n t h a t the sales-people's accents
I M I In k v o u !
reflected those o f t h e i r c u s t o m e r s , a n d h i s research t e c h n i q u e consisted
T i l l l l " li i see y o u t r y i t . '
i n a n i n t e r v i e w e r v i s i t i n g t h e different stores a n d a s k i n g a salesperson for
VN. II I i .m d o i t . '
goods t h a t w e r e l o c a t e d o n t h e f o u r t h floor. T h e n , p r e t e n d i n g he h a d n o t
' N . i yon i an't, either.'
h e a r d t h e a n s w e r t h e i n t e r v i e w e r w o u l d get a s e c o n d m o r e e m p h a t i c 'Vi 1 1 .ni.'
response. A l l t h e p r o n u n c i a t i o n s o f t h e w o r d ' f o u r ' w e r e a n a l y z e d a n d
N M yon (an't.'
c o n t r a s t e d w i t h o t h e r relevant i n f o r m a t i o n such as age, a p p r o x i m a t e age,
'Iiiin
etc. o f e a c h i n t e r v i e w e e . 2 6 4 i n t e r v i e w s w e r e c a r r i e d o u t i n each
'Vllll i tlll'l.'
department store . 3

I DI
As w a s su g g e s t e d a b o v e , s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c r e s e a r c h is b a s e d o n t h e K n V
\e pause. T h e n T o m said:
c o l l e c t i o n o f large a m o u n t s o f data a n d the l a t e r statistical analysis o f this
'Wliai' v o i i r ame?'
data i n o r d e r t o find general tendencies o r regularities. Nonetheless, there i .niv ol y o u r business, maybe.'
is s o m e tensin b e t w e e n q u a n t i t a t i v e a n d q u a l i t a t i v e a p p r o a c h e s t o w, II I 'low l ' l l make i t m y business.'
s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c research. E t h n o g r a p h e r s f o l l o w a d i f f e r e n t a p p r o a c h a n d v\ II, w h y don't y o u ? '
t h e r e f o r e t h e p r o c e d u r e s are very d i f f e r e n t . T h e y base t h e i r re s e a rc h o n II \ O I I ..iv i n u c h I w i l l . '
case s t u d i e s ( E t h n o g r a p h i c a p p r o a c h ) a n d t h a t is w h y t h e y c a r e f u l l y Min l i i n u c h m u c h ! Ther e, now.'
observe single cases a n d t h e y c o n t r a s t t h e p a t t e r n s o f b e h a v i o r t h a t they n l i \.,n i l i i n k y o u ' r e m i g h t y s m a r t , don't you? I c o u l d l i c k y o u w i t h
f i n d w i t h those of o t h e r c o m m u n i t i e s or societies. Due to the type of I i.ind l i e d b e h i n d me, i f I w a n t e d to .'
analysis they m a k e , u s u a l l y based o n recordings, statistical analysis is n o t II w l i \t y o u do it? Y o u say y o u c a n d o i t . '
n o r m a l l y possible. A l t h o u g h some tensin can be perceived between these Well, / will, i f y o u f o o l w i t h me.'
t w o approaches (quantitative a n d qualitative), each study has idiosyncratic M|I yes - l've seen w h o l e f a m i l i e s i n t h e same fix.'
c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s a n d specific a i m s a n d m a y r e q u i r e one o r the o t h e r b u t i t MI 111 v vou t h i n k y o u ' r e some now, don 't y o u ? '
1

is often t h e case t h a t the researcher needs t o be eclectic a n d c o m b i n e the

i H. w h a l a hat!'
statistical analysis of data w i t h personal interviews i n order to gain
II .n l u m p t h a t h a t i f y o u d o n ' t l i k e i t . I dar y o u t o k n o c k i t off;
r e l i a b i l i t y , t o c o n t r a s t his/her f i n d i n g s , o r s i m p l y as a c o m p l e m e n t a r y
research t e c h n i q u e . m i l a n v b o d y t h a t ' l l take a dar w i l l s u c k eggs.'
VlMlVe a l i a r ! '
A l l i n a l l , t h e r e are d i f f e r e n t a p p r o a c h e s t o w a r d s s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c
' Y o n i e another.'
research i n terms of b o t h e l i c i t a t i o n techniques and data analysis and
ii i I i ; ' l i t i n g liar, a n d d a r n ' t take i t u p . '
each type o f research r e q u i r e s a d i f f e r e n t design. I t is o f t e n t h e case t h a t
( M a r k T w a i n , The Adventures of Tom Sawyer
m o r e t h a n o ne e l i c i t a t i o n t e c h n i q u e is needed.

(Please go t o t h e exercises s e c t i o n a n d do exercises 10 a n d 11.) ) Make a lisl o f a l l t h e swear w o r d s y o u k n o w i n y o u r m o t h e r tongue

11 do vou use? H o w often? I n w h a t c i r c u m s t a n c e s ? To w h o m ? W i l
Labov, W i l l i a m (1966). The Social Stratification
3 of English in New York City. 11 a '
Washington, D.C.: Center for Applied Linguistics.
 i M I
3. IT y o n have access l o Cable I V l i \o see an e p i s o d e o f ' T o m a n d
J c i r y ' i n w h i c h the black lady speaks. W h a l distinelive phonological, lexical
a n d syntactic features d o y o u note?
4 . Very r o u g h l y s p e a k i n g w e c a n d i v i d e w o r d s a n d phrases i n t o t h r e e
b r o a d registers: f o r m a l , i n f o r m a l a n d n o r m a l . To w h i c h register d o y o u
i h i n k these w o r d s a n d phrases b e l o n g : buy, parchase, man, bloke, kids,
titilaren, cups, 'I'm knackered', 'I'm shattered', 'That's two quid, guv',
emoluments, 'Has he seen a shrink?', 'Chuck that brolly away', progeny?
Check y o u r answers i n y o u r d i c t i o n a r i e s . I f y o u w a n t t o take t h i s f u r t h e r ,
have a look at s o m e concordances f o r w o r d s l i k e ' s h r i n k ' + ' e m o l u m e n t s ' .
Try http://sara.natcorp.ox.ac.uk/lookup.html
5. I n the f o l l o w i n g passage, the a u t h o r ("I") w h o is o n a boating holiday
w i t h friends o n the river T h a m e s has j u s t h a d a s w i m i n the river. C a n y o u
f i n d a n y l i n g u i s t i c evidence w h i c h suggests t h a t t h e b o o k t h e passage is
taken f r o m is n o t c o n t e m p o r a r y ?
Rather an a m u s i n g t h i n g happened while dressing that m o r n i n g . I
was very c o l d w h e n I got b a c k i n t o the boat, a n d , i n m y h u r r y t o get m y
s h i r t o n , I a c c i d e n t a l l y j e r k e d i t i n t o t h e water. I t m a d e m e a w f u l l y w i l d ,
especially as George b u r s t o u t l a u g h i n g . I c o u l d n o t see a n y t h i n g to l a u g h
at, a n d I t o l d George so, a n d he o n l y l a u g h e d t h e m o r e . I never s a w a
m a n l a u g h so m u c h . I quite lost m y temper w i t h h i m at last, a n d I p o i n t e d
o u t to h i m w h a t a d r i v e l l i n g m a n i a c o f a n i m b e c i l e i d i o t he was; b u t he
o n l y r o a r e d t h e louder. A n d t h e n j u s t as I was l a n d i n g t h e s h i r t , I n o t i c e d
t h a t i t w a s n o t m y s h i r t a t a l l , b u t George's, w h i c h I h a d m i s t a k e n f o r
m i n e ; w h e r e u p o n t h e h u m o u r o f t h e t h i n g s t r u c k m e f o r t h e first t i m e ,
a n d I began t o l a u g h . A n d t h e m o r e I l o o k e d f r o m George's w e t s h i r t t o
George, r o a r i n g w i t h laughter, the m o r e I was a m u s e d , a n d I l a u g h e d so
m u c h t h a t I h a d t o let t h e s h i r t f a l l b a c k i n t o the w a t e r a g a i n .
'Ar'n't y o u y o u g o i n g t o get i t out?' said George b e t w e e n his
shrieks.
I c o u l d n o t a n s w e r h i m a t a l l f o r a w h i l e , I w a s l a u g h i n g so, b u t at
last, b e t w e e n m y peis I m a n a g e d t o j e r k o u t :
' I t isn't m y s h i r t i t ' s y o u r s ! '
I never saw a man's face c h a n g e f r o m l i v e l y t o severe so s u d d e n l y i n
all m y life before.
' W h a t ! ' he yelled, s p r i n g i n g u p . 'You silly c u c k o o ! W h y can't y o u be
m o r e careful w h a t you're doing? W h y the deuce don't y o u go a n d dress o n
the bank? You're n o t f i t to be i n a boat, you're not. G i m m e the hitcher.'
I t r i e d t o m a k e h i m see the f u n o f t h e t h i n g , b u t he c o u l d not. George
is very dense a t seeing a j o k e s o m e t i m e s ,
i
< I alse c o g n a t e s , o r l a l s e f r i e n d s , a r e w o r d s t h a t l o o k a l i k e i n
I n | l i Ii a n d S p a n i s h b u t h a v e d i f f e r e n t m e a n i n g s . F o r i n s t a n c e , t h e
I i i | h ,h w o r d 'decent' does n o t m e a n 'decente i n S p a n i s h b u t 'acceptable'
Mi i easonable'. M a n y o f t h e s e w o r d s o r i g i n a l l y h a d s i m i l a r m e a n i n g s
... h o l h l a n g u a g e s b u t t h e y c h a n g e d o v e r t i m e . I t f o l l o w s s o m e w o r d s
Win isc m e a n i n g has c h a n g e d o v e r t i m e ( s e m a n t i c change). L o o k u p each
Vi II d i n a n e t y m o l o g i c a l d i c t i o n a r y ( s u c h as The Oxford English
lili lionary) a n d a) f i n d h o w e a c h w o r d h a s e v o l v e d f r o m a s e m a n t i c
l i ol view i n the h i s t o r y o f the E n g l i s h language a n d , b) f i n d the
M p p i o p i iate e q u i v a l e n t i n p r e s e n t - d a y S p a n i s h .
E.g.: l u x u r y : I t m e a n s 'opulence' i n present-day E n g l i s h b u t b e t w e e n
I 4 t h a n d m i d 1 9 t h c , luxus m e a n t 'excessive i n d u l g e n c e i n c r e a t u r e
c o m f o r t s a n d sensual pleasures', j u s t like present-day S p a n i s h
'lujurioso'.
Abrupt
I >isj,race
Edil
Ii M i r n a l
Svmpathy
7. B e a r i n g i n m i n d t h e s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s i t u a t i o n i n d i f f e r e n t p a r t s o f
' i >iiii. h y to find o u t i n w h a t respect is S p a i n a single o r a c o m p l e x speech
n u n i t y . D o t h e s a m e w i t h t h e U n i t e d States. I n w h a t respect is t h e
tllualion i n S p a i n a n d t h e U n i t e d States different?
H. T h i n k o f the w a y y o u speak y o u r first language (English o r Spanish)
i i h < >l l i c r p e o p l e i n y o u r speech c o m m u n i t y . H o w does i t v a r y f r o m the
i \ >l h e r p e o p l e y o u k n o w speak? M a k e a l i s t o f c o m m o n f e a t u r e s i n
yoin o w n speech (e.g. p r o n u n c i a t i o n , v o c a b u l a r y ( w o r d c h o i c e ) , syntax,
klli imatic expressions, etc.) a n d t r y t o find a n e x p l a n a t i o n f o r the difference
I l u c e n y o u r o w n speech a n d t h e o t h e r p e r s o n ( f o r example, g e o g r a p h i c
.i l a t i o n ) .
>. D e s c r i b e t h e w a y i n w h i c h t h e l a n g u a g e s p o k e n b y a d o l e s c e n t s
l
i . n lu K n g l i s h o r S p a n i s h ) is c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f a specific g r o u p .
I O. L a n g u a g e is o f t e n r e f e r r e d t o as a s o u r c e o f p o w e r as i t c a n be
H.. .1 l o c o n t r o l o t h e r s . T h i n k a b o u t t h e w a y s o m e professionals s u c h as
i .11 \, l a w y e r s , t e a c h e r s , s p e a k t o o t h e r s i n a w o r k i n g c o n t e x t , o r
In i\s speak to their children. Write a l i s t o f c o m m o n features f o r
. . i . Ii ol t h e m .
 I NI I I 43
4 - AN INIKODIK I ION l ( ) S()( I O I ,IN( i l J I S I I C S

i n v R. W. 2003. 'A bi-ii-l h i s t o r y o l A m e r i c a n S o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s 1949-1989', i n K.

1 1 . I n this c h a p t e r i t has been suggested that languages a n d language
M e s t h r i e (ed.), Sociolinguistics: The Essential Readings. M a l d e n , M A , USA:
use are s u b j e c t e d t o a g r e a t d e a l o f v a r i a t i o n :
Blackwel P u b l i s h i n g .

a) Write different ways of asking for p e r m i s s i o n i n an everyday V O i SKY, B . 1998. Sociolinguistics. O x f o r d : O.U.P.
s i t u a t i o n , f o r instance, y o u have got a headache a n d y o u n e e d a
WAKDIIAUGH, R. 2002, ( 4 t h ed.). An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. M a l d e n , MA,
p a i n - r e l i e v i n g p i l l . F o r e a c h r e q u e s t , indcate t h e p e r s o n y o u are
USA: Blackwel P u b l i s h i n g .
t a l k i n g to and briefly describe the s i t u a t i o n a l context and your
intention.

b) Do y o u speak the same w a y to y o u r brother/sister/friend a n d to 11. K E S O U R C E S O N T H E W E B

y o u r boss? I n w h i c h w a y s is y o u r speech d i f f e r e n t ?
Now y o u can visit the web page f o r t h i s s u b j e c t w h e r e y o u w i l l Find
c) D o y o u speak the same w a y i n a f a m i l y g a t h e r i n g a n d i n y o u r office
jurther references a n d c o m p l e m e n t a r y r e a d i n g s .
o r w o r k i n g place? W h y ? I n w h i c h w a y s is y o u r speech d i f f e r e n t , i f
i t is?

12. I T J R T H E R R E A D I N G S A N D QUESTIONS

10. REFERENCES
12.1. T e x t l
BRATT PAULSON, C h . a n d G. R. T U C K E R . 2 0 0 3 . ' I n t r o d u c t i o n , i n R. M e s t h r i e (ed.),
Sociolinguistics: The Essential Readings. M a l d e n , M A , USA: Blackwel Read the f o l l o w i n g t e x t c a r e f u l l y a n d c o m m e n t o n i t e m p h a s i z i n g any
Publishing. l M I l y o u consider of relevance. After the text y o u w i l l find some questions
i h . i l m a y be h e l p f u l . W r i t e a r o u n d 250-300 w o r d s i n t o t a l .
BERNDT, R. 1982. A History of the English Language. Leipzig, Germany: V E B .

CALVET, L . 2003. ' R e f l e c t i o n s o n t h e o r i g i n s o f S o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s i n E u r o p e , ' i n R. Once w e have i d e n t i f i e d t h e l i n g u i s t i c v a r i a b l e as o u r basic w o r k i n g

M e s t h r i e (ed.), Sociolinguistics: The Essential Readings. M a l d e n , M A , USA: t o o l , t h e next task becomes one o f e m p l o y i n g t h a t t o o l i n a n effort t o see
Blackwel P u b l i s h i n g . h o w l i n g u i s t i c v a r i a t i o n r e l a t e s t o s o c i a l v a r i a t i o n . A n e a r l y s t u d y of
l i n g u i s t i c v a r i a t i o n b y G u m p e r z (1958), b u t one cast i n a ' m o d e r n ' m o l d ,
GUMPERZ, J. J. 1958. 'Dialect Differences a n d Social S t r a t i f i c a t i o n i n a N o r t h I n d i a n
shows some of the intricacies involved i n trying to relate linguistic
Village'. American Anthropologist, 60: 6 6 8 - 8 1 .
v a r i a t i o n t o s o c i a l v a r i a t i o n . B e c a u s e t h e s o c i e t y h e w a s s t u d y i n g is
H O C K , J . 1996. Language History, Language Change and Language Relationship. r i g i d l y s t r a t i f i e d o n t h e basis o f caste m e m b e r s h i p , t h e p r o b l e m s are
B e r l i n : M o u t o n de G r u y t e r . c o n s i d e r a b l y f e w e r t h a t those e n c o u n t e r e d i n s u c h c i t i e s as N e w Y o r k ,
D e t r o i t , o r even N o r w i c h , b u t they are s t i l l present. G u m p e r z shows h o w
IIUDSON, R. A. 1980. Sociolinguistics. C a m b r i d g e , U K : C.U.P. r a t h e r s m a l l differences i n speech c a n effectively d i s t i n g u i s h sub-groups
i n society f r o m o n e a n o t h e r i n a s t u d y o f l i n g u i s t i c usage i n the village
KACHRU, B . B . 2 0 0 1 . 'Speech c o m m u n i t y ' i n R. M e s t h r i e (ed.), Sociolinguistics: The
of Khalapur, eighty miles n o r t h of D e l h i i n India. The social structure
Essential Readings. M a l d e n , M A , USA: Blackwel P u b l i s h i n g .
o f t h e village is d e t e r m i n e d b y Hind caste m e m b e r s h i p w i t h B r a h m a n s
LABOV, W. 2003. 'Some sociolinguistic principies' i n R. Mesthrie (ed.), Sociolinguistics: at t h e t o p , t h e n R a j p u t s ( w a r r i o r s ) , V a i s h y a s ( m e r c h a n t s ) , a n d several
The Essential Readings. M a l d e n , M A , USA: Blackwel P u b l i s h i n g . g r o u p s o f a r t i s a n s a n d l a b o r e r s l o w e r d o w n . A t t h e b o t t o m are t h r e e
u n t o u c h a b l e castes: C h a m a r s (landless laborers), J a t i a C h a m a r s (leather
MESTHRIE, R. (ed.). 2 0 0 1 . Concise Encyclopaedia of Sociolinguistics. Oxford, UK: w o r k e r s a n d shoe m a k e r s ) , a n d B h a n g i s (sweepers). The latter are
Pergamon.
r e s t r i c t e d t o l i v i n g i n c e r t a i n n e i g h b o r h o o d s a n d have less f r e e d o m to
m o v e i n t h e v i l l a g e t h a n d o m e m b e r s o f t h e u p p e r castes. Ten percent
SAVII.I.E-TROIKE, M . 1996. 'The e t h n o g r a p h y o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n . ' I n S. L . M c K a y
o f t h e p o p u l a t i o n are n o t H i n d u s b u t M u s l i m s ; they are o u t s i d e ihe caste
a n d N . H . H o r n b e r g e r , Sociolinguistics and Language Teaching. Cambridge:
C a m b r i d g e U n i v e r s i t y Press. system.
44
AN INTRODUCTION TO SOClOLINGUls | n
So far as language is concerned, certain characteristics ol 11 >
Khalapur village dialect are clear markers of social-group membei shlp
For example, Bhangis do not make certain phonological contrasts ili.i
speakers of all other castes make. Chamars and Jatia Chamars also lai l<
certain phonological contrasts made by a l l others, a n d some, in
attempting to make such a contrast, actually hypercorrect: that is, lhe\
over-extend a particular usage in trying to emulate others. Jatia Chamal I
have a characteristic pronunciation of words that end i n [a?] i n all other
village varieties. Each of the three untouchable castes therefore hu
speech characteristics that clearly set i t off b o t h from the other t w o
untouchable castes and from the touchable castes in the village. Muslim
speech resembles that of the touchable classes.
[...]
This study quite clearly shows a direct relationship between linguistic
variation and caste membership. I f we know certain things about one,
we can predict certain things about the other. It is just such connection*
or correlations that interest sociolinguists w o r k i n g w i t h the linguistn
variable. What they seek are measures of social variation to which thej
can relate the kinds of linguistic variation they observe. However, caste,
w i t h its sharp social stratifications, is useless as a measure of social
variation outside a few non-Western societies. Consequently, the problein
becomes one of finding factors i n society that show a relationship to
such matters as whether or not an i n d i v i d u a l says singing of
singir, he go or he goes, or He doesn't know any thing or He don't know
nothing.
Once a linguistic variable has been identified, the next issue becomes
that of collecting data concerning its variants i n such a way that we can
draw certain conclusions about the social distribution of these variants.
To draw such conclusions, we must be able to relate the variants in some
way to quantifiable factors i n society, e.g., social-class membership,
gender, age, ethnicity, and so on. As we w i l l see, there are numerous
difficulties i n attempting this task, but considerable progress has been
made i n overcoming them, particularly as studies have built on those
that have gone before in such a way as to strengthen the quality of the
work done i n this rea of sociolinguistics.
While i t is fairly easy to relate the oceurrences of the variants of a
linguistic variable to factors such as gender and age, relating them to
factors such as race and ethnicity is somewhat more troublesome since
these are m u c h more subjective i n nature and less easily quantifiable.
But the most complicated factor of all is social-class membership, if we
consider 'social class' to be a useful concept to apply in stratifying society
and few indeed would deny its relevance!
[...]
45
\ I < II II ational scale may employ the following categories: gradate
ni |io ilssioiial education; college or university degree; attendance at
II. p o university but no degree; high school graduation; some high
> I I education; and less than sevenyears of formal education. Income
i l is well as source of income are i m p o r t a n t factors i n any
i llii .ii mu system that focuses on how m u c h money people have.
I il , w ise, i n considering where people live, investigators must concern
lili ni , Ivs with both the type of housing and its location.
(Wardhaugh, 2002: 144-146)
i<>. oniider:
U l r t 11 acling a b o u t G u m p e r z ' s r e s e a r c h i n I n d i a a n d t h e caste
he analyzed, h o w d o y o u see the possibility o f d o i n g research
l l i I I speech c o m m u n i t y i n a w e s t e r n s o c i e t y w h e r e s o c i a l a n d
linguistic differences are o f t e n m o r e subtle?
' I h. i i i i h o r states t h a t is i t is f a i r l y easy to relate l i n g u i s t i c v a r i a n t s
te i hu i o s such as g e n d e r a n d age b u t m u c h m o r e difcult t o relate
lili n i i o factors such as race a n d ethnicity. D o y o u agree? W h y (not)?
| Do y o u l i n d t h e c a t e g o r i e s suggested i n t h e e d u c a t i o n a l scale
lli i i i l e . l e n o u g h f o r s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c research? W o u l d y o u suggest
111. H e o r less categories o r levis t h a n t h e ones listed i n t h i s excerpt?
/' |n lhe text the a u t h o r makes reference t o v a r i o u s factors t h a t affect
l i n g u i s t i c v a r i a t i o n s u c h as age, e t h n i c i t y , gender, e d u c a t i o n a l
b " k g r o u n d , etc. H o w d o y o u t h i n k i n c o m e level a n d s o u r c e o f
un o I I C affect l i n g u i s t i c v a r i a t i o n ?
IV.'J. T . M 2
i id l l i e f o l l o w i n g text c a r e f u l l y a n d c o m m e n t o n i t e m p h a s i z i n g any
i ,. .i i 11 msider of relevance. After the text y o u w i l l find some questions
ni.i\e h c l p f u l . W r i t e a r o u n d 250-300 w o r d s i n t o t a l .
[...]
There is no expectation that a c o m m u n i t y w i l l be linguistically
homogeneous; as a collectivity, it will include a communicative repertoire,
< H i auge of languages, language varieties, and registers, that will pattern
in relation to the salient social and cultural dimensin of communicalion.
Anv one speaker also has a variety of codes, styles, and registers form
M 1 iieh lo choose. The term codes is used here to mean different languages
i H sit'.niI icantly different varieties of a single language; styles, to mean
varieties associated with such social and cultural dimensions as age, sex,
 tu AN I N I K O D I K NON I O SOCIOLINGUISTICS

social class, and relationship between speakers; and registers, to mean I KIA WORDS
varieties of language which are more closely associated w i t h the setting
or scene i n which they are used than they are w i t h the people who are
using them. It is very unlikely in a complex community that any single
individual can produce the full range of the community's repertoire. , , , ,ius book, i n the glossary.
Different subgroups within the c o m m u n i t y may understand and use
different subsets of its available codes. Speakers' communicative
competence includes knowing the alternatives and the rules for
appropriate choice from among the alternatives or for switching between
them. Defining the system for such decisin making is part of the task Analytic language
of describing communication w i t h i n any group, and of explaining Black English Vernacular
communication more generally.
Borrowing
Individuis may belong to several speech communities (which may Dialect
be discrete or overlapping), just as they may particpate i n a variety of Dialectology
social settings. Which one or ones individuis orient themselves to at
Discourse analysis
any given moment which set of social and communicative rules they
Domain
use is part of the strategy of c o m m u n i c a t i o n . To understand this
Ethnography of communication
phenomenon, one must recognize that each member of a community
has a repertoire of social identities and that each identity i n a given Informant
context is associated w i t h a number of appropriate verbal and nonverbal Language attrition
forms of expression. Although an individuis repertoire of social Macro-sociolinguistics
identities may be w i t h i n the bounds of a single complex speech Micro-sociolinguistics
community, for bilingual-bicultural individuis, membership i n unrelated
Native speaker
speech communities is common. Examples include second-generation
Observer's paradox
immigrant children of Greek families who can function appropriately
and comfortably b o t h with peers i n Chicago, Illinois, and w i t h Pragmatics
grandparents and cousins when they visit Athens, and the Navajo leader (Proto)-Indo-European
who is an effective communicator both i n the context of a tribal council Sociolinguistic interview
meeting i n Window Rock, Arizona, and i n a congressional hearing i n Sociology of language
Washington, D.C. Such individuis change not only language codes but
Synchronic variation
rules for speaking, nonverbal behaviors, and other strategies for
interaction, as well as their social roles and identities. Synthetic language
Variety
Saville-Troike (1996: 357-358)

I s s u e s to c o n s i d e r :

a) S a v i l l e - T r o i k e l i n k s d i f f e r e n t i d e n t i t i e s a n d s o c i a l r o l e s t o t h e
a s c r i p t i o n t o different speech c o m m u n i t i e s . D o y o u agree? C a n a
m o n o l i n g u a l speaker be part o f different speech c o m m u n i t i e s ?

b) T r y t o d e s c r i b e y o u r l i n g u i s t i c r e p e r t o i r e a n d y o u r p o s s i b l e
p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n various speech c o m m u n i t i e s . W h a t are some o f the
d i f f i c u l t i e s y o u e n c o u n t e r i n y o u r description?

c) D o y o u t h i n k i t is possible to f i n d a c o m p r e h e n s i v e d e f i n i t i o n o f
'speech c o m m u n i t y ' ? Try a n d provide y o u r o w n d e f i n i t i o n .
 I. S O M E V A R I A B L E S I N S O C I O L I N G U I S T I C S

1.1. Style

As w e s a w i n t h e p r e v i o u s c h a p t e r , g e o g r a p h i c v a r i a t i o n is q u i t e
uoticeable a n d relatively easy t o identify. There are other types o f v a r i a t i o n
I hat are m o r e l a b o r i o u s t o describe a n d , o n some occasions at least, less
conspicuous. E v e n w i t h i n a specic speech c o m m u n i t y individuis have
I range o f c h o i c e s w h e n t h e y speak i n t e r m s o f w o r d c h o i c e , s y n t a c t i c
c o m p l e x i t y a n d even subtle p r o n u n c i a t i o n features. Every i n d i v i d u a l has
a typical w a y i n w h i c h s/he does t h i n g s a n d the same applies t o any aspect
ol h u m a n behavior. T h e r e are r o u g h g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s i n a l l aspects o f life,
lor instance, i n the way people drive. The B r i t i s h are said to be c a l m , gentle
d r i v e r s w h e r e a s t h e I t a l i a n s a r e o f t e n c o n s i d e r e d fast a n d i m p a t i e n t .
H o w e v e r t r u e these g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s m i g h t be, e a c h B r i t i s h a n d I t a l i a n
d river has his/her o w n style w h i c h c a n v a r y d e p e n d i n g o n t h e t i m e o f the
day o r t h e l o c a t i o n .

S t y l i s t i c v a r i a t i o n c a n be f o u n d i n o t h e r reas o f m o r e i n t e r e s t t o
sociolinguists; f o r example, y o u c a n speak very f o r m a l l y o r very i n f o r m a l l y
given c e r t a i n c i r c u m s t a n c e s a n d situations. T h i s i m p l i e s a specific choice
o n the p a r t o f t h e speaker as s/he w i l l p r o b a b l y choose f o r m a l language
for s o l e m n events, less f o r m a l language f o r everyday s i t u a t i o n s a n d really
i n f o r m a l a n d casual language f o r t r i v i a l conversations o r relaxed m a t t e r s .
As a r e s u l t , t h e speaker c a n decide o n a level o f f o r m a l i t y d e p e n d i n g o n a
n u m b e r o f factors s u c h as t h e p a r t i c u l a r o c c a s i o n , social differences, t h e
i n t e r l o c u t o r ' s age a n d o t h e r d e t e r m i n i n g f a c t o r s s u c h as t h e t y p e o f
d i s c o u r s e c h o s e n , i.e., w r i t t e n o r s p o k e n . F o r i n s t a n c e , t h e f o l l o w i n g
sentences m i g h t be used i n d i f f e r e n t s i t u a t i o n s d e p e n d i n g , a m o n g o t h e r
t h i n g s , o n t h e speaker's c h o i c e : " W o u l d y o u be so k i n d as t o leave t h e
r o o m ? " , " C a n y o u please leave t h e r o o m ? " , " G e t l o s t ! " , o r " Y o u p i g , get
lost!". N a t i v e speakers u s u a l l y m a k e use o f t h e r a n g e o f styles t h e y have
 at t h e i r disposal w h e n they speak and lhc\ an casily a c c o m m o d a t e theii
language to the r e q u i r e d degree o l formality. Converscly, il is also possible
t o p r e d i c t t h e stylistic features t h a t a native speaker w i l l b r i n g t o bear < ni
c e r t a i n occasions.
Style i m p l i e s a c h o i c e o n t h e p a r t o f t h e speaker t o say s o m e t h i n g .
G i v e n a c e r t a i n s i t u a t i o n w h e r e t h e speaker w o u l d say s o m e t h i n g l i k e ,
"Can y o u pass me the salt?", i f s/he changes the w o r d salt for a n o t h e r w o r d
s u c h aspepper ovvinegar, o b v i o u s l y there is a difference i n m e a n i n g and,
therefore i t is n o t at the d i s c r e t i o n o f the speaker to change one w o r d for
the o t h e r w h i l e m a i n t a i n i n g the m e a n i n g . However, i f the speaker changes
can f o r could, would, o r s i m p l y says "pass m e t h e s a l t " , i t i m p l i e s a
difference i n style given the speakers i n t e n t i o n as w e l l as other neighboring
factors s u c h as t h e degree o f f o r m a l i t y a n d t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n the
i n t e r l o c u t o r s . A n o t h e r e x a m p l e w o u l d be t h e f o l l o w i n g w o r d s a n d
expressions w h i c h have analogous meanings a l t h o u g h t h e i r election w o u l d
d e p e n d o n t h e speakers' preference a n d the c o n t e x t : die, pass away, bite
the dust o r kick the bucket.
As a r e s u l t o f t h e l o n g l i t e r a r y t r a d i t i o n i n m o s t c u l t u r e s , especially
w e s t e r n , t h e q u e s t i o n o f style has o f t e n b e e n a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e s t u d y
o f l i t e r a r y w r i t i n g . N e v e r t h e l e s s , style is l i n k e d i n a c o n s i s t e n t w a y t o
all l i n g u i s t i c behavior, w h e t h e r w r i t t e n o r spoken, a n d regardless of
w h e t h e r t h e s p e a k e r / w r i t e r is d e e m e d t o be a l i t e r a r y f i g u r e ( S h o r t ,
2001).
T h e f o l l o w i n g examples i l l u s t r a t e a difference o f style. The first one is
a literary text w r i t t e n w i t h a c e r t a i n degree of f o r m a l i t y whereas the second
f r a g m e n t is t h e same text b u t i n a n i n f o r m a l style.
Example A >i< mals w i t h a p a r t i c u l a r oceupation a n d , often, a p a r t i c u l a r w o r k i n g
"Fourscore years and seven ago our fathers brought forth upon this
continent a new n a t i o n , conceived i n liberty, and dedicated to the
proposition that all men are created equal.
Now we are engaged i n a great civil war, testing whether that nation,
or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are
met on a great battlefield of that war. We have come to dedcate a portion
of that field as a final resting-place for those who here gave their lives
that their nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we
should do this..."
(Opening lines of President Lincoln's Gettysburg Address.)
I b i s h i g h - s o u n d i n g a n d very e f f e c t i v e i h e l o r i c , a m a s t e r p i e c e o l
mil>ii, c o u l d be rendered i n evcryday speech as:
iliiinlc Ii
"Eighty-seven years ago our predecessors created a new country in
i his continent - a country made by free people and based on the idea
that everybody is equal.
Now we are fighting a big civil war to find out i f a country based on
that ideal can last for long. We're gathered here on a big battlefield lo
dedcate part of it as a burial ground for those who died here fighting
for their country's survival. I t s absolutely right that we should be doing
this,,,."
i l ,i literal level b o t h excerpts m e a n the same, b u t there is a n enormous
l l l l i i ence of style. L i n c o l n ' s w o r d s w e r e s l i g h t l y archaic even t h e n -a w a y
il ni i k i n g clear t h a t he was t a l k i n g a b o u t eternal vales. T h e second text
lUplnres his m e a n i n g at a f a c t u a l level b u t does n o t h a v e a n y o f t h e
yi II u n c e a n d poetry.
II isc go to the exercises section a n d d o exercise 1.)
I ' Ke<;iser
\ mi ber variable t h a t is at t h e speakers disposal a n d t h a t is caught u p
nli si vlc is register. A register is a set o f language features, m a i n l y t h e
I (il lexical items o r syntactic o r d e r i n g o f utterances, w h o s e use tend
o In associated w i t h a s p e c i f i c i n t e r e s t g r o u p as i n t h e case o
si: d o c t o r s , a i r t r a f f i c c o n t r o l l e r s , l a w y e r s , c o m p u t e r e n t h u s i a s t s
Mus i ype of v a r i a t i o n is characterized b y the circumstance a n d purpose
II llie r< n n m u n i c a t i v e s i t u a t i o n a n d contrasts w i t h v a r i a t i o n b y i n d i v i d u a
geographical or socio-economic variation. Nowadays, th
h e l m i n g a m o u n t o f i n f o r m a t i o n t o w h i c h w e are e x p o s e d i n o u
i\s the appearance of registers. Specialization is encouraged
n i . i llie l l o u r i s h i n g n u m b e r o f t e c h n i c a l w o r d s a n d a c r o n y m s s o m e t i m e
llinki 11 d i f f i c u l t f o r a lay p e r s o n t o f o l l o w a c o n v e r s a t i o n o n a n y t o p i
llinl i c q u i r e s a specific register. A p a r t f r o m specific l a n g u a g e d o m a i n s
i ' i'i .le is socially m o t i v a t e d as i t entails a social n e g o t i a t i o n a m o n g th
! I I i Ii i p a n t s i n o r d e r t o a c c o m m o d a t e t h e a d e q u a t e r e g i s t e r e i t h e r i
i H leu o r spoken discourse.
 54
AN IN 11<( i l X l( | ION TO SOCIOLINGUISTICS
R e g i s t e r c a n be c o n c e i v e d f r o m t w o d i f f e r e n t p e r s p e c t i v e s . I n t h e
n a r r o w sense o f t h e w o r d , r e g i s t e r refers t o t h e t y p e o f language used by
a g r o u p o f professionals w h o e m p l o y c e r t a i n l i n g u i s t i c features w h i c h are
not used, o r at least n o t so c o m m o n l y , i n o t h e r settings. T h i s c o n c e p t i o n
of r e g i s t e r is closely r e l a t e d t o j a r g o n , a n d t e n d s t o be a s s o c i a t e d w i t h
w o r d choice r a t h e r t h a t syntactic o r d e r i n g . O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , i n a b r o a d
sense o f the w o r d , register can be un d e r s t o o d as a social genre, a sociolect,
t h a t b e a r s u p o n l e x i c a l c h o i c e a n d s y n t a c t i c o r d e r i n g , a n d c o u l d be
exemplifed i n the language o f newspaper rdeles, academic prose o r legal
language.
Registers c a n be d e p i c t e d b y m e a n s o f t h r e e m a i n d i m e n s i o n s :
a) F i e l d , w h i c h relates t o t h e s o c i a l a c t i v i t y p e r f o r m e d , t h e s e t t i n g
and the a i m of the interaction.
niij>lf ll: newspaper
b) Tenor, w h i c h refers t o t h e social roles enacted a n d the r e l a t i o n s h i p
between the participants.
c) Mode, w h i c h refers to the mdium o f the language i n that s i t u a t i o n .
F o r example, i n the case o f a newspaper a r t i c l e , the field w o u l d be the
s u b j e c t m a t t e r o f t h e a r t i c l e t h a t is i n t e n d e d t o i n f o r m o r i n s t r u c t t h e
reader. The t e n or here w o u l d comprise the j o u r n a l i s t w h o w r o t e the article,
b u t also the i n t e n d e d audience. Finally, t h e m o d e i n t h i s ins t a nc e w o u l d
be the piece o f w r i t t e n w o r k t h a t is p r i n t e d o n the newspaper a n d reaches
the reader. See t h e f o l l o w i n g passages:
Example A: legal language.
At all pertinent times, it was reasonably foreseeable to Defendants
that without feasible safety features and/or warning devices, Defendants'
guns w o u l d end up being used i n a tragic, preventable shooting by an
unauthorized user. Many of these shootings are unintentional shootings,
often by children wh o do not fully understand or appreciate h o w to
properly handle a gun, or understand its risks.
With regard to those guns of Defendants which are semi-automatics,
at all pertinent times it was foreseeable that users, including adolescents,
would mistakenly believe that a semi-automatic gun would not fire if
the a m m u n i t i o n magazine was removed. At all pertinent times i t was
foreseeable that users of semi-automatic guns w o u l d not understand
or appreciate that an undetectable round of ammunition may be housed
i n the f i r i n g chamber of the g u n , even t h o u g h the detachable
a m m u n i t i o n magazine had been removed or unloaded, and that
preventable, unintentional shootings w o u l d result given Defendants'
designs.
55
Defendants were at all pertinent limes aware of these foreseeable
mil unreasonable dangers inherent in the design of their firearms.
The design of Defendants' guns, which enables any person who gains
possession of them to Tire them and does not make users aware thal a
l o u n d of a m m u n i t i o n is housed i n the f i r i n g chamber, results in
i hoiisands of unintentional shooting deaths and non-fatal injuries every
\ .11. The General Accounting Office estimates that 3 3 % of the annual
1,300 to 1,600 unintentional shooting deaths oceur because the user of
the gun was not aware that a r o u n d of a m m u n i t i o n had been loaded
into the guns firing chamber. This accounts for as many as 4 5 0 to 4 7 5
deaths each year. I n a d d i t i o n to these deaths, there are many
unintentional shooting injuries that are not fatal.
article.
President Slams F i l m Business
Hundreds of Hollywood's rich and famous were left speechless last
night when film Society president, Douglas Kirk, 5 9 , launched a savage
.ii laek on the movie business. Neither the script-writers, not the actors,
or the directors were as good today as they used to be, he told the
istonished f i l m stars. Guests were further incensed when he claimed
ih.it there were too many new films, and roars of protest greeted his
I >ast that people had stopped going to the cinema because they preferred
watching Kirk's od movies at home on televisin.
The speech carne after the Society's annual dinner attended by the
i ream of Hollywood's high society. Among the first to arrive were
Peruvian heiress and actress, Isabel Sastre, wearing a full length pal
vcllow evening dress and a diamond tiara, and accompanied by her latest
husband, Rupert Mur bank, "sixth time lucky", she t o l d our reprter.
Present, too, were British star Simn Selino and, hot foot from flming
and only just i n ti me for dinner, comedy star Albert Tancred, his arm
nll in plaster after an accident at his Austrian home. Later guests enjoyed
a lavish six course banquet (including cariare, roast duckling and steak
n i poivre) before veteran Kirk's sour grapes left a bad taste i n
everybody's mouth.
(By Jim Lawley)
<"//'/(' (': the language of cooking.
Step one: Pour the mussel l i q u o r f r o m the shells i n t o a saut pan
and bring to a boil. Add the mussels and poach gently over medium-low
hcat for about 4 minutes, u n t i l the edges begin to c u r l . Remove the
mussels w i t h a slotted spoon and set aside; reserve the cooking liquid
 56
AN INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLINGUISTICS
i n the pan. Place the peppercorns, 3 garlic cloves, salt, and 1/2 cup ol
the hot mussel liquid i n a blender and puree. Add the puree and oil to
the liquid i n the pan and bring to a boil. Remove from the heat and let
cool. Add the lime juice and reserved mussels to the mixture; puree again.
Transfer the mussel puree to a saucepan and add the stock, c u m i n ,
thyme, and remaining garlic. Simmer for 15 minutes over low heat, then
strain into a clean saucepan. Whisk i n the butter u n t i l completely
incorporated and set aside.
Step two: Wrap a bacon slice around each filet, securing with kitchen
twine, and season w i t h salt and pepper. Heat the oil i n a heavy saut pan
to almost smoking. Lower the heat to mdium and sear the steaks for
10 minutes per side; the filets should be crusty and b r o w n e d o n the
outside and rare to medium-rare on the inside. I f you prefer, cook about
2 minutes longer on each side for medium-rare or about 5 minutes more
per side for mdium. While the steaks are cooking w a r m the mussel
sauce.
Step three: Bring a saucepan of lightly salted water to a boil. Add
the leeks and cook for 5 minutes. Drain carefully, toss i n a bowl w i t h the
butter, and season w i t h salt and pepper to taste.
Step four: Ladle the sauce on w a r m serving plates and place the
steaks on top. Carefully cut the twine around the steaks and discard it.
For each serving, divide the leeks into 4 portions around the beef and
place a smoked mussel on top of each portion of leeks.
Style a n d register are r e l a t e d i n t h e sense t h a t stylistic v a r i a t i o n s can
o c c u r w i t h i n a register, as t h e speaker o r w r i t e r c a n choose, f o r instance,
d i f f e r e n t degrees o f f o r m a l i t y o r casualness w i t h i n t h a t r e g i s t e r . I n a
n e w s p a p e r a r t i c l e w e c o u l d r e a d "SARS appears t o be the latest example
o f a v i r u s l e a p i n g f r o m animis t o people a n d w r e a k i n g h a v o c " , o r s i m p l y
" S A R S seems t o be t h e m o s t r e c e n t e x a m p l e o f a v i r u s j u m p i n g f r o m
animis t o people a n d p l a y i n g havoc". Y o u w o u l d find one sentence o r the
o t h e r d e p e n d i n g o n t h e type o f p u b l i c a t i o n a n d t h e style o f t h e j o u r n a l i s t .
(Please go t o t h e exercises s e c t i o n a n d d o exercises 2, 3 a n d 4.)
1.3. G e n d e r
D o m e n a n d w o m e n speak i n the same way? D o m e n d o m i n a t e topics
o f conversation? A r e m e n m o r e assertive t h a n w o m e n ? D o m e n i n t e r r u p t
w o m e n m o r e often t h a n w o m e n t o men? L i v i n g i n a western society i t may
take some t i m e t o a n s w e r these q u e s t i o n s , even t o f i n d s o m e examples.
T h e r e is i n d e e d s o m e evidence t h a t m a r k s l a n g u a g e as sexist, o r r a t h e r
t h e i r users, a n d that b o t h sexes d o n o t speak the same w a y a n d t h a t cannot
57
l\e u t t r i b u t e d to stylistic o r i n d i v i d u a l differences. However, i t s h o u l d
p led out that language s h o u l d n o t be considered as i n h e r e n t l y s c x i s i
i i i i used i n a sexist w a y o r even t h a t i t reflects a sexist w o r l d . ' H e ' is
twclfth c o m m o n e s t w o r d i n t h e E n g l i s h language whereas 'she' is the
ii i \ II si c o m m o n e s t w o r d . Since t h e r e are n o t m o r e m e n i n the w o r l d
i n u i unen, that m i g h t , at first glance, seem t o suggest t h a t E n g l i s h is a
t h i language b u t a l i t t l e f u r t h e r r e f l e c t i o n b r i n g s us t o t h e r e a l i z a t i o n
iil llie E n g l i s h language is used t o t a l k a n d w r i t e a sexist w o r l d . M e n are
ii 11 11 II ir likely t h a n w o m e n , f o r example, t o be leaders o f t h e i r countries
i n i n wspapers 'he' tends t o be m o r e f r e q u e n t t h a n 'she'.
r illerns o f v a r i a t i o n between m e n a n d w o m e n are m u c h m o r e evident
parts o f t h e globe as is the case o f J a p a n . Japanese w o m e n s h o w
II . w o m e n w h e n t h e y speak i n v a r i o u s ways, f o r i n s t a n c e b y u s i n g
I I * a sentence final p a r t i c l e . M a l e speakers refer t o themselves as wasi
u i d female speakers use watasi o r atasi. B u t d i f f e r e n c e s c a n be
in h inore subtle t h a n t h a t . A c c o r d i n g t o W a r d h a u g h (2002: 318) m o r e
\u i h.ui w o m e n i n F r e n c h - s p e a k i n g M o n t r e a l d o n o t p r o n o u n c e the </>
les a n d p r o n o u n s (il, elle, la a n d les), a n d s c h o o l g i r l s i n S c o t l a n d
p r o n o u n c e t h e <t> i n w o r d s l i k e water a n d g o m o r e f r e q u e n t l y
n i 11, tys w h o prefer a g l o t t a l stop.
11 udgill (1972) i n a s t u d y c a r r i e d o u t i n N o r w i c h ( E n g l a n d ) f o u n d o u t
i ucn t e n d e d t o be m o r e conservative i n t e r m s o f language use, as
M I were reported t o show m o s t language change. H e studied
|l mi di igical a n d sociological variables a n d he also discovered that w o m e n
. i . I I . i ally m o r e status-conscious t h a n m e n . As a m a t t e r o f fact, i n his
. 1 11. a i gued t h a t w o m e n h a d a clear tendeney t o o v e r r e p o r t t h e i r use
lili lige f o r m s (this s t u d y i n c l u d e d v a r i o u s social g r o u p s c o m i n g f r o m
11 I I I I ' and m i d d l e class) w h i l e m e n w e r e i n c l i n e d t o u n d e r r e p o r t theirs.
.. I 11 p o n the collected d a t a a n d the subsequent analysis, h e c o n c l u d e d
ii m i l tended t o respond to standard-language prestige n o r m s ,
men were liable t o react t o v e r n a c u l a r prestige f o r m s . T h e f o r m e r
l'. .1 language was associated, i n the c o n t e x t i n w h i c h t h e research w a s
I out, w i t h refinement, s o p h i s t i c a t i o n a n d adherence t o the standard
Hglingc, w h e r e a s t h e l a t t e r t y p e o f l a n g u a g e w a s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h
... lu. a n d t o u g h n e s s , w h i c h w e r e c o n s i d e r e d , t o s o m e e x t e n t , as
n il .I. inasculine a t t r i b u t e s . T h e r e a s o n f o r w o m e n ' s adherence t o the
llld m i c o u l d be m o t i v a t e d , a c c o r d i n g t o T r u d g i l l , t o t h e i r p o w e r l e s s
II n i life. This study was carried o u t t h i r t y years ago, a n d the findings
m u l l he i n t e r p r e t e d w i t h c a u t i o n as t h e r o l e o f w o m e n i n society has
i m i . .1 i r c m e n d o u s l y i n these t h r e e decades. H o w e v e r , i t p r o p e r l y
i i i i u i i s for differences i n male-female l i n g u i s t i c behavior.
 58 AN I N I K O ION TO SOCIOLINGUISTICS
The study o f gender is a c o m p l e x d e v e l o p i n g Issue given the fact lliat
a n u m b e r o f s o c i a l v a r i a b l e s converge a n d , i t does n o t have a n u n i f o r m
effect o n l i n g u i s t i c behavior. As E c k e r t p o i n t s o u t , t h i s s h o u l d be t a k e n as
an essential a p p r o a c h t o the s t u d y o f data:
Gender differences are exceedingly complex, particularly i n a society
and era where women have been moving self-consciously i n t o the
marketplace and calling traditional gender roles into question. Gender
roles and ideologies crate different ways for men and w o m e n to
experience life, culture, and society. ( 1 9 9 7 : 2 1 4 )
The study o f gender a n d v a r i a t i o n arises f r o m the different roles, n o r m s
a n d expectations u p o n the sexes. Gender-based v a r i a t i o n has n o t received
as m u c h s c i e n t i f i c a t t e n t i o n as t h a t g i v e n t o s o c i o e c o n o m i c class o r
d i a l e c t a l v a r i a t i o n over the years. As a result, m a n y o f t h e c o n c e p t i o n s w e
have n o w a b o u t gender a n d v a r i a t i o n are based u p o n p o p u l a r belief r a t h e r
t h a n o n a s o u n d s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c a n a l y s i s . I n t h e l a s t decades t h i s has
changed to a c e r t a i n extent a n d there is a considerable a m o u n t o f research
i n c o r p o r a t i n g sex as a b i o l o g i c a l c a t e g o r y i n s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s , d i s c o u r s e
analysis, a n d p r a g m a t i c s .
T r a d i t i o n a l l y , t h e t e r m sex has b e e n u s e d t o r e f e r t o b i o l o g i c a l a n d
a n a t o m i c a l d i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n m e n a n d w o m e n , a n d gender has b e e n
used to refer t o p s y c h o l o g i c a l a n d s o c i o - c u l t u r a l differences b e t w e e n t h e
sexes. T h i s a p p r o a c h , a l t h o u g h c l e a r a n d s i m p l e e n o u g h t o c a t e g o r i z e
p r o f o u n d d i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n m a l e s a n d f e m a l e s p r o v e s t o be a l i t t l e
simplistic for sociolinguistic research, as one o f the a i m s o f sociolinguistics
is t o describe the r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n these t w o , i.e. sex a n d gender. Sex is a
b i o l o g i c a l c a t e g o r y w h i c h c o n s t i t u t e s t h e base f o r t h e d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n o f
roles, n o r m s a n d e x p e c t a t i o n s w i t h i n a c e r t a i n speech c o m m u n i t y , a n d
these s o c i a l roles, n o r m s a n d e x p e c t a t i o n s c o m p o s e t h e i d e a o gender.
Obviously, i t makes n o sense t o t h i n k o f the differences b e t w e e n m e n a n d
w o m e n as a set o f t r a i t s t h a t c h a r a c t e r i z e a n d s h a r p l y d i s t i n g u i s h e a c h
g r o u p f r o m one another, since they c a n n o t be considered p o l a r opposites.
F e m i n i n i t y a n d m a s c u l i n i t y change f r o m one culture t o the other, o r w i t h i n
the same f r o m one g e n e r a t i o n t o t h e next, a n d also depend o n e t h n i c ,
r e l i g i o u s o r social ( o f t e n s o c i o - e c o n o m i c ) g r o u p s . W h a t is m o r e , r e c e n t
sludies (Leap, 2001) have also been c a r r i e d o u t w h i c h s u p p o r t the existence
< >l certain characteristics that identify gay a n d lesbian language (specialized
vot abulary, p h o n o l o g i c a l features, d i s t i n c t i v e i n t o n a t i o n p a t t e r n s , etc.),
a l t h o u g h this issue is s t i l l a n o n g o i n g debate.
Recent studies have s h o w n n e u r o p h y s i o l o g i c a l differences i n t h e w a y
males a n d females process language. I t seems that p h o n o l o g i c a l processing
in m . i l e s relates to the left h e m i s p h e r e o f the b r a i n w h e r e a s i t i n v o l v e s
linlli l i c m i s p h e r e s i n the case o f females. However, n o evidence has been
ii \ I h a t s u c h b i o l o g i c a l d i f f e r e n c e s h a v e a n effect o n m a l e - f e m a l e
language processing a n d speech; a n y d i s s i m i l a r i t y seems t o be a r e s u l t o f
Korial f a c t o r s ( s o c i a l c o n s t r a i n t s a n d t r a d i t i o n a l l a n g u a g e usage m a k e
Women s p e e c h d i f f e r e n t t o t h a t o f m e n ) e d u c a t i o n a l f a c t o r s ( i n s o m e
'lies w o m e n are n o t a l l o w e d to be schooled o r they s i m p l y do n o t have
lecess lo h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n ) , o r p o w e r (as the sources o f p o w e r i n w e s t e r n
|Oi iety, i n g e n e r a l , has t r a d i t i o n a l l y b e e n c o n t r o l l e d b y m e n , a n d t o a
idcrable e x t e n t s t i l l are).
Analysis o f these d i f f e r e n c e s suggest t h a t t y p i c a l l e x i c a l a n d
i i u i i m a t i c a l choices, w h i c h are c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f m e n a n d w o m e n , lead
b the f o r m a t i o n o f genderlects, i.e., men's a n d w o m e n s talk. R o b i n L a k o f f
( I 9 9 0 ) identifed c e r t a i n features d i s t i n g u i s h i n g women's t a l k i n t e r m s o f
m ,i (I choice, f o r e x a m p l e , i n t h e frequeney o f c e r t a i n colors, a n d c e r t a i n
\e a d j e c t i v e s (charming, lovely, sweet); or i n their hesitant
mionation, a voice p i t c h associated w i t h surprise and questions; the
I n q u e n c y o f t a g phrases (you know, kind of); a n d , t h e i r a t t i t u d e t o w a r d s
politeness (less s w e a r i n g , m o r e indireetness, a n d h e d g i n g ) ; a n d , t h e use
ni m o r e p o l i t e n o i s e s (uh-huh, yeah, hmm, etc.) w h i c h s u p p o r t t h e
i n t e r l o c u t o r s view. Conversely, m e n t e n d t o be m o r e d i r e c t a n d d o m i n a t e
m i n taking. I n general, they u n d e r s t a n d language as i n f o r m a t i o n g a t h e r i n g
rather t h a n a m e c h a n i s m t o i n i t i a t e a n d s u p p o r t t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h
ollicrs. ( I f y o u w o u l d l i k e t o k n o w m o r e a b o u t t h i s r e a d H o l m e s , 1995)
At t h i s p o i n t i t s h o u l d be specified t h a t t h e r e is a difference b e t w e e n
i h e language u s e d b y m e n a n d w o m e n , a n d t h e language used t o refer to
them.
I n the past, m a s c u l i n e has o f t e n been considered as a c o m m o n gender,
and therefore u n m a r k e d , a n d f e m i n i n e as m a r k e d . I n m o s t I n d o - E u r o p e a n
languages t h e m a s c u l i n e is u s e d t o r e f e r t o b o t h m a l e a n d f e m a l e , f o r
example:
a) E v e r y o n e s h o u l d c o n t a c t h i s o w n t r a v e l agent f o r reservations.
E x a m p l e a) c a n r e f e r t o m a l e s a n d f e m a l e s i n t h e s a m e g r o u p .
T r a d i t i o n a l l y , t h e m a s c u l i n e is p r e f e r r e d e v e n i f t h e n u m b e r o f m a l e
subjects is i n f e r i o r to the a m o u n t o f female subjects. A n u m b e r o f solutions
have b e e n p r o p o s e d i n E n g l i s h t o f i n d a w a y t o a v o i d t h i s i n s t a n c e o f
sexism i n language. The s o l u t i o n w o u l d be to find a neuter f o r m , u n m a r k e d
l o r gender as i t is t h e case o f o n i n F r e n c h o r i m p e r s o n a l se i n S p a n i s h .
A l t h o u g h s o m e s o l u t i o n s have been p r o p o s e d , one o f t h e p r e f e r r e d ones
 60
AN INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLINGUIST
is l l i e use o l t l i i r d p e r s o n p l u r a l p r o i i o u n l o rel'er to males a n d f e m a l i
for e x a m p l e :
b) E v e r y o n e s h o u l d c o n t a c t t h e i r t r a v e l agent f o r reservations.
Masculine has been t r a d i t i o n a l l y used to refer t o professions associated
[ ( ) llie speakers a b i l i t y t o g a i n t h e i r listeners' c o m p l i a n c e (Giles, 2001).
w i t h m e n a n d t h a t s h o w s t h a t t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n l a n g u a g e and
society is a t w o - f o l d one. Language reflects the w a y the society is o r g a n i / e i 1
and to w h a t extent language shows the p o w e r o f stereotyping. In a
c h a n g i n g w o r l d w h e r e w o m e n are t a k i n g o n j o b s c u s t o m a r i l y a t t r i b u t e d
to m e n , a n d i n a society w h e r e w o m e n are f i g h t i n g against sexiij
d i s c r i m i n a t i o n , l a n g u a g e is also r e f l e c t i n g a c h a n g e . As a case i n p o i m ,
t h e w o r d s i n t h e l e f t h a n d c o l u m n are b e c o m i n g less c o m m o n a n d thl
ones o n t h e r i g h t c o l u m n are p r e f e r r e d n o w a d a y s :
Bus b o y D i n i n g r o o m attendant
Chairman Chairperson
Fireman Firefighter
Foreman Supervisor
Policeman Plice o f f i c e r
Salesman Salesperson
Spokesman Spokespereon ; Winilcl be s t y l i s t i c a l l y suitable?
(Please go t o t h e exercises s e c t i o n a n d d o exercise 5.)
2. S P E E C H ACCOMMODATION
Speech a c c o m m o d a t i o n consists o f the m o d i f i c a t i o n o f ones o w n speech
o r o t h e r c o m m u n i c a t i v e b e h a v i o r s t o the ones used b y the p e r s o n one is
i n t e r a c t i n g w i t h . T h i s w a y o f a d j u s t i n g one s o w n speech c a n give w a y to
speech convergence o r speech divergence d e p e n d i n g o n the i n t e n t i o n s of
the speakers a n d t h e results o f t h e c o m m u n i c a t i o n encounter. T h e r e are
m a n y ways of p e r f o r m i n g speech a c c o m m o d a t i o n a n d the results generally
vary d e p e n d i n g o n c o n t e x t u a l factors. Doctors, lawyers a n d therapists can
a c c o m m o d a t e t h e i r speech as p a r t o f t h e i r j o b w h e n c o m m u n i c a t i n g w i t h
clients, or t o show empathy. Speakers o f a non-standard variety m a y change
t h e i r speech d u e t o l a n g u a g e i n s e c u r i t y o r i n o r d e r t o faciltate
c o m p r e h e n s i o n t o t h e i r i n t e r l o c u t o r w h e n i n t e r a c t i n g w i t h a speaker o f a
s t a n d a r d v a r i e t y . A d j u s t i n g t o a g i v e n r e g i s t e r o r s t y l e is also a w a y o f
a c c o m m o d a t i n g speech t o take advantage o f i n t r a - g r o u p inclusin.
Speech convergence shows a speakers or a g r o u p s need for social
i n t e g r a t i o n and/or identieation w i t h a n o t h e r o r others. T h i s m o d i f i c a t i o n
61
' |n i v l i i iftcn expresses a conscious a n d delibrate process b u t , o n m a n y
i IOIIS it reflects a n u n c o n s c i o u s behavior. R e s e a r c h has s h o w n t h a t
l u n o i j ' i n g speech a c c o m m o d a t i o n c a n increase t h e speakers perceived
(ni i i 11 .u i i v e n e s s ; ( b ) p r e d i c t a b i l i t y a n d s u p p o r t i v e n e s s ; (c) l e v e l o f
lu i |n i s o n a l i n v o l v e m e n t ; (d) i n t e l l i g i b i l i t y a n d c o m p r e h e n s i b i l i t y ; a n d ,
Speech divergence a n d t h e use o f d i v e r g e n t strategies are m o r e o f t e n
i. o i l where the participants i n the c o m m u n i c a t i o n encounter stem
M I lcrent social o r w o r k i n g b a c k g r o u n d s g i v i n g w a y t o a strategy o f
i i't o u p distinctiveness. B y means o f this tactic, m e m b e r s o f a n i n g r o u p
i i i i s i f y t h e i r inclusin i n t h e relevant g r o u p w h i l e e x c l u d i n g others.
'Ilils l a r g e t c a n be a t t a i n e d w i t h t h e use o f a s p e c i f i c s l a n g , j a r g o n ,
|i m a t i c a l c o m p l e x i t y or, s i m p l y , accent.
i l'li use go to t h e exercises s e c t i o n a n d d o exercise 6.)
II. EXERCISES
1. Can y o u briefly describe a s i t u a t i o n i n w h i c h the f o l l o w i n g sentences
a) I ' m t a k i n g off.
b) I w o u l d l i k e t o express m y s y m p a t h y f o r y o u r loss.
c) You'd b e t t e r get o u t o f m y way.
il) Have f u n !
c) The existence o f different ethnic groups i n that c o u n t r y brings
about...
f) Break a leg!
2 . Read carefully the three excerpts (legal language, language o f
* H i k i n g a n d n e w s p a p e r a r t i c l e language) p r o v i d e d above. U n d e r l i n e the
u . m i s a n d expressions t h a t y o u c o n s i d e r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f each register.
3. F i n d t h r e e s a m p l e s o f l a n g u a g e , e i t h e r w r i t t e n o r s p o k e n , t h a t
n p i e s e n t t h r e e types o f register associated w i t h d i f f e r e n t o c e u p a t i o n s o r
Interest g r o u p s . T r a n s c r i b e o r c o p y t h e m a n d m a k e a l i s t o f 10-15 w o r d s ,
eupressions o r s y n t a c t i c o r d e r i n g s t h a t y o u c o n s i d e r t o be p a r t o f t h a t
Pfglster. T h e n , t r y t o p i n p o i n t t h e three d i m e n s i o n s described above: field,
tenor a n d m o d e . (You c o u l d possible search the internet t o find these three
imples o f language.)
 62
A N I N T K O I H K | I O N T O S()( loi.INOIUN11

4. D o y o u t h i n k t h a t register a n d style c o u l d be ineans o f e s t a b l i s h i n n 1(1 S O U R C E S O N T H E W l l i

s o l i d a r i t y a m o n g speakers? P r o v i d e a n e x a m p l e .

5. R e f l e c t o n t h e w a y m e n a n d w o m e n use l a n g u a g e ( p r o b a b b Now y o u c a n v i s i t t h e w e b page f o r t h i s subject w h e r e y o u w i l l f i n d

Spanish) i n y o u r neighborhood o r the place where y o u w o r k . Can M U i " ' i,, i i elerences a n d c o m p l e m e n t a r y r e a d i n g s .
f i n d a set o f l i n g u i s t i c features t h a t d i s t i n g u i s h b e t w e e n t h e sexes (e.g.,
e x p r e s s i o n s o r w o r d s t h a t m e n w o u l d n e v e r say, a n d t h e o t h e r waj)
round)?
, I I K I I I E R R E A D I N G S AND Q U E S T I O N S
6. C a n y o u t h i n k o f a n i n s t a n c e o f speech a c c o m m o d a t i o n , e i t h e r a
case o f speech convergence o r speech divergence? Describe i t i n a r o u n d
250 w o r d s . 1,1. Text 3

i ti .ul ihe f o l l o w i n g text carefully a n d c o m m e n t o n i t e m p h a s i z i n g any

4. REFERENCES Hkpei i vou consider o f relevance. After the text y o u w i l l find some questions
lliui ni.IV be h e l p f u l . W r i t e a r o u n d 250-300 w o r d s i n t o t a l .
CHODOROW, N. 1974. 'Family structure and feminine personality.' I n M. Z . Rosaldo
and L. Lamphere (eds.) Woman, Culture and Society. Stanford: Stanford Style shifting. One of the fundamental principies of sociolinguistic
University press. investigation might simply be stated as There are no singlestyle speakers.
By this we mean that every speaker w i l l show some v a r i a t i o n i n
ECKERT, P. 1997, 'Sex and Gender Differences i n Variation' i n N. Coupland & A. phonological and syntactic rules according to the immediate context i n
Jaworski (eds.). Sociolinguistics: A Reader and Coursebook. Basingstoke: which he is speaking. We can demnstrate that such stylistic shifts are
Palgarve.
determined by (a) the relations of the speaker, addressee, and audience,
and particularly the relations of power or solidarity among them; (b)
GILES, H. 2001. 'Speech Accomodation' in R. Mesthrie (ed.) Concise Encyclopedia
of Sociolinguistics. Oxford: Pergamon. the wider social context or "domain": school, job, home, neighborhood,
church; (c) the topic. One must add of course that the stylistic range and
GILLIGAN, C. 1982. In a Different Voice. London: Harvard University Press. competence of the speaker may vary greatly. Children may have a very
narrow range i n both the choices open to them and the social contexts
HOLMES, J. 1995. Women, Men and Politeness. Harlow, England: Longman. they respond to. Od men often show a narrow range i n that their
motivation for style shifting disappears along w i t h their concern for
LABOV, W. 2003. 'Some sociolinguistic principies.' I n Ch. B. Bratt Paulston and G .
power relationships. [...]
Richard Tucker (eds.) Sociolinguistics: The Essential Readings. Malden. USA:
Blackwell Publishing. Well-developed social variables show a systematic range of style
LAKOFF, R. 1990. Talking power. New York: Basic Books. shifting which is correlated to the amount of attention paid to speech.
We can easily observe such style shifting i n certain long-standing
LEAP, W. L. 2001. 'Gay Language' i n R. Mesthrie (ed.) Concise Encyclopedia of variables which are common to almost all dialects of English. The th of
Sociolinguistics. Oxford, UK: Pergamon. thing and that can appear as smooth fricative " t h " sound, the standard
variant; as a " t " - l i k e sound l i g h t l y or strongly articulated; as a
SHORT, M . 2001. 'Style', i n Mesthire, R. (2001) Concise Encyclopaedia of c o m b i n a t i o n of these two; or as a zero as i n Gimme 'at. For most
Sociolinguistics. Oxford, UK: Pergamon. Americans, the proportions of these forms are nicely blended and graded
TANNEN, D. 1990. You Just Don't Understand: Women and Men in Conversation. for each stylistic level a t different absolute levis for different social
New York: W i l l i a m Morrow. groups and different regions. Similarly, the alternation of -ing and -in'
i n unstressed syllables is a systematic stylistic variable for most
TRUDGILL, P. 1972. 'Sex Covert Prestige and Linguistic Change i n the Urban British Americans again at different levis for different classes and regions.
English of Norwich', Language and Society, I , 179-95.
Labov (2003: 234)
WARDHAUGH, R. 2002. An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. (4th ed.) Malden, USA:
Blackwell Publishing.

I s s u e s to c o n s i d e r :
a) W h a t d o y o u t h i n k o f the sentence There are no single-style speakei
E x p l a i n y o u r answer.
b) P r o v i d e some features i n y o u r o w n l a n g u a g e t h a t indcate a siv
shift (vocabulary, g r a m m a t i c a l c o n s t r u c t i o n , p h o n o l o g i c a l fea 11 n i
etc). W h a t s i t u a t i o n a l factors d o y o u t h i n k m a y cause t h e shift 1 ti
style?
I Ni i l o u b t that t h e speech o f m e n a n d w o m e n is d i l l c r e n t . C a n y o u
provide some specific examples t o s h o w t h i s c o n t r a s t ?
' |)u y o u t h i n k t h a t t h e d i f f e r e n c e i n m e n ' s a n d w o m e n ' s t a l k is
i i i l i i n a l l y b o u n d , i.e., does i t d e p e n d o n t h e c u l t u r e ( o r c o u n t r y ) ?
r i . i . provide a n example.
fc| \S

6.2. T e x t 4

Read the f o l l o w i n g text c a r e f u l l y a n d c o m m e n t o n i t e m p h a s i z i n g anv i lili-, book, i n the glossary.

aspect y o u consider o f relevance. After the text y o u w i l l find some quesl i< II i
t h a t m a y be h e l p f u l . W r i t e a r o u n d 250-300 w o r d s i n t o t a l .

The evidence described i n this chapter suggests that men tend lo Discourse analysis
domnate interactions i n public settings. They generally talk more thuA Ethnography of speaking
women, ask more questions, interrupt more often, and when they gfl Linguistic competence
the floor they are more likely than a woman to challenge and disagrc* Native speaker
w i t h the speaker. I n a variety of contexts, women tend to provide mort
Pragmatic competence
supportive and encouraging feedback than men, to agree rather than
disagree, to look for connections and add to and b u i l d on tlu< Pragmatics
contributions of others. This is positively polite behaviour, stressilU (Proto)-Indo-European
shared goals and vales, and expressing solidarity. Women also exhib Variety
negatively polite behaviour i n many contexts by avoiding competing lm
the floor or i n t e r r u p t i n g others. They appear to be more attentivl
listeners, concerned to ensure others get a chance to contribute.
One explanation w h i c h has been proposed for this pattern f o c u M
on the social meaning of talk. I t has been suggested that, i n general,
women are more concerned w i t h solidarity or 'connection' (Chodomw
1974; Gilligan 1982), while men are more interested i n status and beinl
'one-up' (Tannen 1990a: 38). Features of female talk, such as facilitad ve
tags, agreeing comments, attentive listening and encouraging feedbai k
can be seen as expressions of concern for others, and a desire to m a n
contact and strengthen relationships. Male talk, on the other hand,
appears to be more competitive, more concerned with dominating othci I
and asserting status. Challenging utterances, bald disagreements aiul
disruptive interruptions are examples of strategies w h i c h typify male
talk i n public contexts, and which seem to support this claim.

Holmes(1995: 67)

I s s u e s to c o n s i d e r :

a) To w h a t e x t e n t d o y o u agree w i t h H o l m e s , t h e a u t h o r o f t h l l
fragment?
Unit 3
 I. I ' I D G I N I Z A T I O N A N D C R E O L I Z A T I O N

l ' i d g i n i z a t i o n is a p r o c e s s t h a t s o m e t i m e s t a k e s p l a c e w h e n t w o
l i n g u a g e s c o m e i n t o c o n t a c t a n d , as a r e s u l t , t h e r e is a p r o c e s s o f
i i n | ) l i f i c a t i o n o r h y b r i d i z a t i o n . T h i s generally o c c u r s because t h e r e is a
need to c o m m u n i c a t e b e t w e e n speakers o f d i f f e r e n t languages a n d there
m e l i m i t e d r e l a t i o n s b e t w e e n t h e m , i.e., t h e l a n g u a g e is o n l y u s e d f o r a
i p e c i f i c p u r p o s e s u c h as t r a d e . O f t e n , the w o r d s f r o m o n e l a n g u a g e are
| l l< >pted w h i l e u s i n g the s y n t a c t i c o r d e r i n g o f t h e o t h e r language b u t , as
.1 i ule t h e g r a m m a t i c a l s y s t e m is s i m p l i f i e d as w e l l as o t h e r c o m p l e x
111 ij-iiistic features. The f o r m a t i o n o f p i d g i n s was characteristic i n the 16th
.un 17th c e n t u r i e s w h e n E u r o p e a n c o l o n i a l p o w e r s spread a l l o v e r t h e
1

u i n Id a n d n e w languages, w h i c h w e r e l e x i c a l l y r e l a t e d to the language o f

the colonizer, e m e r g e d . These c o n t a c t languages w e r e i n i t i a l l y u s e d j u s t
l o r l u n c t i o n a l purposes i n specific s i t u a t i o n s a n d contexts a n d , therefore,
they w e r e n o t t h e n a t i v e l a n g u a g e o f a n y o n e a n d speakers c o n t i n u e d t o
I I si- t h e i r languages i n t h e i r o w n speech c o m m u n i t i e s . W a r d h a u g h (2002:
<>.') p o i n t s o u t t h a t the process o f p i d g i n i z a t i o n m o s t l i k e l y r e q u i r e s the
i (mtact o f m o r e t h a n t w o languages. I n a context w i t h o n l y t w o languages
there w o u l d p r o b a b l y be a s t r u g g l e b e t w e e n t h e t w o a n d t h e m o s t l i k e l y
o ii c o m e w o u l d be a r e l a t i o n o f d o m i n a n c e o f one over the other, based
ni s o c i a l a n d e c o n o m i c f a c t o r s . T h e l a n g u a g e o f t h e d o m i n a n t c u l t u r e
\vi m l d p r o b a b l y be i m p o s e d . I n a s i t u a t i o n i n w h i c h the locis speak m o r e
l lian one n a t i v e language t h e r e is a need t o f i n d a c o m m o n g r o u n d .

Pidgins often undergo several geographical a n d sociolinguistic contexts

. i s Is the case o f M e l a n e s i a n P i d g i n E n g l i s h w h i c h arse as a s h i p b o a r d
lingua franca, i t was later used as a p l a n t a t i o n language a n d i t f i n a l l y carne
l o be a l a n g u a g e f o r i n t e r - e t h n i c c i t y c o m m u n i c a t i o n ( R i c h f o r d &
M c W h o r t e r , 1997).

' See World E n g l i s h e s i n c h a p t e r 6.

 I'idgins liavv I x v n used l< >i cent lirios and evenlually, s< une ol ihom, bccame
n rolos. The process ol creolization takos placo w h e n that language that was
o r i g i n a l h a l i m c l i o n a l language used only lor p u i p o s e l u l c o m m u n i c a t i o n is
acquired as a m o t h e r tongue by c h i l d r e n w h o are exposed t o i t . T h e social
circumstances i n w h i c h this language is n o w used are m o r e complex as they
need to serve a l l k i n d s o f social needs a n d c o m m u n i c a t i v e purposes a n d ,
iherefore, the language expands. In such a situation, the pidgin develops and
bocomos more complex both i n terms o f g r a m m a r and phonology and its use
t h e n covers a l l k i n d s o f c o m m u n i c a t i v e f u n c t i o n s . The processes o f
pidginz.iation and creolization are absolutely different a l t h o u g h they overlap.
The f o r m e r involves some k i n d o f s i m p l i f i c a t i o n , i n terms o f lexis, g r a m m a r
and phonological features, whereas the latter entails the expansin i n all kinds
ol linguistic features and communicative functions. This amplifcation becomes
apparent because the language w h i c h originally had l i m i t e d functions becomes
n o w a system used as a native language that needs to be used for a l l types o f
social functions. However, not every p i d g i n becomes a crele. Although creles
have gained status i n the last decades, there are m i l l i o n s o f speakers whose
native a n d o n l y language is a crele a n d they m a y feel they speak a s u b -
s t a n d a r d language. Some creles have become official languages i n places
like as Papua N e w G u i n e a a n d some o t h e r creles are widespread s u c h as
H a w a i i a n Crele English (English-based) a n d H a i t i a n Crele (French-based),
w h i c h is the native language o f almost a l l H a i t i a n s (over 5 m i l l i o n ) . A n o t h e r
interesting example o f this full development and c o m m o n use of pidgins and/or
creles is K i s w a h i l i . This language even has a BBC web page where news c a n
be read a n d heard (www.bbc.co.uk/swahili).
B e t w e e n 1950 a n d 1975 these l a n g u a g e s s t o p p e d b e i n g c o n s i d e r e d
un interesting and m a r g i n a l 'bastardized jargons' to gain the status of 2
languages, a n d t o g e t h e r w i t h a change i n t h e i r p o l i t i c a l status a n d t h e i r
social c o n s i d e r a t i o n i n some c o u n t r i e s , they became o f c e n t r a l interest f o r
many linguists, i n c l u d i n g sociolinguists, applied linguists and theoretical
linguists. Before that, pidgins a n d creles were deemed to be o f little interest
because t h e y w e r e c o n s i d e r e d t o l a c k c e r t a i n l i n g u i s t i c features s u c h as,
ai ticles, the c o p u l a , a n d g r a m m a t i c a l i n f l e c t i o n s , a l l as a r e s u l t o f t h e i r
' l u n c t i o n a l ' p u r p o s e w h i c h left aside l i n g u i s t i c features w h i c h w e r e n o t
essential to convey m e a n i n g . At present, they are c o n s i d e r e d as languages
i n t h e i r o w n r i g h t o r as v a r i e t i e s o f a l a n g u a g e w i t h t h e i r o w n h i s t o r y ,
s t r u c t u r e , c o m m u n i c a t i v e f u n c t i o n a n d speech c o m m u n i t i e s .
rtMSfJSSS? tzr** w e r e lgnore "> - ? b
i )i iginally, pidgins served the purpose ol a lingua franca, i.e., a language
i i ' . c d h\e w h o speak d i f f e r e n t m o t h e r t o n g u e s a n d w h o u s e d a
i n i n m o n language f o r a specific f u n c t i o n a l s i t u a t i o n , s u c h as trade. T h i s
i . n i od p h e n o m e n o n t h a t s t i l l o c c u r s t o d a y as w e c a n f i n d s o m e clear
c\.imples o f lingua francas, s u c h as E n g l i s h w h i c h is u s e d a l l o v e r t h e
i ii Id l o r i n t e r c u l t u r a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n a n d has b e c o m e t h e language o f
business. A n o t h e r example o f a lingua franca is E s p e r a n t o . T h i s language
|| not the m o t h e r tongue o f any speaker because i t is a n artificial language,
hnt it is s o m e t i m e s used f o r i n t e r n a t i o n a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n .
i Picase go t o t h e exercises s e c t i o n a n d d o exercise 1)
2. S O M E I N S T A N C E S O F P I D G I N S
Most p i d g i n s a n d creles are based o n a n E u r o p e a n language, a n d the
most c o m m o n a n d w i d e s p r e a d ones are based o n one o f t h e f o l l o w i n g
languages: E n g l i s h , F r e n c h , Spanish, D u t c h , I t a l i a n , o r Germn. E n g l i s h -
based creles are very c o m m o n i n Caribbean reas such as Antigua, Barbados,
Jamaica a n d the West Indies i n general, b u t they are also present i n Africa
( C a m e r o o n , K e n y a , St. Helena, Z i m b a b w e , N a m i b i a ) , Asia ( I n d i a , C h i n a ,
l l o n g K o n g ) a n d t h e Pacific rea (Papua N e w G u i n e a , S o l o m o n Islands,
Australia). French-based creles can be f o u n d i n M a r t i n i q u e , Guadeloupe,
St. L u c i a a n d H a i t i . Some Spanish-based p i d g i n s a n d creles were used i n
Dominican Republic, Cuba, Puerto Rico a n d the Philippines. Some instances
o f Portuguese-based creles c a n be f o u n d i n A r u b a , B o n a i r e a n d Curacao,
Malaysia a n d Singapore. These are some o f the most i m p o r t a n t pidgins:
Cameroon Pidgin E n g l i s h
Hawaiian Pidgin
Kamtok
K e n y a Pidgin Swahili
Naga Pidgin
New G u i n e a Pidgin Germn
Nigerian Pidgin E n g l i s h
Papuan Pidgin English
Pidgin Germn (Gastarbeiters) 3
 Russenorsk 4 UNIT 3
Sango
Vietnamese Pidgin F r e n c h
(Please go t o t h e exercises s e c t i o n a n d d o exercise 2.)
P i d g i n s a r e t o be f o u n d a l l o v e r t h e w o r l d b u t , t h e y t e n d t o s h a r e a
n u m b e r o f g e n e r a l characteristics. These are s o m e o f t h e m :
a) A l m o s t c o m p l e t e l a c k o f i n f l e c t i o n i n n o u n s , p r o n o u n s , verbs a n d
adjectives.
b) N o u n s are u n m a r k e d f o r n u m b e r o r gender.
c) Verbs l a c k tense m a r k e r s .
d) There is n o d i s t i n c t i o n f o r case i n personal p r o n o u n s , so I c a n s t a n d
f o r me, a n d they f o r them.
e) Syntactically, t h e absence o f clausal s t r u c t u r e s is q u i t e c o m m o n i n
p i d g i n s . H o w e v e r , r e l a t i v e clauses a n d o t h e r types o f e m b e d d i n g
develop i n c r e o l i z a t i o n .
f) I n o r d e r t o a v o i d possible confusin, as there is o f t e n n o d i s t i n c t i o n
b e t w e e n l o n g a n d s h o r t v o w e l s (e.g. ship a n d sheep w o u l d b e
p r o n o u n c e d i n t h e same w a y ) , a c o m m o n r e s o u r c e i n t r o d u c e d i n
these l a n g u a g e s is ' r e d u p l i c a t i o n ' . F o r e x a m p l e , i n T o k P i s i n sip
means ' s h i p ' a n d sipsip m e a n s 'sheep', a n d pis m e a n s 'peace' w h i l e
pispis has t h e m e a n i n g o f ' u r i n a t e ' . A n o t h e r c o m m o n u s a g e o f
r e d u p l i c a t i o n is t o i n t e n s i f y t h e m e a n i n g o f a w o r d , f o r i n s t a n c e ,
cry m e a n s ' c r y ' w h e r e a s crycry m e a n s ' c r y c o n t i n u a l l y ' , o r talk
m e a n i n g ' t a l k ' a n d talktalk m e a n i n g 'chatter' . 5
3. S O M E I N S T A N C E S O F C R E O L E S
T e r m i n o l o g y a n d s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c status are n o t a l w a y s consistent a n d
s o m e creles c a n be r e f e r r e d t o as p i d g i n s ( f o r i n s t a n c e , T o k P i s i n a n d
H a w a i i a n P i d g i n E n g l i s h ) o r t h e o t h e r w a y r o u n d . T h i s m i s m a t c h is
.mil N' oRussenorsk was
r w e g i a n fish u s e d until the 1920's i n the Arctic and was used by R u s s i a n fishermen
traders.
s Please note that this c o m m u n i c a t i o n strategy is very frequent i n m a n y languages. F o r
example in S p a n i s h if y o u w a n t to e m p h a s i z e that a m o u n t a i n w a s really h i g h y o u c a n s a y
I ,;i montaa era alta, a l t a ' o r to express that the c a k e w a s really good y o u c a n say ' E l pastel
Mtaba bueno, bueno'. I n E n g l i s h y o u c a n s a y ' Y o u w i c k e d , w i c k e d c h i l d ' .
73
|n i xluced because ' p i d g i n ' a n d 'crele' are t e c h n i c a l terms c o m m o n l y used
In l i n g u i s t s b u t n o t n e c e s s a r i l y b y s p e a k e r s o f t h e l a n g u a g e s . S o m e
Instances o f creles are:
A n g l o - R o m a n i (a c r e o l i z a t i o n o f R o m a n i i n E n g l a n d )
A s m a r a P i d g i n ( I t a l i a n - b a s e d , i t is s p o k e n i n parts o f E t h i o p i a )
lerbice Crele D u t c h
C h a b a c a n o o Zamboangueo. (Spanish-based)
6
H a i t i a n Crele
H a w a i i a n Crele E n g l i s h
Jamaican Patwa
Tok Pisin
The B r i t i s h E m p i r e spread a l l over the w o r l d for a r o u n d 350 years and
litis f a v o r e d t h e expansin o f S t a n d a r d E n g l i s h a n d r e g i o n a l v a r i e l i e s
i iverseas, o n the one h a n d , b u t also the c r e a t i o n a n d development of m a n y
pidgins a n d creles i n different parts of the globe, o n the other. As a m a t t e r
< )l Fact there have been m o r e English-based creles t h a n i n o t h e r languages
such as F r e n c h , P o r t u g u e s e o r S p a n i s h . T w o m a j o r g r o u p s o f E n g l i s h
based creles can be i d e n t i f l e d : the A t l a n t i c g r o u p , spoken i n West A f r i c a
ai i d t h e C a r i b b e a n rea s u c h as J a m a i c a n Crele E n g l i s h , t h e Crele
Knglish o f the Lesser Antilles a n d the Eastern Caribbean varieties (Trinidad
a n d Tobago, Guyana), flourishing i n the 17th a n d 18th c ; a n d , the Pacific
g r o u p i n c l u d i n g H a w a i i a n Crele E n g l i s h a n d Tok P i s i n .
.'{.1. H a w a i i a n Crele E n g l i s h
Over 600.000 people i n H a w a i i speak H a w a i i a n Crele E n g l i s h ( H C E )
also k n o w n as H a w a i ' i P i d g i n o r s i m p l y P i d g i n . H C E is i m m e r s e d in a
c o m p l e x s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s i t u a t i o n because, as o f t e n happens w i t h p i d g i n s
a n d creles, i t w a s d e n i g r a t e d r e p e a t e d l y i n s c h o o l s a n d p u b l i c
a d m i n i s t r a t i o n s for years b u t m o r e a n d m o r e often i t is t u r n i n g i n t o a way
to express s o l i d a r i t y a n d forge local identity. Nowadays, H a w a i i ' s C o u n c i l
is d e t e r m i n e d t o m a i n t a i n a n d develop t h i s l o c a l language b y means o f
e n f o r c i n g c o m p e t e n t language p l a n n i n g a n d p o l i c y (see c h a p t e r 5).
6T h e r e are thee m a i n e x a m p l e s of creles b a s e d o n S p a n i s h : Papiamento ( f o r m e d tu
the 17th c. i n the i s l a n d of C u r z a o w h i c h is c u r r e n t l y u s e d i n the i s l a n d s of A r u b a and
Bonaire); Palenquero (developed in the 18th c. near Cartagena, C o l o m b i a ) ; a n d Chabacano
or Zamboangueo (is used in s o m e parts ol the Philippines). T h e s e S p a n i s h - b a s e d creles
are at the time ol writing out of the scope ol this Unit but il yon wish to k n o w more about
them, you c a n read ' L e n g u a s pidgin y lenguas c r i o l l a s ' in Principios de sociolingt'stica v
sociologa del lenguaje by F r a n c i s c o Marcos Marn, pp. 277-291 ( B a r c e l o n a : Ariel).
 AN INTRODUCCION TO S()('|()I.IM(;|/
These are s o m e general eharaeterislies o l I K K :
1. F r o m a p h o n o l o g i c a l p o i n t o f view, H C E is r a t h e r s i m p l e siru I
a v o i d s p h o n o l o g i c a l f e a t u r e s w h i c h are d i f f i c u l t t o p r o n o u i u I
any o f the languages i n contact ( E n g l i s h , H a w a i i a n and m
others). T h e vocalic system was s i m p l i f i e d a n d fricatives tend lo
avoided:
E.g.: B o d a d e m ( b o t h o f t h e m )
B r a d d a h (brother)
2. V o c a b u l a r y is d e r i v e d t o a large extent f r o m t h e socially d o m i n a
g r o u p . E n g l i s h - b a s e d p i d g i n s u s u a l l y h a v e a b o u t 9 0 % o l wol
c o m i n g f r o m E n g l i s h , t h e l e x i f i e r l a n g u a g e . N o t i c e t h a t some
these w o r d s H C E c o m e d i r e c t l y f r o m E n g l i s h (A) a n d s o m e ol h
h a v e b e e n a d a p t e d o r s i m p l i f i e d ( B ) . S t i l l , t h e y a r e large
recognizable:
A B
s ,^ g ? asa
3. M a n y w o r d s are p o l i s e m o u s as, f o r i n s t a n c e :
E.g.: t r y c a n be u s e d as a m a i n v e r b 'try', b u t also as a v e r b au
l i a r y w i t h the m e a n i n g o f 'please'.
i n s i d e means 'inside', ' s o u l ' a n d 'heart'.
4. A l m o s t c o m p l e t e l a c k o f i n f l e c t i o n i n n o u n s , p r o n o u n s , verbs an.
adjectives. N o u n s are u n m a r k e d f o r n u m b e r a n d gender:
E.g.: 'Dis d a language fo m o s p e o p o d a t stay Uve i n s i d e H a w a i ' i ' .
'Him was real t i g h t w i t his brudda'.
'You g o fve m i l e sout'.
5. Tense a n d aspect are n o r m a l l y i n d i c a t e d w i t h a m a r k e r .
P a s t t e n s e is expressed b y p l a c i n g p r e v e r b a l p r e t e r i t e a u x i l i a r i e
'wen', ' b i n ' a n d 'haed' b e f o r e t h e v e r b :
E.g.: ' S h i w e n p e i n d a g r i n haus'.
'You b i n say go u p o n r o o f .
75
I tiln e e v e n t s are m a r k e d by 'go', 'gon', 'gona', o r ' g o i n ' before the
Vt*i b:
Ir I !'< ni it fish'.
Progressive aspect c a n be expressed b y : a) i n s e r t i n g 'ste' (stay)
l lore the verb i n the i n f i n i t i v e ; b) u s i n g the i n g f o r m o f the verb;
nuil, c) u s i n g b o t h f o r m s altogether:
I r a) ' S h i ste r a i t d a leta'.
b) 'Dey p l e i n g f u t b a w l ' .
c) 'aue ste i t i n g d a kek'.
I u i x i l i a r i e s are n o n e x i s t e n t a n d n e g a t i o n is expressed b y p l a c i n g
'no', 'nat' o r 'neva' before t h e v e r b :
i <.: ' S h i neva si daet m u v i ' .
'No c a n ' ( c a n n o t , i t s n o t possible)
'No m o ' (there isn't any)
ll'li < i 11 lo the exercises s e c t i o n a n d d o exercise 3)
J a m a i c a n P a t w a (or P a t o i s )
\ u r e s u l t o f n o t h a v i n g a n o f f i c i a l s t a t u s , a ame f o r t h e crele
f i n m . i ' c used m a i n l y i n Jamaica has n o t been fixed to the present day a n d
lems like Jamaican, J a m a i c a n Crele, Jamaican Patwa o r Patois are
II ii ed. O v e r 9 0 % o f t h e 2.5 m i l l i o n p o p u l a t i o n o f J a m a i c a i n t h e late
|U'J()'s are descendants o f slaves b r o u g h t f r o m A f r i c a . L a n g u a g e i n t h i s
I ii i M i r a n i s l a n d n o w a d a y s reflects t h e h i s t o r y o f t h a t c o u n t r y a n d i t s
t'iinlaci w i t h a w h o l e r a n g e o f c u l t u r e s a n d languages t h a t have passed
lliHHil'.h. I n spite o f t h a t , t h e o f f i c i a l language r e m a i n s S t a n d a r d E n g l i s h
lili I i is t h e e d u c a t e d m o d e l s p o k e n b y t h e lite a n d also t h e o f f i c i a l
i ni i.uage. I n J a m a i c a , a w h o l e l i n g u i s t i c s p e c t r u m c a n be f o u n d h a v i n g
II i n d a r d E n g l i s h ( t h e l e x i f i e r l a n g u a g e ) at o n e e x t r e m e a n d J a m a i c a n
i o r c r e o l i z e d E n g l i s h at the other. J a m a i c a n P a t w a is c h a r a c t e r i s t i c
l " i lis l i a g m e n t e d English speech, a n d for having a syntax developed d u r i n g
|hi ilays o f slavery w i t h t h e i n f l u e n c e o f several West A f r i c a n languages,
i " 11.1111 i ng to the Niger-Congo f a m i l y o f languages. Nowadays, this language
I il got m u c h social a n d socioeconomic status i n Jamaica a n d i t largcly
II i 1 1 ' s e n ts t h e speech o f t h e peasant a n d l a b o r e r w i t h l i t t l e e d u c a t i o n . I t
1
i nol c o n s i d e r e d a n " a c c e p t a b l e " l a n g u a g e f o r f o r m a l p u r p o s e s a n d
i lenkers are often c o n s i d e r e d as socially a n d l i n g u i s t i c a l l y i n f e r i o r . Some
attempts have b e e n m a d e l o c h a n g e i h i s s i t u a t i o n a i m i n g at givinl Ahei ed t h i r d person s i n g u l a r s u b j e c l - v c r b c o n c o r d :
lamaiean Patwa official status and l u r n i n g il mo llie language ol cducalion JP Engl.
J a m a i c a n P a t w a is g a i n i n g i n p r e s t i g e a n d is n o w seen s o m e t i m e s Ifl E.g.: ' i f i m dar axe' i f he dares to ask
newspapers o r h e a r d o n the r a d i o , a n d is also present i n songs w h i c h h e l p i 'shi greet i m ' she greets h i m
to raise the self-esteem o f t h e speakers a n d assert t h e i r identity.
7. Absence o f a u x i l i a r l e s t o f o r m the negative:
This crele does n o t quite have a u n i f o r m o r t h o g r a p h i c represen!aI i< >n
and no agreement has been m a d e t o c o n c l u d e i f i t s h o u l d a c c o m m o d a i . Engl.
the lexifier language (Standard English) o r i f a n entirely new system should E.g.: I d o n ' t w a n t a n y t h i n g t o eat.
be created. JP
Some general features o f JP: E.g.: ' M i n u h w a n n u t t e n fe eat'.

1. N o It - 0/ o r Id - 5/ d i s t i n c t i o n : H. C o p u l a d e l e t i o n :
JP Engl.
JP Engl.
E.g.: 'it soh bad' i t is so b a d
E.g.: 'de' the
' i m short a n t u m p a ' he is s h o r t a n d stokcy
'dis' this
'life a r d m a n y sey' m a n y p e o p l e say t h a t l i f e is h a r d
'odder' other
'wid' with ' 1 Tense m a r k e d l e x i c a l l y ( i n s t e a d o f m o r p h o l o g i c a l l y ) :

'tink' thing Engl.

E.g.: T h a t is t h e w o m a n t h a t t o o k m y money.
2. F i n a l c o n s o n a n t c l u s t e r s t e n d to be d e v o i c e d (Id/ b e c o m e s Itl) 01 JP
deleted:

JP Engl. E.g.: 'Is d a t o o m a n d e h d i d t e k m i money'.

E.g.: 'husban' husband
'purfume' perfumed
| 3 . Tok P i s i n
3. I t is n o t s t r e s s e d - t i m e d b u t s y l l a b l e - t i m e d , so a l l syllables receivc Papua N e w Guinea has three official languages w h i c h t u r n t o be second
the same stress. (You c a n f i n d some r e c o r d i n g s i n the w e b site for languages t o m o s t people: H i r i M o t u , T o k P i s i n a n d E n g l i s h . T o k P i s i n
t h i s subject.) i 11') is used nowadays b y three m i l l i o n people as a u n i f y i n g language, a n d
\tngua franca, a m o n g speakers o f a n u m b e r of d i f f e r e n t i n d i g e n o u s
4. M o d i f i e d p e r s o n a l p r o n o u n s :
languages (over 800) Papua N e w G u i n e a . T h i s language, w h i c h r e m a i n s
I 'me' M I v d i s t a n t t o E n g l i s h , is s o m e t i m e s used as a p i d g i n a n d s o m e t i m e s as
He 'im' a Crele a n d shows clear influences f r o m E n g l i s h i n t e r m s o f b o r r o w i n g s ,
They 'dem' s n b o r d i n a t i o n p a t t e r n s , p l u r a l f o r m s (-s), etc. H o w e v e r , w e c a n n o t say
lliat a c o n t i n u u m b e t w e e n T P a n d E n g l i s h c a n be f o u n d as i t seems t h a t
5. Absence o f p l u r a l m a r k e r s o n n o u n s : d e c r e o l i z a t i o n does n o t affect TP. I n 1975 P a p u a N e w G u i n e a w a s b o r n
and TP was recognized i n the c o n s t i t u t i o n as o n o f the n a t i o n a l languages.
JP Engl. Now some c o m m u n i t i e s c a n choose t o have t h e i r c h i l d r e n schooled i n TP
E.g.: ' a l l type a people' all kinds of people in the f i r s t t h r e e years o f e l e m e n t a r y e d u c a t i o n b u t p a r e n t s perceive t h a t
'book' shoes Knglish b r i n g s m o r e advantages t o t h e i r c h i l d r e n . TP is also used i n m a n y
g o v e r n m e n t p u b l i c a t i o n s , i n r a d i o , televisin b r o a d c a s t i n g a n d i n t h e
 ' '-SO loi iN(!ii|ST|| I
79
l l o u s c Assembly w h i c h is llie p a r l i a m e n t . Wantok, a w e e k l y newspapet]
is w r i t t e n i n T P a n d has a r e a d e r s h i p o f over 10.000 people. ?>. S i m p l i f i e d vocalic system, o n l y /a/, Id, / i / , lo/, lu:
S o m e g e n e r a l features o f TP:
TP Engl.
'fut' foot
1. C o n s o n a n t a s s i m i l a t i o n . T h e r e is n o d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n /p/ and /I/,
/g/ a n d /k/; /s/, /// a n d ltl: 'grin' green
'gro' grow
TP
Engl. 'ston' stone
E-g. 'hap pas seven'
h a l f past seven 'smok' smoke
'lipt'
lift 'stret' straight o n
pait'
fight 'tumora' tomorrow
pilta'
filter
'pinga'
finger 4. W o r d r e d u p l i c a t i o n t o i n d i c a t e emphasis:
pul bilong pis'
fin o f f i s h TP Engl.
pulap'
full, full u p E.g.: 'liklikbas' minibus
TP 'lukluk' l o o k at
Engl.
E-g.
g-' 'sak' 'man bilong toktok' talkative person
shark
sel' 'singsing' festival
shell
sem'
shame
sip' 5. P l u r a l suffix '-pela':
y
ship
sot, sotpela' short TP Engl.
su
shoe E.g. 'emtupela' those t w o
sips' 'emtripela' those t h r e e
=hips 'etpela' eight
sis
< dieese 'tpela' both
sops (
:hops 'tpela m a r i t ' m a r r i e d couple
TP t

ngl.
6. Lexicn based o n E n g l i s h . I t s h o u l d be t a k e n i n t o a c c o u n t t h a t i n
;
E-g.
o t h e p r o c e s s o f d e c r e o l i z a t i o n , m o r e a n d m o r e w o r d s t e n d t o be
Plk p
Jg a d o p t e d f r o m the lexifier language a n d the acrolect q u i c k l y adopts
ig w o r d s t h a t p o r t r a y the present society.
d c o n s o n a n t clusters: TP Engl.
TP r . E.g.: 'adres' address
E.g.: Igl.
adn 'dokta' doctor
and
i s J

'heven' heaven
- f f d n ga r d e n
'man' man
h S ho rse
'
na rner
'stori'
'skul'
story
school
, ? a n , l a r np
lephan l e f i
hand
7. Metaphors i n w o r d f o r m a t i o n :
W , k rk
w a n handet' huj TP Engl.
dred
E.g.: 'haus b i l o n g t u m b u n a p a s i n ' museum
 80 81
AN INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLINGUISTICS

'kaikai long moning' breakfast ii I M I I w o r k i n g classes. T h e p r o n u n c i a t i o n i n stage 8 is closer t o the basilect

'laplap b i l o n g windo' curtain |lul shows a r u r a l w o r k i n g class, as w e l l as i t e m 9 w h i c h is used by od
' l a i n b i l o n g Jisas' disciples ni.I illiterate r u r a l laborers.
' p i n b i l o n g us' nose p i n
I l a w a i i is one o f those places w h e r e w e c a n f i n d t h i s c o n t i n u u m o f
8. S i m p l i f i e d p r e p o s i d o n a l system ( o n l y three): 'long' used f o r 'to, for, [ H T C I I w h i c h ranges f r o m the d i s t i n c t H C E t o S t a n d a r d E n g l i s h o f H a w a i i .
f r o m ' ; ' b i l o n g ' used f o r ' o f ; and, ' w a n t a i m ' used for ' w i t h ' . I n i l n s case, i t depends m a i n l y o n the speakers l o c a t i o n a n d u p b r i n g i n g .
I IM basilect (barely i n t e l l i g i b l e b y S t a n d a r d E n g l i s h speakers) is spoken
N O T E : I n the w e b page f o r t h i s subject, y o u c a n find w r i t t e n a n d a u r a l
i i In c o u n t r y side w h e r e a s t h e acrolect is s p o k e n i n t h e m a y o r cities.
samples o f these a n d o t h e r p i d g i n s and creles.

4. D E C R E O L I Z A T I O N JY T H E U S E O F P I D G I N S A N D C R E O L E S I N E D U C A T I O N

Creles, as a n y o t h e r l i v i n g language, continu t o evolve. T h e r e is a ll is r a t h e r u n c o m m o n t o f i n d a p i d g i n o r crele, o r o t h e r m i n o i ity

p h e n o m e n o n c a l l e d d e c r e o l i z a t i o n that arises w h e n one crele h a s a i l i . i l c c t , as t h e l a n g u a g e o f i n s t r u c t i o n i n f o r m a l e d u c a t i o n i n a n y
p r o l o n g e d c o n t a c t w i t h a s t a n d a r d language i n a specific society, a n d t h a t i . I m . i i i o n a l system i n t h e w o r l d , a n d V a l d m a n (1989) considers t h a t t h i s
standard brings a considerable influence to bear o n the crele. So, speakers IN so for t w o reasons. O n t h e one h a n d , t h e c o n t i n u u m o f v a r i a t i o n t h a t
start to develop the crele t a k i n g the standard as a m o d e l and a c o n t i n u u m Is usually f o u n d b e t w e e n t h e pidgin/creole a n d t h e s t a n d a r d e d u c a t i o n a l
is created w i t h the standard as a model at the top a n d the crele as a m o d e l Innguage r e p r e s e n t s a s t r o n g o b s t a c l e (see d e c r e o l i z a t i o n ) as i t is
at t h e b o t t o m . T h i s process c a n be clearly perceived nowadays i n places K iinetimes d i f f i c u l t t o isolate a p a r t i c u l a r n o r m t o be used i n e d u c a t i o n .
l i k e B a r b a d o s , C a m e r o o n , I n d i a , Nigeria a n d Papua N e w Guinea, a m o n g P n i lie o t h e r h a n d , t h e s o c i a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f t h e p i d g i n / c r e o l e is i n a
others. I n such a s i t u a t i o n the different forms of the crele become socially | .i\d by the fact t h a t i t is f r e q u e n t l y c o n s i d e r e d as d e v i a n t f r o m
s t r a t i f i e d a n d t h e v a r i e t y , o r varieties, w h i c h are closer to t h e s t a n d a r d IIH s t a n d a r d a n d as h a v i n g a n i n f e r i o r status i n the speech c o m m u n i t y .
o f t e n b e c o m e s t h e l a n g u a g e o f t h e lite a n d educated society (acrolect)
Siegel ( 2 0 0 2 ) a f f i r m s t h a t speakers o f creles a n d m i n o r i t y d i a l e c t s
whereas the v a r i e t y w h i c h is closer to the crele often represents i l l i t e r a t e
|i nerally d o n o t d o w e l l i n t h e f o r m a l e d u c a t i o n s y s t e m . I n s o m e cases
people a n d l o w e r social class (basilect). Between these two poles there can
IIMS can be caused b y socio-economic factors b u t o n some o t h e r occasions
a p p e a r a w h o l e range o f varieties o r mesolects w h i c h determine n o t o n l y
s o c i a l s t r a t i f i c a t i o n b u t also alleged identities a m o n g their speakers. ii l e e m s clear t h a t language plays a role. Very often, these speakers are i n
W a r d h a u g h (2002: 80) cites A l l s o p p (1958) a n d shows the f o l l o w i n g stages I w a y disadvantaged because the language o f f o r m a l e d u c a t i o n is actuallv
i n t h e c o n t i n u u m t o say ' I t o l d h i m ' i n Guyanese: I s t a n d a r d v a r i e t y t h a t t h e y d o n o t speak as a m o t h e r t o n g u e . T h i s is the
i r o l A A V E ( A f r i c a n A m e r i c a n V e r n a c u l a r E n g l i s h ) w h i c h has been
1. ai t o l d h i m i n a l y z e d q u i t e e x t e n s i v e l y since t h e 1960's i n t h e U n i t e d States. N o t so
2. ai t o d d h i m m u c h research has been developed w i t h regards to other m i n o r i t y dialects
3. ai to: 1 i m a n d creles a l t h o u g h these cases are equally i n t e r e s t i n g (see c h a p t e r 6 for
4. ai tel i m i n l i u m a t i o n o n A b o r i g i n a l languages).
5. a tel i m
6. S o m e creles a r e n o w r e c o g n i z e d as a d i s t i n c t v a r i e t y w i t h a
ai tel I
7. in . i i u m a t i c a l s y s t e m b u t e d u c a t o r s a n d p o l i c y m a k e r s i n t r o d u c e m a n y
a tel I
8. . i i i ' i i m e n t s against the a p p l i c a t i o n of a ' n o n s t a n d a r d ' v a r i e t y i n the
m i tel I
9. e d u c a t i o n a l system. T h e y p o s i t , f o r example, t h a t i n s t r u c t i o n t i m e s h o u l d
m i tel a m
he spent o n l e a r n i n g t h e s t a n d a r d as they c o n s i d e r t h a t a n y effort m a d e
T h e varieties 1 t o 3 reflect t h e acrolect t y p i c a l o f middle-class usage, i " leach t h e n o n s t a n d a r d is a waste o f t i m e . T h e y believe t h a t u s i n g a n d
v a r i e t i e s 4 t o 7 d i s p l a y mesolect f o r m s characteristic i n lower m i d d l e a n d ti u l i i n g a n o n s t a n d a r d v a r i e t y o f speech i n t h e c l a s s r o o m d e p r i v e s
 82
AN INTRODUCCION TO SOCIOLINGUISTICS
c h i l d r e n o f a chance t o benefit f r o m t h e s o c i o - e c o n o m i c advantages t h a l
speakers o f s t a n d a r d varieties have, c o n d e m n i n g t h e m t o a n u n c h a n g i n g
underclass status. Some o t h e r educators a n d p o l i c y m a k e r s advcate thal
u s i n g a n o n s t a n d a r d v a r i e t y i n e d u c a t i o n m a y cause confusin a n d
interference w i t h the s t a n d a r d variety w h a t w i l l result i n a d d i t i o n a l
difficulties for the children.
N o d o u b t t h a t s o m e p r o g r e s s is b e i n g m a d e i n t h i s respect o v e r the
years, a n d p i d g i n s a n d creles are g a i n i n g social a n d p o l i t i c a l r e c o g n i t i o n
a n d t h e i r a c k n o w l e d g e m e n t as p a r t o f the social i d e n t i t y i n m a n y p a r t s ol
t h e w o r l d is n o w a f a c t (see l a n g u a g e p o l i c y i n c h a p t e r 5 ) . I n t h e last
decades t h e r e has been a g l o b a l a t t e m p t t o l e g i t i m i z e t h e use o f p i d g i n s ,
creles a n d m i n o r i t y d i a l e c t s i n f o r m a l e d u c a t i o n c l a i m i n g t h a t t h e
speakers o f these languages h a v e a r i g h t t o express t h e i r o w n l i n g u i s t i c
a n d s o c i o c u l t u r a l i d e n t i t y i n t h e i r o w n languages. Siegel ( 2 0 0 2 ) p o i n t s out
t h a t t h i s e n t h u s i a s m f o r u s i n g p i d g i n s , creles a n d m i n o r i t y d i a l e c t s i n
f o r m a l e d u c a t i o n h a d to face s o m e obstacles s u c h as the f o l l o w i n g :
1 . N e g a t i v e a t t i t u d e s a n d i g n o r a n c e o n t h e p a r t o f t h e teachers w h o ,
especially i n i m m i g r a t i o n settings, m a y m i s t a k e language p r o b l e m s
o f creole-speaking c h i l d r e n f o r c o g n i t i v e p r o b l e m s a n d e v e n t u a l l y
l o w e r t h e i r e x p e c t a t i o n s o f these s t u d e n t s . E v e n t u a l l y , t h i s leads
to the l o w e r i n g of student performance i n favor of students
s p e a k i n g t h e s t a n d a r d v a r i e t y . S o m e s t u d i e s i n t h i s r e s p e c t have
been carried out w i t h i m m i g r a n t c h i l d r e n m o v i n g to new
e d u c a t i o n a l systems s u c h as creole-speaking c h i l d r e n c o m i n g f r o m
t h e C a r i b b e a n rea a n d e n t e r i n g the p u b l i c e d u c a t i o n a l s y s t e m i n
t h e U n i t e d States.
2 . Negative attitudes a n d self image o f the students themselves because
o f d e n i g r a t i o n o f t h e i r s p e e c h a n d c u l t u r e . T h i s effect c a n be
neutralized by l e g i t i m i z i n g the students' language varieties and
a d o p t i n g a n integrative a p p r o a c h , f o r e x a m p l e : b r i n g i n g aspects o f
t h e i r c u l t u r e i n t o t h e c l a s s r o o m (e.g.: t r a d i t i o n s , m u s i c , etc.);
e n c o u r a g i n g s t u d e n t s t o s p e a k and/or w r i t e i n these v a r i e t i e s ;
teaching some sociolinguistic principies that explain linguistic and
p r a g m a t i c differences w i t h s t a n d a r d varieties.
3. Repression o f self-expression because o f t h e n e e d t o use a n
u n f a m i l i a r f o r m o f language.
4 . D i f f i c u l t y i n a c q u i r i n g l i t e r a c y i n a second language o r d i a l e c t . I n
t h i s case, c h i l d r e n m a y be r e p r e s s e d i f t h e y are n o t a l l o w e d t o
express themselves i n t h e i r f a m i l i a r language variety.
83
I INI 11 <
l ' n l g i n s , creles a n d m i n o r i t y d i a l e c t s h a v e so far been used i n three
lypes o f e d u c a t i o n a l p r o g r a m s ( S i e g e l , 2 0 0 2 ) , a l l o f t h e m a i m i n g at
lli Ii 111 i ve b i l i n g u a l i s m o r b i d i a l e c t a l i s m , t h a t is, h e l p i n g t h e s t u d e n t s t o
|Ct|iiii c the s t a n d a r d language w h i l e m a i n t a i n i n g t h e i r o w n p i d g i n , crele
n o r i t y language. T h i s practice clearly c o n t r i b u t e s t o t h e i r self-esteem
11-1 l l i c i r r i g h t t o m a i n t a i n t h e i r m o t h e r t o n g u e . T h e s e t h r e e s o r t s o
programs vary i n the w a y the c h i l d r e n s h o m e varieties are considered
m i l nteract w i t h t h e s t a n d a r d l a n g u a g e w i t h i n t h e c l a s s r o o m . These
i l i i ' ' types are: i n s t r u m e n t a l p r o g r a m , a c c o m m o d a t i o n p r o g r a m o r
I W i i r c n e s s p r o g r a m . I n t h e f i r s t case, t h e i n s t r u m e n t a l p r o g r a m is
11 H H icrized by the use o f the h o m e variety as the mdium o f i n s t r u c t i o n ,
0 ll i s u s e d as a v e h i c l e f o r t h e a c q u i s i t i o n o f i n i t i a l l i t e r a c y a n d t h e
Ii II n i n g o f o t h e r subjects i n t h e c u r r i c u l u m . T h e s t a n d a r d l a n g u a g e is
lore i n t r o d u c e d at a later stage a n d i t g r a d u a l l y becomes t h e language
ni I n s t r u c t i o n f o r s o m e s u b j e c t s . I n s t r u m e n t a l p r o g r a m s h a v e b e e n
I m p l e m e n t e d i n places s u c h as M a u r i t i u s ( M a u r i t i a n Crele) o r P a p u a
Ni w G u i n e a ( T o k P i s i n ) . I n t h e s e c o n d case, t h e a c c o m m o d a t i o n
p i o g r a m does a l l o w t h e use o f t h e h o m e l a n g u a g e a n d i t s use is n o t
1 N i lalized i n a n y w a y b u t i t is, however, n o t e m p l o y e d as t h e language o f
m i r u c t i o n f o r a n y s u b j e c t or i t is s t u d i e d as a l a n g u a g e i n i t s e l f . A t
l i l g h e r levis, as s t u d e n t s a c c o m m o d a t e t o t h e s t a n d a r d v a r i e t y , t h e i r
I c l a n g u a g e a n d c u l t u r e c a n be p r e s e r v e d b y m e a n s o f t h e s t u d y o f
lu i a t u r e o r m u s i c o f t h e i r o w n c o m m u n i t i e s . S o m e a c c o m m o d a t i o n
p r o g r a m s have been set u p f o r H a w a i i a n c h i l d r e n speakers o f v a r i e t i e s
u l H a w a i i a n Crele E n g l i s h a n d s p e a k e r s o f A b o r i g i n a l E n g l i s h i n
A u s t r a l i a . I n t h e t h i r d case, t h e a w a r e n e s s p r o g r a m i n c l u d e s i n t h e
' u n i c u l u m s o m e t e a c h i n g o n basic s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c a n d s o c i o p r a g m a t i c
|n m c i p l e s o f d i f f e r e n t l a n g u a g e v a r i e t i e s , a n d t h e i r g r a m m a t i c a l r u l e s
un p r a g m a t i c s are c o m p a r e d w i t h those o f t h e s t a n d a r d variety. S o m e
Iwareness p r o g r a m s have been created for creole-speaking Caribbean
m u n i ' i a n t s i n the U n i t e d K i n g d o m a n d speakers o f K r i o l a n d A b o r i g i n a l
I n ' l i s l i i n Australia. (Recent research c a r r i e d o u t i n these three p r o g r a m s
i n i n m a r i z e d i n Siegel. 2 0 0 2 : 1 7 - 2 9 )
i Please go t o the exercises s e c t i o n a n d d o exercise 4 a n d 5 . )
<>. E X E R C I S E S
I . S e a r c h t h e internet for ' E s p e r a n t o ' a n d 'Esperanto speaki
1 1 i m i n u n i t i c s ' . Read a b o u t this language a n d t h e n w r i t e a s u m m a r y (about
' ( ) w o r d s ) w i t h the i n f o r m a t i o n y o u c o n s i d e r relevant a b o u t i t ( o r i g i n ,
 AN I N I K O I M K l ' I I I N TO IS'I'I INII *

h n p p i - i i s . ' What do vou think is the i n o n atlitude a m o n g schoolchildrcn

users, n u m b e r o f speakers, etc.). What a d v a n l a g c s a n d d i s a d v a n t a g e s i a n

y o u see for the use o f E s p e r a n t o nowadays? Imvaicls s t a n d a r d English? You may w a n l l<> have a look to c h a p t e r 5 a n d
Ii mi . i l i o n i language p l a n n i n g .
2 . Search t h e w e b f o r at least three o f the p i d g i n s f r o m t h e list. (el
5. F i n d o u t w h a t languages are o f f i c i a l i n the f o l l o w i n g c o u n t r i e s .
some general i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t t h e m ( w h e r e t h e y are s p o k e n , n u m b t |
o f speakers, etc.) a n d find a s h o r t sample (10 Unes). T h e n analyze it and
Australia
u n d e r l i n e a l l the w o r d s o r expressions y o u t h i n k t h a t c o m e f r o m E n g l i s h
llelgium
3 . Read the f o l l o w i n g excerpts i n H a w a i ' i Crele E n g l i s h adapted Ir Brazil
M a s u d a (1995: 322) a n d t r a n s c r i b e d f o l l o w i n g O d o O r t h o g r a p h y . Try t i 1 ( aada
t r a n s c r i b e t h e m i n t o s t a n d a r d E n g l i s h a n d n o t e t h a t the p r o n u n c i a t i o n < olombia
o f t h e t e x t is m u c h c l o s e r t o t h e O d o O r t h o g r a p h y t h a n t o s t a n d a i d I inland
English. I i .mee
ll.nli

A. Kaz India
N o , d a k a get i n w a n l o n g l a i n . Kenya
Samtaim i n wan long lain. New Z e a l a n d
M e i b i i , get a b a u t f i f t i , s i k s t i kaz, yae. Noiway
/En'den, its n a t o n l i w a n l a i n , r.ipiia New Guinea
D e i get sevro m o aDa l a i n z , l'-iraguay
D e i get s a m m o kaz, t u , ae? l'hilippines
End, d a t i i m s t a z iz, Singapore
A w l w e i z b r i n g i n ka, aend, Tanzania
Awlweiz t e i k i n aut, sii. I Iruguay
l'hilippines
B. M a i jab Singapore
So, m a i j a b iz t u s i i l.mzania
Doet n o m o , n o m o , n o c h r a b o i n d a f i i l d l ii uguay
D e i graeb dea ka, /aire
D e n , s a m av d e m , d e i t e l ,
W h y d o y o u t h i n k some o f these c o u n t r i e s have m o r e t h a n one official
Eh, ai tink
M a i k a m p a n i n o m o , d o h , yae. language?
Y'sii, i f n o m o , n o m o k a m p a n i ,
Wel, a i go f a i n d ,
Sii, aes m a i j a b , s i i . 7. REFERENCES

4 . J a m a i c a n Crele o r 'patois' is c o m m o n l y used i n J a m a i c a a l t h o u g h \ i . o r - , R. 1958. 'The English language i n B r i t i s h Guiana'. English Language
i t is frequently n o t socially v a l u e d . The language o f e d u c a t i o n is S t a n d a r d Tkaching, 12: 59-66.
E n g l i s h . The teaching of S t a n d a r d E n g l i s h i n schools often proves I Im M, .1. 2000. An Introduction to Pidgins and Creles. Cambridge: Camhrid^c
i n e f f e c t i v e as c h i l d r e n p r e f e r t o use ' p a t o i s ' . W h y d o y o u t h i n k t h i s
University Press.
7 Bickerton, D. and C. Odo, (1976) Change and Variation in Hawaiian English. Vol. I: Iliii M I S , J. 1992. An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. Harlow, UK: Longman.
General Phonology and Pidgin Syntax. Honolul: Social Science Research Institute. University
of Hawai'i. II II s, I). 1971. Pidginization and Creolization of Languages. Cambridge, C.U.P.

MASDDA, H. 1995. 'Versificalion and teilcration n i I la watt Crele English: T I
paila maen, awra' World EngUshes 14/3: 317-342.
RlCKPORD, J . R . & J . MCWHORTER. 1997. 'Language contact and language general i< >n',
in F. Coulmas, The Handbook of Sociolinguistics. Oxford: Blackwells.
SIEGEL, J . 2002. 'Applied Creolistics i n the 21st Century.' i n Glenn Gilbert (ed I
Pidgin and Crele Linguistics in the Twenty-first Century. New York: Peter Lang
VALDMAN, A. 1989. 'The use of crele as a school mdium and decreolizatoin m
Haiti.' i n W . Z. Sonino (ed.) Literacy in school and society: Multidisciplinaiv
perspectives. New York: Plenum Press.
WARDHAUGH, R . 2002 (4th ed.). An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. Malden, U S A
Blackwell Publishing.
R E S O U R C E S O N T H E WEB
^ S S y o u w i l l f m
9. F U R T H E R R E A D I N G S A N D QUESTIONS
9.1. Text 5
R e a d the f o l l o w i n g text carefully a n d c o m m e n t o n i t e m p h a s i z i n g any
aspect y o u consider o f relevance. After the text y o u w i l l find some questions
t h a t m a y be h e l p f u l . W r i t e a r o u n d 250-300 w o r d s i n t o t a l .
Many present-day creles are spoken by descendants of the African
slaves i n America and the Caribbean. As mentioned above, the common
language of the plantation was generally a pidgin, and children naturally
acquired the pidgin as a rst language. As the families' communicative
needs expanded, so d i d the resources of the language they used. The
pidgin developed into a crele.
Alternatively, a pidgin can become so useful as a lingua franca that
it may be expanded and used even by people who share a tribal language.
I n m u l t i l i n g u a l speech communities, parents may use a p i d g i n so
extensively d u r i n g the day, i n the market, at church, i n offices and on
public transpon, that it becomes normal for them to use it at home too.
In this case, too, children w i l l often acquire it as their first language and
it w i l l develop i n t o a crele. Tok Pisin is the first language of many
children i n New Guinea.
INI I \ 87
i m n m
Once a crele has developed I can be used for all the functions of
any language politics, education, administration (including tax forms
[...]), original literature (and translations of Shakespeare too), and so
on. Tok Pisin is the most frequently used language of debate i n the Papua
New Guinea Parliament. Creles have become accepted standard and
even national and official languages, as w i l l be seen i n the next chapter.
Once developed there is no evidence in their linguistic structure to reveal
their pidgin origins. A linguist doing a present day (or synchronic)
analysis of, say, Afrikaans would not be able to identify i t as a crele.
The features which might suggest its crele origins are all features which
can be found i n other well-established languages w i t h no history of
creolisation that we can know about. (Even English has been described
by some as a latter-day crele, w i t h French vocabulary superimposed
on a Celtic base.) This is fascinating and provocative since, as mentioned
above, it suggests that the processes of pidginisation and creolisation
may be universal processes which reveal a great deal about the origins
of language and the ways in which languages develop.
, Holmes(1992: 98-99)
INNUCS to c o n s i d e r :
a) Do y o u t h i n k t h a t by u s i n g creles i n p u b l i c a t i o n s the post-creole
c o n t i n u u m c a n be s t o p p e d a n d the language c a n be f i x e d i n some
way?
h) D o y o u t h i n k t h a t creles s h o u l d be a d o p t e d as o f f i c i a l languages
i n t h e c o u n t r i e s w h e r e they are used as happens w i t h Tok P i s i n i n
Papua N e w Guinea?
c) B e a r i n g i n m i n d the 21st c e n t u r y society w e Uve i n , d o y o u t h i n k
t h a t n e w p i d g i n s a n d creles w i l l arise as they d i d i n t h e 18th a n d
19th c ?
>.2. Text 6
Read the f o l l o w i n g text carefully a n d c o m m e n t o n i t e m p h a s i z i n g any
aspect y o u consider of relevance. After the text y o u w i l l find some questions
dial may be h e l p f u l . W r i t e a r o u n d 250-300 w o r d s i n t o t a l .
Tanzania faced the dilemma of w h i c h language to choose as its
official national language. Choosing one language from over a hundred
indigenous languages, each associated w i t h a particular tribe, would
have simply provoked discontent, if not intertribal warfare. Choosing
English for a newly independent nation seemed inappropriate (though
 l)Nll \ .
88 AN I N T U o n i K ' J ' I O N TO S ( K lOI.IN ,11 IS I II S

many other nations have had lillle choice bul lo use the language ol llie in KKY WORDS
colonisers as their only official language). The first President of Tan/ama
Julius Nyerere, chose Swahili, a language of the Bantu language laniilv I he l o l l o w i n g l i s t o f key w o r d s c o n t a i n s s o m e i m p o r t a n t t e r m
which was widely used throughout the country as a lingua fraiu t fl , |csented i n t h i s u n i t . A d e f i n i t i o n f o r each t e r m c a n be f o u n d
many contexts. There were some obvious reasons for this choice. S Hil ol this b o o k , i n the glossary.
were pragmatic. Swahili was already the mdium of primary educal n >n,
for instance, and so all Tanzanians learned the language at school. Othd
obvious reasons were more ideological. Ninety-six per cent of Tanzania'
languages are Bantu languages, like Swahili, so it could be cleai 1]
Acrolect
identified as an African language. Moreover, Swahili had served as thi
Auxiliary language
lingua franca of the anti-colonial political movement for independen i
In this role it had acted as a kind of social cement between very disparata Basilect
groups. I t could hardly have had better credentials from a political and English-lexifier crele
social point of view. Language conflict
Language election/selection
Holmes (1992: 113) Lexifier
Lingua franca
I s s u e s to c o n s i d e r : LWC
Mesolect
a) W h a t p r o b l e m s a n d d i f f i c u l t i e s c a n y o u t h i n k o f i n a c o u n t r y thal
Minority language
has recently g a i n e d independence ( h a v i n g a c o l o n i a l past) a n d thal
New Englishes
has t o select a n o f f i c i a l language?
Sabir
b) D o y o u k n o w o f a n y o t h e r c o u n t r y w h e r e a specific code has been
selected f o r p r a c t i c a l a n d p o l i t i c a l purposes?

c) W h a t advantages are there i n selecting a n o f f i c i a l language that is

a n i n t e r n a t i o n a l language s p o k e n a l l over t h e w o r l d l i k e E n g l i s h ?
I KIUNGUALISM: INTRODUCTION

I h inclreds o f languages are used i n the w o r l d every day. A l t h o u g h m a n y

i i es o f m o n o l i n g u a l societies are to be f o u n d , especially i n the western
Id, l he n u m b e r o f speakers k n o w i n g o r m a k i n g use o f m o r e t h a n one
l i i i i f ' i i . i f e as a c o m m o n m e a n s o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n easily surpasses t h e
l n i ol m o n o l i n g u a l speakers. I n m a n y places a r o u n d the w o r l d , people
ii 01 v t h a n o n e language every day, because o f s i t u a t i o n a l f a c t o r s as
II i i h c i r s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s i t u a t i o n . B i l i n g u a l i s m is n o t r e s t r i c t e d t o
i i H i n tries o r reas t r a d i t i o n a l l y considered b i l i n g u a l such as Canad
MI ' ' ii / i i l a n d , b u t is present i n every c o u n t r y o f t h e w o r l d i n o n e w a y o r
lln i ii licr. So, u s i n g one language at h o m e a n d a n o t h e r one at w o r k is n o t
i 11 .inge i n some places . T h e second language ( i n t e r m s o f o r d e r o f
1

Mi ' I I I I i l i o n ) does n o t need t o have been l e a r n e d f o r m a l l y ; speakers m a y

|n i h . i v r a c q u i r e d i t b y c o n s t a n t exposure t o t h e language, a n d t h e s h i f t
I ' code t o t h e o t h e r is o f t e n m a d e u n c o n s c i o u s l y .

h i . not easy t o define t h e t e r m B i l i n g u a l i s m as t h e r e c a n b e m a n y

I n i terms o f overall proficiency and sociolinguistic factors that
i u n n c the use a n d k n o w l e d g e o f o n e language o r t h e other.
11111111 11.111 s i n can range f r o m a f u n c t i o n a l a b i l i t y t o use one language o n l y
i u n d o m a i n s , t o b a l a n c e d b i l i n g u a l i s m w h i c h entails a n e q u a l a n d
lili h Ii w l i apacity i n t w o o r m o r e languages.

i'der to p o r t r a y the different features o f b i l i n g u a l i s m , some aspects

I l o he described:

i i . i l is i m p o r t a n t t o t a k e i n t o a c c o u n t t h e m e a n s o f a c q u i s i t i o n ,
m u l l n u o n h l depend o n w h e t h e r each o f the languages was a c q u i r e d as

i " thl use- we are referring to bilingualism assuming that there are two languages
il i i \MIMIII lie perfectly possible, and very normal in some parts of the world, to refer
ilh inore I l i a n Iwn languages. Then we would speak ol multilingualism.
 AN INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOI.INi ,1 T .
a m o t h e r tongue, a second language o r a foreign language . I ai h ol i l .
c i r c u m s t a n c e s r a d i c a l l y affeets t h e degree o f a t t a i n m e n t a n d the over
proficieney, d e p e n d i n g o n t h e age o f t h e speaker a n d the a m o u n l i )l I In
spent l e a r n i n g a n d u s i n g t h e language.
Second, the skills in each language may vary as i t is perfectly p o s l f i l
and rather c o m m o n , to have different commands o f the various skills: ixuu Ii
w r i t i n g , speaking a n d listening comprehension. The degree o f developm
i n each o f these four skills w i l l be determined, at least i n part, by the m
o f a c q u i s i t i o n . So, s o m e o n e a c q u i r i n g the language i n a n a t u r a l i o n l
( w i t h o u t f o r m a l i n s t r u c t i o n ) w o u l d p r o b a b l y develop his/her a u r a l ol
knowledge o f the language b u t m a y n o t become c o m p e t e n t i n readini I
w r i t i n g . I t goes w i t h o u t saying t h a t literacy is n o t necessarily attainci I I
fluent speakers, n o t even i n t h e i r m o t h e r tongue. I t also needs t o be tak
into account that, as usually happens i n second a n d foreign language le.
receptive skills are often m o r e easily developed t h a n productive skills So,
is p e r f e c t l y possible f o r s o m e o n e l e a r n i n g t h e language i n a f o r m a l
classroom context to develop receptive skills, namely listening a n d icadln
to a larger extent t h a n productive skills, that is speaking a n d w r i t i n g .
T h i r d , t h e r e are c e r t a i n f u n c t i o n s t h a t b i l i n g u a l s g e n e r a l l y prefer
p e r f o r m i n o n e l a n g u a g e t h a n i n t h e other. T h i s m a y be d u e t o tlie la
t h a t t h e y have n o t d e v e l o p e d a specific s k i l l i n t h a t language s u l l i i leflj
(e.g.: particpate i n a d a i l y c o n v e r s a t i o n , r e a d t h e newspaper, etc.) or Jim
because i t seems m o r e n a t u r a l f o r t h e m t o d o i t i n a c e r t a i n language 11
c o u n t i n g , c u r s i n g , d r e a m i n g , etc).
F o u r t h , the d o m a i n often influences language choice i n bilingtl
speakers because t h e a c q u i s i t i o n o r l e a r n i n g was d o m a i n - d e p e n d e n i
s i m p l y b e c a u s e o n e l a n g u a g e is p r e f e r r e d i n s o m e c o n t e x t s a n d i t
subjected t o t h e effect o f t h r e e m a i n factors: a) the l o c a t i o n (e.g.: h<
office, school, s h o p p i n g center, party, etc.); b) the role relationships amoiin
the i n t e r l o c u t o r s (e.g.: s i b l i n g , father, mother, colleague, neighbor, fr< mi
doctor, etc.), a n d ; c) the topics i n v o l v e d i n the conversation (e.g.: dome I h
weather, s o c i a l greetings, a c a d e m i c , etc.).
2 Note that the mother tongue would be the language acquired from the parents al lu itni
and would probably be the first one i n terms of order of acquisition, i.e. the first langu > i
It is often referred to as the native language. The second language would be the l a n p u i n
learned i n the place where it is used by most speakers as a means of communication hu
which is not the native language of the learner. For example, a Spanish mother tiinijtlf
speaker learning English i n E d i n b u r g h w o u l d be i n a Second Language (SL) Icni ulii||
situation. Finally, a Foreign Language is learned when the target language is not the lan
used by most speakers. For instance, a Spanish mother tongue speaker learning English In
Madrid would be an English learner i n a Foreign Language (FL) learning context.
ii ,r. s i a l c d before, b i l i n g u a l speakers are l i k e l y t o have a preferred
I * I o each d o m a i n as s h o w n i n t h e f o l l o w i n g e x a m p l e i n s p i r e d by
l l i .1 i m . i l i o n (the n o t i o n o f d o m a i n a n d language choice are l i n k e d to
| i i|in .i i o n o f ' r e g i s t e r ' . See c h a p t e r 2):
Robert Rodrguez was born in a suburban rea i n New Jersey. He is
2 5 year od, he lives w i t h his parents, and one of his sisters, Maira, who
IN 19. His parents, Carlos and Fabiana, carne from Colombia 2 7 years
.i|'o and have lived i n the rea ever since. They have relatives in Colombia
.un they go back there o n special occasions but not regularly. Carlos
,iud Fabiana live i n a beautiful house and work very near; it only takei
them 15 minutes driving every day. At work, i n a factory, they mainly
1
ipeak their perfectly comprehensible English w i t h a markedly foreign
accent, which they learned when they carne to the US at the age of 30,
.ihhough some of their colleagues come from other Spanish-speaking
i lries in South America and they speak Spanish to them. In their
Way home after work, they stop at the mal to do some shopping and
diere they come across some Spanish-speaking friends b u t all their
11 inversation w i t h the shopkeeper takes place i n English. When they get
home, they have a message f r o m Robert on the answering machine
saying, in Spanish, that he is late from work. Every day Robert commutes
lo New York City where he works as a clerk. At work he speaks English
all the time a l t h o u g h on some occasions he speaks Spanish to his
i ustomers. When Robert talks to his grandparents o n the phone he
speaks Spanish and he often wishes he could spend more time with them
In i ause, as they live i n Colombia, he has only met them twice. On his
Way home he dropped by to see his girlfriend ( w i t h Italian ancestors
ili hough she has never been to Italy) and greets her for her birthday in
English, which is the only language she speaks. When Robert gets home,
he meets his younger sister Maira who is back from college, where she
.luches accounting.
Robert and Maira are planning to throw a surprise party for Roberl's
gil llriend and they make all the arrangements, i n English. As they are
ni.iking a list w i t h the food and d r i n k they need to buy, their mother
i i mies in and tells them, in Spanish, that dinner is ready. They sit at the
table and go on making arrangements for the party w i t h their parents
in lluent Spanish w i t h a funny English accent. The following day at the
party in their backyard, Robert and M a i r a w i l l be using their native-
ipeaker English w i t h some friends and neighbors, and fluent Spanish,
their 'mother tongue' w i t h an accent to their parents and some of their
I lispanic friends.
. i r u i n the exercises s e c t i o n a n d d o exercise 1.)
 97
AN INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOI IN(I r . i

2. B I L I N G U A L I S M : D E F I N I T I O N S A N D DIMENSIONS ii . . p i io ihc exercises section a n d d o exercise 2.)

B r o a d l y s p e a k i n g the s t u d y a n d d e p i c t i o n o f b i l i n g u a l i s m can In i l u - lasl decades a l a r g e a m o u n t o f r e s e a r c h o n i n d i v i d u a l

p r o m i n e n c e e i t h e r t o t h e social side o f t h i s p h e n o m e n o n , as i t stema I
a c o n t e x t i n w h i c h various languages are i n c o n t a c t ; o r i t c a n p a j cid
a t t e n t i o n t o t h e i n d i v i d u a l a n d p s y c h o l i n g u i s t i c side o f t h e i s s u e a | l
l a n g u a g e s i n v o l v e d i n t e r a c t a n d d e v e l o p i n t h e b r a i n o f t h e bil nuil
speaker. B o t h t h e n o t i o n o f t h e b i l i n g u a l s p e a k e r a n d t h e c o n c c p l l l
b i l i n g u a l i s m are rather f u z z y a n d have o f t e n been m i s c o n c e i v e d .
3 ;flun lln- way i n w h i c h t h e languages were learned. Coordnate b i l i n g u a l i s m
Social b i l i n g u a l i s m (or m u l t i l i n g u a l i s m ) is a n rea o f research d e d l c i
t o t h e s t u d y o f i t s social dimensin as a c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f b i l i n g u a l I
m u l t i l i n g u a l societies where m o r e t h a n one language are c o m m o n Iv n
b y a speech c o m m u n i t y o r social g r o u p . I t does n o t m e a n t h a t a l l speakc
have a c o m m a n d over b o t h languages, r a t h e r t h e t e r m j u s t i m p l i e s lluil
at least s o m e o f t h e m e m b e r s o f t h a t speech c o m m u n i t y are capabl< i ll
u s i n g t h e o t h e r language, e i t h e r p r o d u c t i v e l y o r r e c e p t i v e l y (e.g |||
m e m b e r s o f a m u l t i l i n g u a l c o u n t r y do n o t need t o be b i l i n g u a l t h e m s r h
t h e y m a y j u s t be m o n o l i n g u a l ) . N o t e t h a t m u l t i l i n g u a l i s m is f u i l l n |
e x p l a i n e d a t t h e e n d of this chapter.
Individual b i l i n g u a l i s m (also referred to as b i l i n g u a l i t y ) is r a t h e r simp
t o define i n t e r m s o f the first h a l f o f t h e t e r m as i t refers t o t h e i n d i v i d u a l
p a r t o f t h e p h e n o m e n o n , that is, a n i n d i v i d u a l has some knowledge ol twfl]
o r m o r e l a n g u a g e s . T h i s e n t a i l s a s p e c i a l p s y c h o l i n g u i s t i c procea
N e v e r t h e l e s s , i t is n o t p o s s i b l e t o m a k e a c l e a r s e p a r a t i o n b e t w e .
b i l i n g u a l i s m as a n i n d i v i d u a l a n d a societal p h e n o m e n o n . Some quest ion
t h a t c a l i f o r r e f l e c t i o n are:
L i l i n i 11.111 .111 has t r i e d t o d i s t i n g u i s h d i f f e r e n t sorts o f b i l i n g u a l i s m . The
In i l i. ai i o n f i r s t i n t r o d u c e d b y W e i n r e i c h ( 1 9 5 3 : 9-11) d i f f e r e n t i a t e s
|n n>. . I I \, ' c o m p o u n d ' a n d ' s u b - c o o r d i n a t e ' b i l i n g u a l i s m a n d
Mu i l . i l i o r a t e d b y t a k i n g as a s t a r t i n g p o i n t t h e w a y t h e c o n c e p t s a n d
lln . are encoded i n t h e b r a i n . E a c h o f these t h r e e d i v i s i o n s stems
i " , i l i . i l languages are l e a r n e d i n d i f f e r e n t c o n d i t i o n s a n d seprate
i . w h i c h w o u l d i m p l y t h a t the languages are kept apart i n the m i n d .
i s u c h c i r c u m s t a n c e s , d i f f e r e n t c o n t e x t s give w a y t o d i f f e r e n t
i i'.s w i t h d i s s i m i l a r c o n c e p t u a l systems (e.g.: s o m e o n e w h o learns
I M h h as his/her m o t h e r t o n g u e a n d l a t e r learns a f o r e i g n language i n
I). Compound b i l i n g u a l i s m arises w h e n a c q u i s i t i o n takes place i n a
non i n w h i c h b o t h languages are l e a r n e d i n t h e same c o n t e x t , a n d
Itnlli meanings s h o w a fused r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o r m e a n i n g i n the b r a i n . T h i s
Is i l i a t the languages i n v o l v e d are s o m e h o w i n t e r d e p e n d e n t (e.g.: a
lilhl w h o learns t w o languages at h o m e at t h e same t i m e , p r o b a b l y one
n i ' f r o m t h e f a t h e r a n d t h e o t h e r one f r o m t h e m o t h e r ) . T h e t h i r d
iHi'.sihility a c c o r d i n g t o W e i n r e i c h (1953), sub-coordinate bilingualism,
lli'i i ves f r o m t h e l e a r n i n g o f o n e l a n g u a g e f i r s t a n d t h e l e a r n i n g o f t h e
i i l l n r l a t e r o n (e.g.: a c h i l d w h o l e a r n s b o t h l a n g u a g e s a t h o m e
nliuullaneously b u t one o f t h e m is d o m i n a n t , p r o b a b l y because s/he spends
111 11 e i i me w i t h one o f t h e parents). W e i n r e i c h illustrates these three types
i 'I I n l i n g u a l i s m w i t h the f o l l o w i n g d i a g r a m f o r lexical r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a n d
i iiinciation:

a) To w h a t extent does t h e b i l i n g u a l speaker need t o be p r o f i c i e n l in

Compound Sub-coordinate
b o t h languages so t h a t s/he c a n q u a l i f y as b i l i n g u a l ? Coordinte
b) Does a b i l i n g u a l speaker n e e d t o s h o w e q u a l p r o f i c i e n e y i n b o l l i table
^table^= r n e s a ^
languages? table mesa
1
| | 1
c) Does t h e b i l i n g u a l p r o f i c i e n e y o f t h e l a n g u a g e e n t a i l a spoken 01 /teibol/ /mesa/ /teibal/
/teibol/ /mesa/
w r i t t e n c o m m a n d of b o t h languages?
|
/mesa/
d) W h a t l a n g u a g e c o m p o n e n t s s h o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d as c r i t e r i a foi
a s s i g n i n g the label of ' b i l i n g u a l ' : vocabulary, p r o n u n c i a t i o n , syntax,
flueney, etc?

This w o r k i n g classification has been studied for decades a n d a n u m t e

as o / h e ^ ^ ^ h S I ^ ^ T f n a l l y b e e n i d e a l i z e d i n same wy | e x n c r i m e n t s have b e e n c a r r i e d o u t f o l l o w i n g its p r i n c i p i e s . H o w c v c
applied and t h S e t S l t ^ S S * ? * a d e q U a t d y d e f n e d ' i n s P i t e o f b ^ g fundamenlal In , t e g ^ r z a t i o n was n e i t h e r a b a n d o n e d or developed m o r e fully duc
 AN INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOI IN( ,1 i .,,

to t h e c o m p l e x i t y o f t h e n e u r o l i n g u i s l i c p r o c e s s e s a n d t h e f e w a d v . i i u B ) | | | i l l i o o ( | b i l i n g u a l i s m c a n a l s o b e c l a s s i l i e d i n t o simultaneous infant
attained i n t h e f i e l d ( w e s h o u l d t a k e i n t o a c c o u n t t h a t t h e m o s t s i g m l i. | iiulism, w h e n the child acquires a second language early i n infaney
advances i n p o r t r a y i n g b i l i n g u a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n i n t h e b r a i n is based
(ni n l i M si u n e d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e m o t h e r t o n g u e h a s b e e n a t t a i n e d ; a n d ,
a p h a s i c p a t i e n t s ) . H o w e v e r , as M a c n a m a r a ( 1 9 6 7 : 6 6 ) i n d i c a t e s , i l I n
m u , i , ulive childhood bilingualism, w h e n a b a s i c l i n g u i s t i c a b i l i t y is
o u t t o b e t o o s i m p l i s t i c as i t c e n t e r s m a i n l y o n i s o l a t e d w o r d s a n d
I e a r l y i n i n f a n e y i n t h e m o t h e r t o n g u e a n d a s e c o n d l a n g u a g e is
relationship b e t w e e n language a n d m e a n i n g seems t o be m u c h mo
complicated t h a n that. B | ) | i l i e i l r i g h t after.
The sociocultural e n v i r o n m e n t c a n c e r t a i n l y influence b i l i n g u a l i s m
Another dimensin i n t h e s t u d y o f b i l i n g u a l i s m is t h a t whlfll
ni i pi i i a l l y t h e s o c i a l s t a t u s t h a t t h e l a n g u a g e s h a v e i n t h e speech
d i s t i n g u i s h e s b e t w e e n t h e balancea b i l i n g u a l a n d t h e dominant b i l i n g u ll
imiinily. Depending o n the social consideration that the languages
(Lambert, 1955). T h e f o r m e r refers t o a n i n d i v i d u a l w h o has equivalen!
lint i 111 l b e s o c i e t y , a c h i l d c a n d e v e l o p b o t h l a n g u a g e s e q u a l l y o r o n e m o r e
c o m p e t e n c e i n b o t h l a n g u a g e s (e.g.: s o m e o n e b r o u g h t u p i n a b i l i n g u n l
l l i i i u i h e o t h e r . Additive b i l i n g u a l i s m occurs w h e n b o t h languages are
family a n d society w h e r e b o t h languages receive equal considera! ion i
tu i.ills v a l u e d . T h e c h i l d m a k e s u s e o f b o t h l a n g u a g e s a n d a c c o r d i n g l y
and the l a t t e r a p p l i e s t o s o m e o n e w h o s e c o m p e t e n c e i n t h e m o t h e r t o n g \
liilu .ulvantage o f this p o t e n t i a l l y e n h a n c i n g s i t u a t i o n t o g a i n cognitive
surpasses h i s c o m p e t e n c e i n t h e o t h e r l a n g u a g e , a t least i n s o m e d o m a i n
II iliililv. I n t h i s case, t h e a c q u i s i t i o n o f t h e s e c o n d l a n g u a g e d o e s n o t
(e.g.: a c h i l d l e a r n i n g l a n g u a g e A f r o m t h e f a t h e r a n d l a n g u a g e B f r o m llu<
h i . ni verse effeets o n t h e l a n g u a g e or languages already k n o w n .
mother a n d school, w i l l p r o b a b l y have m o r e chances to develop languajrt I
Nidniiiciive b i l i n g u a l i s m , conversely, results f r o m a s o c i o c u l t u r a l context
B unless s p e c i a l a c t i o n s are u n d e r t a k e n ) . B a l a n c e d b i l i n g u a l i s m entails |
VIIITC t h e m o t h e r t o n g u e i s d e t r a c t e d a n d , as a c o n s e q u e n c e , t h e c h i l d s
high communicative competence i n b o t h languages b u t n o t necessai il\
fiii>ni!ive d e v e l o p m e n t m a y b e h i n d e r e d because t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e
m o n o l i n g u a l competence i n b o t h languages . B a l a n c e d b i l i n g u a l i s m should
4

d language interferes w i t h the development of the first language.

be u n d e r s t o o d i n r e l a t i v e t e r m s as b i l i n g u a l s p e a k e r s h a r d l y e v e r show
equal speaking a n d w r i t i n g abilities i n their languages, they are rarclj
equally fluent about all topics i n all contexts. Normally, balance ol
dominance can vary depending on the linguistic domains and functioni
D o m i n a n t b i l i n g u a l i s m is a c t u a l l y t h e n o r m as i t i s r a t h e r d i f f i c u l t f o r u
bilingual speaker to reach absolutely even competence i n t w o codes.
A n o t h e r possible dimensin t o d i s t i n g u i s h v a r i o u s types o f b i l i n g u a l i s m
is r e l a t e d t o t h e a g e o f a c q u i s i t i o n , s o a u s e f u l d i s t i n c t i o n c a n b e d r a w n
b e t w e e n : childhood b i l i n g u a l i s m , adolescent bilingualism and aduli
b i l i n g u a l i s m . I n t h e f i r s t case t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f b i l i n g u a l i s m t a k e s place
at t h e s a m e t i m e as t h e c h i l d s c o g n i t i v e d e v e l o p m e n t w h e r e a s i n t h e ere
o f a d o l e s c e n t a n d a d u l t b i l i n g u a l i s m t h e c o g n i t i v e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o l the
w o r d , t o give a n e x a m p l e , has a l r e a d y been c o m p l e t e d , at least t o a c e r t a i n
extent, a n d t h e r e is m a i n l y a process o f re-labeling previous concepts
At this p o i n t i t should be clarified that a balanced bilingual should not be conceived
as the addition of t w o monolingual speakers. The development of bilingualism depends on
numerous factors (age of learning, situational context, social consideration of the languages.
personal identity, etc.), and certainly there are domains i n w h i c h the speaker w i l l show
higher command of the language or will simply prefer one language or the other. A bilingual
should be conceived as a competent speaker-hearer who has developed a c o m m u n i c a t i v i
competence i n two or more languages, who uses language A, language B or languages A and
B depending on the situation, topic, interlocutor, domain, etc., but who does not necessai Uj
have equal command i n both.
I l . u n c r s a n d B l a n c ( 1 9 8 9 : 11) a l s o d i s t i n g u i s h b i l i n g u a l s a c c o r d i n g t o
lili I I c u l t u r a l i d e n t i t y . S o , a n a d o l e s c e n t o r a d u l t b i l i n g u a l m a y i d e n t i f y
l l l i u s e l l w i t h t h e c u l t u r e s a s s o c i a t e d t o e a c h l a n g u a g e . I n t h i s c a s e s/he
Wi II ild a l s o b e bicultural a n d that clearly depends o n the social consideration
Mi it I v a l u g i v e n t o b o t h l a n g u a g e s a n d b o t h c u l t u r e s b y t h e s o c i e t y . T h i s
i " i ilic s i t u a t i o n w o u l d p r o b a b l y cause b a l a n c e d b i l i n g u a l i s m . Nonetheless,
ii l u i ' l i p r o f i c i e n e y i n b o t h l a n g u a g e s does not necessarily involve a
lu u l l u r a l i n d i v i d u a l , w h o c a n a l s o b e monocultural, i.e., s o m e o n e w h o
i ullurally identifies himself w i t h just one group. B i l i n g u a l development i n
,i g i v e n s p e e c h c o m m u n i t y c a n a l s o p e r s u a d e a p e r s o n t o g i v e u p o r d e n y
lln c u l t u r e of his mother-tongue g r o u p a n d foster that o f the second
l u n g u a g e g r o u p , b e c o m i n g a n aceulturated b i l i n g u a l . T h i s l a t t e r process is
iioi i n f r e q u e n t a t a l l w h e n s o m e s o r t o f m i n i m a l m i g r a t i o n i s i n v o l v e d as
luiinigrants often w i s h t o b l e n d i n t o the n e w society a n d c u l t u r e a n d they
ai i o i u m o d a t e as m u c h a s t h e y c a n t o t h e r e c e i v i n g c u l t u r e .
An aspect related t o t h e psycholinguistic processing o f bilinguals, w h i c h
h.e. b e e n w i d e l y i n v e s t i g a t e d i n t h e l a s t d e c a d e s , i s w h e t h e r b i l i n g u a l s o w n
one o r t w o m e n t a l lexicons. T h e one-lexicon advocates consider thal
l e m a n t i c i n f o r m a t i o n is s t o r e d i n a single s e m a n t i c s y s t e m w h e r e w o r d s
in b o t h l a n g u a g e s c o e x i s t b u t a r e l a b e l e d as b e l o n g i n g t o o n e l a n g u a g e o r
lln- other. A n o t h e r g r o u p o f specialists p r o p o s e t h a t t h e b i l i n g u a l m e n t a l
 100
AN INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLINGUIST!!
lexicn is d i v i d e d i n t o t w o sets, o n e f o r e a c h l a n g u a g e , a n d that
i n t e r r e l a t i o n between the t w o is o n l y possible t h r o u g h t r a n s l a t i o n . A m i il |
recent i m a g e c o n s i d e r s t h a t b i l i n g u a l speakers possess t h r e e stores: a) u
c o n c e p t u a l one f o r t h e i r k n o w l e d g e o f t h e w o r l d ; b ) a language store fol
language A; a n d , c) a language store f o r language B .
(Please go t o t h e exercises s e c t i o n a n d d o exercise 3.)
3. C O D E CHOICE
As W a r d h a u g h (2002) suggests, t h e t e r m 'code' is a d m i t t e d l y lose b u l
very useful t o refer t o any k i n d o f system t h a t t w o o r m o r e people use f< >i
c o m m u n i c a t i o n . Terms like dialect, language, style, standard, register, variety,
pidgin a n d crele are p r o n e t o a r o u s e e m o t i o n s t h a t , i n o n e w a y o r tlie
other, are affected by t h e i r s o c i o p o l i t i c a l status o r i n d i v i d u a l
c o n s i d e r a t i o n s . F o r i n s t a n c e , a n A r a b w h o k n o w s t h e l i t e r a r y v a r i e t y ol
Arabic (koranic) b u t speaks the c o l l o q u i a l variety o f the elassie (vernacular)
w i l l p r o b a b l y c o n s i d e r t h a t t h e y are t w o v a r i e t i e s o f t h e same language.
I n the same vein, a N o r w e g i a n w h o speaks b o t h N y n o r s k a n d Bokml may
insist t h a t s/he is b i d i a l e c t a l o r b i l i n g u a l w h i c h s h o w s t h a t t o s o m e extent
5
c o n s i d e r i n g oneself b i l i n g u a l o r b i d i a l e c t a l is, o r s h o u l d be, a q u e s t i o n ol
self-adscription. Anyhow, a very useful c r i t e r i o n to d i s t i n g u i s h between
b i d i a l e c t a l a n d b i l i n g u a l s p e a k e r s c o u l d be t h e q u e s t i o n o f m u t u a l
i n t e l l i g i b i l i t y , i.e., i f t h e speakers o f these languages c a n u n d e r s t a n d each
other w h e n using their o w n code . 6
I n t h e case o f b i l i n g u a l o r b i d i a l e c t a l speakers, i t w o u l d be i n t e r e s t i n g
to know, however, the factors t h a t r u l e code choice o n every single s i t u a t i o n
a n d , eventually, w h y c e r t a i n speakers s o m e t i m e s s h i f t f r o m o n e c o d e to
another. So, i t seems t h a t whenever a speaker engages i n a c o m m u n i c a t i v e
s i t u a t i o n , s/he has previously decided (consciously o r unconsciously) u p o n
the code s/he is g o i n g t o use. L a n g u a g e plays a very i m p o r t a n t r o l e i n o u r
lives a n d the a c t u a l choice c a n be very i m p o r t a n t . A speaker may
deliberately choose to use a specific language i n some situations t o express
solidarity w i t h his interlocutor. F o r example, let's t h i n k o f someone entering
a department-store i n Pontevedra, S p a i n . The s h o p assistant w i l l p r o b a b l y
101
1INII l
l i l i l e s h i m / h e r i n S p a n i s h a n d a f t e r a w h i l e , i l b o t h the c u s t o m e r a n d
||li l i o p a s s i s t a n t f i n d c l u e s t o t h e i r i n t e r l o c u t o r s b e i n g s p e a k e r s o f
i . illi I I n, t h e y m a y n a t u r a l l y a n d a u t o m a t i c a l l y c h a n g e t h e i r l a n g u a g e
and continu t h e i r conversation i n G a l i c i a n . I n so d o i n g , a n u m b e r
i .i i n u n i c a t i v e goals have been a c c o m p l i s h e d n o t o n l y because o f the
,ii i i o n c a r r i e d o u t , b u t because a degree o f closeness a n d e m p a t h y
i ilso i eached b y t h e i r s w i t c h i n g t o t h e c o m m o n language.
I unguage c h o i c e c a n also be c o n s i d e r e d a w a y t o assert s o m e k i n d o f
I ii' or even t o resist s o m e k i n d o f ' p o w e r ' i n places w h e r e t w o o r m o r e
l i i n i i . i ) ' c s coexist a n d have e q u a l s o c i o p o l i t i c a l status as i n Canad. T h e
lilil i.il Languages Act, a d o p t e d i n 1969, gave E n g l i s h a n d F r e n c h equal
, i ights a n d privileges i n the federal i n s t i t u t i o n s o f Canad. However,
n i d i s h f i r s t l a n g u a g e speakers c o m p r i s e a m i n o r i t y i n Q u e b e c ,
H pi i e n t i n g 1 0 % o f t h e province's p o p u l a t i o n , whereas i n o t h e r p a r t s o f
II.nla, F r e n c h f i r s t l a n g u a g e speakers are a m i n o r i t y , a c c o u n t i n g f o r
ippi i iximately 5% o f t h e p o p u l a t i o n . U n d e r s u c h circumstances, a F r e n c h
inadian m a y insist o n u s i n g French to an official of the federal
u n e n t o u t s i d e Q u e b e c . I n t h a t case l a n g u a g e c h o i c e c a n be
II MI lered a w a y o f ' p o l i t i c a l o r r i g h t s expression'. T h e u n d e r l y i n g issue
I * l l i a l m o t i v a t i o n is a d e t e r m i n i n g c o m p o n e n t i n code-choice a n d code-
11' 111 ng as t h e r e are n u m e r o u s factors t h a t affect i t : s o l i d a r i t y w i t h t h e
Ii Icncr, c h o i c e o f t o p i c , s o c i a l d i s t a n c e , c o n t e x t u a l a n d s i t u a t i o n a l
>i l II i ipriacy, register, i n t e r l o c u t o r , etc.
I lie very fact o f b e i n g p r o f i c i e n t i n m o r e t h a n one language allows f o r
l l i r p o s s i b i l i t y o f s w i t c h i n g codes at s o m e p o i n t . W a r d h a u g h ( 2 0 0 2 )
ll! ilinguishes t w o m a i n types o f code-switching: situational and metaphorical.
l In - l o r m e r refers t o a language change d e p e n d i n g o n c o n t e x t u a l factors
Im Ii liave n o t h i n g t o d o w i t h the topic b u t w i t h t h e given s i t u a t i o n . T h e
I 'Her points t o the topic a n d the contents o f the c o m m u n i c a t i v e process as
lln m a i n reason f o r language choice. The alternance o f code often encodes
personal a n d social vales t h a t a d d i n t e r p e r s o n a l closeness o r distance.
.1.1. Code-switching
The Hispanic c o m m u n i t y i n the USA o f t e n switches between b o t h
i mies, E n g l i s h a n d S p a n i s h , o n s o m e occasions as a s o l i d a r i t y m a r k e r
7
This is very characteristic, for instance, of the Puerto Rican community in New York.
Fol iliis speech community, a conversation full of language switches is a form of speech in
lis own.
 AN INTKODIK T I O N K ) SOCIOI.INCUIS
w h e n t a l k i n g to people b e l o n g i n g l o t h e i r o w n c o m m u n i t y . However, t h f l
c a n easily change to e i t h e r language w h e n addressing a m o n o l i m u i l
speaker o f e i t h e r o f these t w o languages. B e l o w is a f r a g m e n t i n w h i i H
t h i s c o d e - s w i t c h i n g c a n be seen:
OYE, when I was a freshman I had a term paper to do...
And all of a sudden, I started acting real CURIOSA, y o u know I
started going like this. Y LUEGO DECA, look at the smoke comini' ol
of my fingers, like that. And then M E DIJO, stop acting silly. Y LUI < !< i
DECA YO, MIRA can't you see. Y LUEGO STE, I started seeing lllo
little stars all over the place. Y VOLTEABA YO ASINA Y L E DECA I. N j
at the... the... NO S ERA COMO BRILLOSITO AS like stars.
(Valds Falls, 1976; quoted i n Apple and Muysken, 1996: I / M
I n t h e t e x t a b o v e , a t l e a s t t h r e e types o f c o d e - s w i t c h i n g c a n he
perceived. These are d e s c r i b e d b y R o m a i n e (1989: 112) as:
a) T a g - s w i t c h i n g : f o r i n s t a n c e t h e use o f e x c l a m a t i o n s o r tags f r o m
one language i n t o a n utterance i n the o t h e r language, s u c h as 'O") I
at t h e v e r y b e g i n n i n g o f t h e p a r a g r a p h w h i c h is w r i t t e n i n a
l a n g u a g e d i f f e r e n t f r o m t h e rest o f t h e sentence. T h i s t a g - s w i n h
m i g h t o c e u r because t h e speaker lacks the necessary vocabularx 111
E n g l i s h , o r s i m p l y because i t comes u p m o r e easily and
spontaneously since tags are subjected t o few syntactic r e s t r i c t i i >ir.
a n d c a n be i n s e r t e d w i t h o u t i n t e r f e r i n g w i t h t h e s y n t a c t i c
o r g a n i z a t i o n o f t h e u t t e r a n c e . S o m e tags e a s i l y i n s e r t e d f r o m
E n g l i s h are: you know a n d / mean.
b) I n t e r s e n t e n t i a l s w i t c h : f o r instance, i n t h e sentences 'Y L U E G O
DECA, l o o k at t h e s m o k e c o m i n g o u t o f m y fingers, l i k e t h a t ' and
'Y L U E G O STE, I started seeing l i k e l i t t l e stars a l l over t h e plac-.'
T h i s type o f s w i t c h is f o u n d b e t w e e n sentences a n d o f t e n arises i 11
sentence b o u n d a r i e s , m a r k e d w i t h a s h o r t p a u s e a n d b e t w e e n
speaker t u r n s . I n t h i s excerpt, i n t e r s e n t e n t i a l s w i t c h also seems to
be caused i n d i r e c t speech b y t h e change f r o m the n a r r a t o r t o the
a c t u a l w o r d s used b y t h e speaker, e.g.: ' A n d t h e n M E D I J O , s t o p
a c t i n g silly'.
c) I n t r a s e n t e n t i a l s w i t c h : for instance, i n the sentence 1 started acting
real CURIOSA' w h e r e b o t h codes are m i x e d w i t h i n a sentence. T h i s
t y p e o f c o d e - s w i t c h c o n t a i n s t h e h i g h e s t s y n t a c t i c r i s k a n d is
t y p i c a l l y r e f e r r e d t o as c o d e - m i x i n g .
H,'2. ( l o t l e - m i x i n g
( ode m i x i n g c a n be c o n s i d e r e d a d i f f e r e n t p h e n o m e n o n t o c o d e -
|SVlli lmi|' a l t h o u g h t h e t e r m s are s o m e t i m e s used i n t e r c h a n g e a b l y as the
pis t h e y d e s c r i b e o f t e n o v e r l a p . I n d e e d , n o t a l l s p e c i a l i s t s w o u l d
i IM iwledge a d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n t h e m . C o d e - m i x i n g o c c u r s w h e n t h e
un. i l o c u t o r s change f r o m o n e l a n g u a g e t o t h e o t h e r i n t h e c o u r s e o f a
m i ' conversation and m o r e precisely w h e n s w i t c h i n g back a n d f o r t h
s w i t h i n a clause. I t is i m p o r t a n t t o note that the speakers d o n o t even
Uretl lo be aware of i t a n d t h e breaks between codes are s o m e w h a t b l u r r e d
H* ihev c a n o c e u r w i t h i n clauses. C o d e - m i x i n g h i g h l i g h t s h y b r i d i z a t i o n
Itylicrcas c o d e - s w i t c h i n g stresses t h e e x i s t e n c e o f m o v e m e n t f r o m o n e
|tii|'iiagc i n t o the other. C o d e - m i x i n g t y p i c a l l y presumes a m a s t e r y of the
* ndes b e i n g m i x e d a n d is v e r y t y p i c a l o f b i l i n g u a l s . I n c e r t a i n l o c a t i o n s
m i l as G i b r a l t a r , w h e r e t w o languages s u c h as E n g l i s h a n d S p a n i s h are
||t cise c o n t a c t , people m a y start a sentence i n one of t h e languages a n d
l i i u . l i it i n the other, o r i n s e r t c e r t a i n w o r d s o r phrases f r o m one language
lulo i he other, a l l d e p e n d i n g o n a n u m b e r of factors such as t h e s i t u a t i o n a l
lext, t h e degree o f f a m i l i a r i t y a m o n g t h e i n t e r l o c u t o r s a n d t h e a c t u a l
lause for c o d e - s w i t c h i n g : i.e., i f i t is a result o f the lack o f k n o w l e d g e o r i f
II i oiies u p as a m e a n i n g f u l discourse strategy. The f o r m e r p h e n o m e n o n ,
un k n o w i n g c e r t a i n w o r d s i n one l a n g u a g e , o b v i o u s l y i m p l i e s t h a t t h e
i 'i . i kers have at least a f u l l c o m m a n d over one o f the languages a n d some
i o n I r o l over the other. Code-mixing is also relatively c o m m o n i n the speech
ol i i n m i g r a n t s . S p a n i s h - s p e a k i n g i m m i g r a n t s i n t h e USA, f o r e x a m p l e ,
i il leu make use o f E n g l i s h w o r d s o r expressions w h e n they speak E n g l i s h .
I he i eason for this m a y lie i n the fact t h a t they are referring t o some object
" i i oncept w h i c h was n o t k n o w n to t h e m before c o m i n g i n t o the new
i n l l u r e , o r t h e y w e r e n o t v e r y f a m i l i a r w i t h i t , o r s i m p l y o n t h e basis o f
i \s t o t h e w o r d . T h i s p r o c e s s o c c a s i o n a l l y r e s u l t s i n l e x i c a l
I < i w i n g . A n instance c a n be f o u n d i n the c o m m o n use o f t h e f o l l o w i n g
English w o r d s b y H i s p a n i c i m m i g r a n t s ( p r o b a b l y b e l o n g i n g t o the first o r
ihe s e c o n d g e n e r a t i o n i n t h e c o u n t r y ) s p e a k i n g S p a n i s h i n t h e USA:
/ M I k vara , basement, coupons, mal, take it easy, VCR, etc. As a result, these
1
l u n e l i o n a l b i l i n g u a l s ( h a v i n g f u l l c o m m a n d over one of the languages a n d
| l i m c t i o n a l c o m m a n d over t h e other) o f t e n develop a m i x e d code w h i c h
is based o n t h e od language b u t includes features f r o m the n e w language.
Ai i his p o i n t the use of a l t e r n a t i n g codes s h o u l d be d i s t i n g u i s h e d f r o m the
development o f a m i x e d v a r i e t y as occurs w i t h p i d g i n s (see chapter 3). The
I n c i d e n t a l b o r r o w i n g d e s c r i b e d i m m e d i a t e l y above c a n pave t h e w a y t o
p e r m a n e n t lexical b o r r o w i n g . F o r example, w h e n there is a need t o refer
i " .in object o r concept t h a t has n o t been present i n the receiving language
 .v, njoucn)i.iN(;iii

o' s i m p l y as a result o l lashions. I lsiii)> loreign w o r d s may be pereeiv

a sign o l i n n o v a t i o n . IHU OSSIA

(Please go t o t h e exercises section a n d d o exercise 4.) i A iliplossic s i t u a t i o n e n t a i l s t h e co-existence o f t w o o r m o r e c o d e s 8

Iit. Ii .iie used i n the same s e t t i n g b u t u n d e r d i f f e r e n t c i r c u m s t a n c e s , i.e.

> ol the codes is u s e d w i t h c o n t r a s t i n g f u n c t i o n a l p u r p o s e s . These
4. C O D E - S W I T C H I N G I N B I L I N G U A L CHILDREN
^ M or varieties t e n d t o be kept apart in their functions, i.e. the purposes
I n the case o f b i l i n g u a l a n d m u l t i l i n g u a l speakers, code choice i g i B p y Me used f o r (e.g. c o m m u n i c a t i o n at h o m e , business o r t r a n s a c t i o n s ,
a l w a y s a t w i l l . W h e n t w o languages are a t t h e d i s p o s a l o f t h e b i l i n g j II Ii . i st i ng, fine l i t e r a t u r e , etc.). So, given the existence of t w o varieties,
speaker, there are sometimes u n i n t e n t i o n a l interferences between llie l p i e ol t h e m b e i n g c o n s i d e r e d m o r e p r e s t i g i o u s a n d c u l t i v a t e d t h a n t h e
codes. T h i s c a n be seen v e r y c l e a r l y i n c h i l d r e n r e c e i v i n g a b i l i n i ' i i Milu i . w o u l d lead t o the d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n b e t w e e n a h i g h v a r i e t y ( H ) a n d a
e d u c a t i o n w h e n t h e y m i x b o t h languages a n d t r a n s f e r w o r d s , s y n l a i I & variety ( L ) .
c o n s t r u c t i o n s o r p h o n o l o g i c a l features f r o m one language i n t o t h e < >i h \ i i i r d i n g t o F e r g u s o n (2003: 347) t h e s p e c i a l i z a t i o n o f f u n c t i o n s f o r
F o r e x a m p l e , Nicols, a b i l i n g u a l ten-year-old boy, b r o u g h t u p i n Spulfl ti n u i l , varieties d e t e r m i n e s t h e a p p r o p r i a t e n e s s o f e i t h e r v a r i e t y f o r a
b y h i s S p a n i s h m o t h e r a n d B r i t i s h father, r e m a r k e d t o h i s m o t h e r , '| | i il s i t u a t i o n s w i t h few occasions f o r o v e r l a p p i n g . T h i s entails t h e use
estoy p e n s a n d o de los pobres [...]' (instead, o f course, o f 'estoy pensa i idcj
i in language t o express a set o f b e h a v i o r s , a t t i t u d e s a n d vales, a n d
en los pobres'). I t seems clear t h a t o n t h i s occasion h i s S p a n i s h was b e i n |
IIH il lie: language t o p u t i n t o w o r d s a c o n t r a s t i n g set o f behaviors, attitudes
unduly influenced by the English structure 'think of.
t i n l v.111 es. T h e next c h a r t s h o w s some general s i t u a t i o n s a n d t h e v a r i e t y
As de B o t ( 2 0 0 2 ) p o i n t s o u t , c o d e - s w i t c h i n g a n d the use o f m o r e than 11 or l o w ) m o r e l i k e l y used:
one language is t h e n o r m a l w a y o f expressing oneself i n a b i l i n g u a l contexl
High Low
a n d i t is as n a t u r a l as a n y o t h e r s p o n t a n e o u s s p e e c h c o m i n g I r
variety variety
m o n o l i n g u a l speakers. T h e a n a l y s i s o f h o w l a n g u a g e s i n t e r a c t a n d ai c L
H
used b y b i l i n g u a l speakers c a n cast s o m e l i g h t o n t h e issue o f c o g n i i h I
p r o c e s s i n g b y b i l i n g u a l s , namely, t h e m e c h a n i s m s o f language selection + -
* ni in church or mosque +
a n d language s e p a r a t i o n . S o m e issues have l o n g p u z z l e d psycholinguists -+
a n d language e d u c a t o r s , some o f these are:
Imltticlions to servants, waiters, workmen, clerks
+
-
t'm vinal letter
+
-

a) H o w d o b i l i n g u a l speakers process t h e i r languages? hiwinrh in parliament, political speech

+
llniviMsity lecture -+
b) Does t h e b i l i n g u a l c h i l d develop a u n i q u e language system w h e r e
Cnnvorsah'on with family, friends and colleagues -+
b o t h l a n g u a g e s are i n t e r t w i n e d o r does he h a v e t w o d i f i e r e ni
Nnws broadeast -+
l i n g u i s t i c systems? D o e s s/he m a k e use o f o n e o r t h e o t b c i
+
d e p e n d i n g o n t h e context? Ni II lii' 'soap opera'
Nnwspaper editorial, news story, caption on picture
-+

+
c) I f there is m o r e t h a n one system, are t h e y l o c a t e d i n t h e same par
of the brain?
( uption on political cartoon -
Pottry *
^
11 ild literatura *^ ^ ^ * - * - H ^ o r b - h - n b .
d) Does t h e b i l i n g u a l b r a i n c o n t a i n one o r t w o d i f f e r e n t lexicons?
These questions are n o t always easy t o a n s w e r o r even testable g i v e n the
fact t h a t m o s t p s y c h o l i n g u i s t i c r e s e a r c h c a n o n l y a n a l y z e l i n g u i s t i c
p e r f o r m a n c e a n d i n t e r a c t i o n a n d m a k e p l a u s i b l e inferences c o n c e r n i n g
these issues.

(Please g o t o t h e exercises section a n d d o exercise 5.)

di lilil ion.
 106
AN INIKOD1K TION TO SO< lOI.INGUIN
I n m o s t instances o f languages c n t n i i g l c d n i a diglossic situatl
speakers r e g a r d the H variety as being m o r e prestigious, m o r e appeall
a n d m o r e a p p r o p r i a t e t h a n t h e L variety, even i f t h e i r k n o w l e d g e < >l i
H is n o t as c o m p r e h e n s i v e as t h e i r a b i l i t y i n t h e L , o r t h e L val ie
e m b o d i e s t h e i r m o t h e r t o n g u e . W h a t is m o r e , t h e l i t e r a r y t r a d i t j
p r o b a b l y m a k e s use o f t h e H v a r i e t y a n d e n j o y s a h i g h e s t e e m m i
speech c o m m u n i t y . Nevertheless, m o r e recently, a n d as a c a l i f o r SOI I
identity, the L varieties have been e m p l o y e d i n p o e t r y o r o t h e r litera
w r i t t e n w o r k s , a n d descriptive a n d n o r m a t i v e studies have IM ,
undertaken.
T r a c i n g b a c k t h e issue o f t h e n a t i v e l a n g u a g e i n i n s t a n c e s s u c h >
t h e H a i t i a n Crele, c h i l d r e n m o r e c o m m o n l y l e a r n t h e L v a r i e t y as 11 M I
f i r s t l a n g u a g e a t h o m e a n d l a t e r , w h e n t h e y a r e s c h o o l e d t h e y huvi
access t o t h e H v a r i e t y . T h i s d i g l o s s i c s i t u a t i o n g i v e s t h e L vari i \
status o f m o t h e r t o n g u e t h a t is ' a c q u i r e d ' n a t u r a l l y , whereas the II
v a r i e t y is o f t e n l e a r n e d f o r m a l l y i n s c h o o l s o r o t h e r f o r m a l c o n t e x t !
a n d is, t h e r e f o r e , ' l e a r n e d ' . T h e H v a r i e t y u s u a l l y has a s t r o n g t r a d i l i o n
9
o f g r a m m a t i c a l s t u d y a n d there are p l e n t y o f reference books on ii
w h i c h b r i n g s w i t h i t established n o r m s f o r p r o n u n c i a t i o n , o r t h o g r a p h v ,
g r a m m a r a n d vocabulary. T h e differences b e t w e e n t h e H a n d the I
v a r i e t y are n o t o r i o u s i n t e r m s o f g r a m m a t i c a l s t r u c t u r e as g r a m m a l n a l
categories i n t h e H v a r i e t y are u s u a l l y r e d u c e d , o r s i m p l y absenl, m
t h e L v a r i e t y , f o r e x a m p l e , t h e i n f l e c t i o n a l s y s t e m o f n o u n s a n d vei b |
(see t h e g e n e r a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f Creles: H C E , J a m a i c a n P a t w a and
T o k P i s i n ) . T h e lexicn i n H a n d L v a r i e t i e s is s h a r e d t o a l a r g e extent
b u t o b v i o u s l y t h e r e a r e c o n s p i c u o u s d i f f e r e n c e s i n f o r m , u s e and.
m e a n i n g . I n t e r m s o f p h o n o l o g y , t h e degree o f closeness b e t w e e n i be
H a n d the L varieties depends, to a large extent, o n the language*
i n v o l v e d . S o m e i n s t a n c e s o f l a n g u a g e s i n d i g l o s s i c s i t u a t i o n s c a n be
f o u n d where H a n d L varieties differ r e m a r k a b l y a n d i n some olbei
instances they are r a t h e r similar.
There f o l l o w t w o examples o f h i s t o r i e diglossic s i t u a t i o n s :
9 At this point i t would be convenient to clarify the contrast between 'acquisition' and
K . I I nlng' which is based on the distinction made by Krashen and Terrell (1983. The Naimul
Approach: Language Acquisition in the Classroom. London: Prentice Hall International I In
i lieir hypothesis which considers that language proficieney can be attained by two different
p n i i esses: acquisition and learning. The former refers to a natural process similar to llie
w .i\ child gains knowledge of his mother tongue, i.e., unconsciously and incidentally. Tlie
latter refers to the conscious process of learning rules. They suggest that only i n this lallei
case is teaching useful.
107
\ After the N o r m a n conques! i n 1066 ", N o r m a n F r e n c h a n d E n g l i s h
1
l'.i a d u a l l y b e c o m e t o c o e x i s t i n E n g l a n d i n a d i g l o s s i c s i t u a t i o n ,
N o r m a n F r e n c h b e i n g considered t h e H v a r i e t y a n d b e i n g used b y
most o f t h e f e u d a l a r i s t o c r a c y a n d , eventually, h a n d i n h a n d w i t h
I nglish i n monasteries. E n g l i s h , however, c o n s t i t u t e d t h e L variety
being used b y peasants a n d artisans i n everyday situations. Needless
lo say t h a t t h e H v a r i e t y was t h e prestige variety, used i n p o l i t i c s ,
g o v e r n m e n t a n d l o c a l a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , whereas t h e L v a r i e t y lacked
any prestige o r social consideration. Chaucer's l i t e r a r y w o r k , a r o u n d
b i c e h u n d r e d y e a r s later, u s e d t h e L v a r i e t y a n d w a s the
e u l m i n a t i o n of a l o n g lasting process i n w h i c h the L variety
g r a d u a l l y assumed f u n c t i o n s t h a t h a d been r e s t r i c t e d to the H
v a r i e t y i n t h e p a s t . T h i s p r o c e s s w a s r e i n f o r c e d b y t h e steady
a s s i m i l a t i o n o f the F r e n c h s p e a k i n g a r i s t o c r a c y i n t o t h e E n g l i s h
i n l t u r e due t o the d e t a c h m e n t a n d l a c k o f contact w i t h t h e i r native
I ranee, g e n e r a t i o n after g e n e r a t i o n .
I) The H a i t i a n Crele e m e r g e d as t h e c r e o l i z a t i o n o f a p i d g i n F r e n c h .
Alterwards, standard French became the H variety (frangais)
whereas the H a i t i a n Crele kept the status of L variety (crele). The
I . v a r i e t y is o f t e n a s s o c i a t e d w i t h c o n v e r s a t i o n a l l a n g u a g e a n d ,
therefore, the spelling used to represent i t is n o t always standardized
(for example, the M c C o n n e l l - L a u b a c h spelling). The H variety,
h o w e v e r , is m o r e e a s i l y r e p r e s e n t e d b y t h e s t a n d a r d l a n g u a g e
o r t h o g r a p h y because i t is w i d e s p r e a d even t h o u g h t h e r e m a y be
some resemblances b e t w e e n t h e sounds o f the H a n d L variety.
I, M C L O S S I A AND BILINGUALISM
Diglossia, as is stated i n m o s t w o r k s o n t h e t o p i c b y J o h n G u m p e r z ,
i ' - not o n l y exist i n m u l t i l i n g u a l societies b u t also i n t r a d i t i o n a l l y called
' m o n o l i n g u a l s o c i e t i e s ' w h e r e v a r i o u s d i a l e c t s , r e g i s t e r s o r styles are
. mployed. I t goes w i t h o u t saying t h a t t h i s embraces a l m o s t a l l societies
i Irictly speaking, m o n o l i n g u a l societies are a theoretical c o n s t r u c t that
not f i n d a f u l l r e a l i z a t i o n i n t h e present-day w o r l d .
The d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n diglossia a n d b i l i n g u a l i s m is n o t s i m p l e since
11M i , n i - n u m e r o u s social, personal a n d s i t u a t i o n a l factors t h a t bear u p o n
"' The defeat of King Harold's army by the French-speaking followers of William, Duke
ni N andy, in the Battle of Hastings i n 1066 marked the beginning of a foreign invasin
Ii would have great effeets on the social, economic, cultural and linguistic development
ll I iii'l.ind.

AN INTRODUCCION T()S()( lOI.INCUISTI
language use a n d l a n g u a g e ehoiee. F i s h m a n (2003) p o r t r a y s I
DIGLOSSIA
_ nably used b y the speakers l i v i n g i n t h a t rea. T h a t means that there
+
1. Both diglossia and
+ 2. Bilingualism without
bilingualism
BILINGUALISM diglossia
3. Diglossia without 4. Neither diglossia or
bilingualism bilingualism
Fishman (2003: 260)
T h e f i r s t p o s s i b i l i t y (1) e m b r a c e s a speech c o m m u n i t y w h e r e b o t h
diglossia a n d b i l i n g u a l i s m oceur. T h a t is the case, f o r instance, o f Germn
( H ) a n d Swiss Germn (L) spoken i n some cantons i n S w i t z e r l a n d . There,
b o t h codes are u s e d a l t e r n a t i v e l y f r o m s c h o o l age a n d used f o r different
f u n c t i o n s a n d i n d i f f e r e n t c o n t e x t s (e.g. a t h o m e a n d at s c h o o l ) . O t h e r
instances o f steady diglossia a n d b i l i n g u a l i s m c o - o e c u r r i n g i n t h e same
s p e e c h c o m m u n i t y are t h e case o f S p a n i s h ( H ) a n d Guaran ( L ) i n
Paraguay, a n d t h e s t a t u s o f A r a b i c i n m a n y A r a b c o u n t r i e s w h e r e
b u s i n e s s m e n a n d t h e scientific c o m m u n i t y w o u l d use classical ( k o r a n i c )
( H ) a n d v e r n a c u l a r A r a b i c ( A l g e r i a n , M o r o c c a n , etc.) ( L ) i n s p e c i f i c
s i t u a t i o n s , b u t also a w e s t e r n f o r m e r c o l o n i a l la ngu a ge s u c h as F r e n c h
( H ) , w h e n r e q u i r e d i n p r o f e s s i o n a l c i r c u m s t a n c e s . M a n y o t h e r instances
l i k e these c a n be d e t e c t e d i n s o c i e t i e s w h e r e a Crele a n d a s t a n d a r d
language o r a c r o l e c t co-exist (see c h a p t e r 3).
T h e second p o s s i b i l i t y (2), b i l i n g u a l i s m w i t h o u t diglossia, relates to
transitory situations where r a p i d social changes affect a speech c o m m u n i t y
and, for a relatively b r i e f p e r i o d o f t i m e , the languages inv olv e d l a c k w e l l -
defined seprate functions. This s i t u a t i o n p r o b a b l y describes a n i n d i v i d u a l
l i n g u i s t i c b e h a v i o r r a t h e r t h a n a social one. T h i s s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s i t u a t i o n
can take place i n t h e course o f i n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n and/or u r b a n i z a t i o n o f
s o m e societies w h e r e one speech c o m m u n i t y prov id e s the means (c a p it a l
and o r g a n i z a t i o n ) , a n d a d i f f e r e n t speech c o m m u n i t y provides the
manpower f o r t h e p r o d u c t i o n . T h i s e x a m p l e p r o b a b l y e n t a i l s a
d e m o g r a p h i c m o v e m e n t o f the m a n p o w e r ( m i g r a t i o n ) a n d , therefore, the
ad< i p l i o n o f a n e w language, as w e l l as a set o f c u l t u r a l vales a n d n o r m s ,
I bal are r a p i d l y t a k e n over a n d o f t e n i n t e r t w i n e d w i t h the p r e v i o u s ones.
100
IINII I
I oi ,i p e r i o d o f t i m e the language o f w o r k o r t h e language o f s c h o o l i n g ,
h ilie o n e h a n d , a n d t h e l a n g u a g e o f h o m e , o n t h e o t h e r h a n d , m a y
llileitwine w i t h o u t a definite separation of functions and locations.
The i h i r d possibility (3), diglossia w i t h o u t bilingualism, relates to societies
>v hei e l w o o r m o r e languages share a g e o g r a p h i c rea b u t they are n o t
H ii least t w o speech c o m m u n i t i e s t h a t d o n o t share a contact language
11 < i m m u n i c a t i o n is attained b y means of, for instance, interpreters. These
II leties t e n d t o be f o r m e d b y t w o o r m o r e speech c o m m u n i t i e s thal are
United for f u n c t i o n a l purposes because o f religious, p o l i t i c a l o r econonuc
i is, although apparent social a n d c u l t u r a l dissimilarities seprale ti un
I he situation w o u l d appear to favor b i l i n g u a l i s m b u t w h a t we find, instead,
i i hi'lossia as language repertoires i n one o r b o t h groups are, in some way,
i' 11 icled o w i n g to role specialization. I t is also characteristic i n this type
ni societies t h a t m o s t o f t h e lite a n d m o s t o f t h e masses lead Uves
ih i m g u i s h e d b y specific role repertoires. A n instance o f diglossia w i t h o u t
bilingualism can be f o u n d i n I n d i a between people belonging to lower castes
I I lindus) a n d the h i g h e r castes ( B r a h m i n s ) .
The f o u r t h p o s s i b i l i t y (4) is, i n F i s h m a n s w o r d s , 'easier t o hypothesize
111.111 l o find' as o n l y v e r y s m a l l a n d set a p a r t societies c o u l d s h o w n e i t h e r
b i l i n g u a l i s m or diglossia (note that absence o f diglossia seems even m o r e
u n l i k e l y a n d a w k w a r d t h a n b i l i n g u a l i s m ) . I t w o u l d be t h e case o f speech
i o m m u n i t i e s w h e r e n o d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n i n registers o r v a r i e t i e s is f o u n d ,
Which is r a t h e r i m p r o b a b l e g i v e n t h e s o c i a l dimensin o f language. A n
in .lance o f t h i s speech c o m m u n i t y w i t h o u t b i l i n g u a l i s m a n d w i t h o u t
djglossia c o u l d be a b a n d o r c l a n w i t h a closed n u m b e r o f m e m b e r s and
u i i h r e s t r i c t e d social r e l a t i o n s .
(l'lease go t o t h e exercises s e c t i o n a n d d o exercise 6.)
7. MULTILINGUALISM
M u l t i l i n g u a l i s m refers to the co-existence of more t h a n t w o languages o r
snll iciently distant dialects, no matter h o w many, w i t h i n a speech community.
I i ii the sake of clarity, i n this book, a n d i n mo st o f the b i b l i o g r a p h y o n the
tupie, t h e t e r m b i l i n g u a l i s m is used t o r e f e r t o a s i t u a t i o n i n w h i c h l w o
languages coexist w h e t h e r i n an i n d i v i d u a l speaker or a social gr o up.
M o n o l i n g u a l speech c o m m u n i t i e s are r a r e these days a n d , w h a t is
more, most countries i n the w o r l d are m u l t i l i n g u a l (only Iceland and
Portugal a r e r e p o r t e d t o be m o n o l i n g u a l c o u n t r i e s i n E u r o p e ) . I n t h e
 I 10
AN I N I K O D I K n o N TOSOCIOUNGUISTICS
h i s t o r y o f h u m a n k i n d , l a n g u a g e has p r o v e n t o be p o s s i b l y t h e n i o s l
i m p o r t a n t f a c t o r t h a t d e t e r m i n e s o t h e r aspects o f p o l i t i c a l a n d s o c i a l
o r g a n i z a t i o n i n t h e w o r l d . A r o u n d 5,000 l i v i n g languages are r e p o r t c d ln
exist n o w a d a y s i n t h e w o r l d whereas there are a b o u t 200 c o u n t r i e s . f i n
fact can p r o v i d e us w i t h a n idea o f t h e c o m p l e x i t y o f t h e issue. L a n g u a v i .
o f t e n e m b o d y s o c i a l i d e n t i t i e s at a s u p r a - s t a t e level (e.g.: t h e S w e d i s h
language i n F i n l a n d ) w h i c h c a n cause s o c i o - p o l i t i c a l c o n f l i c t s as is the
case o f language m i n o r i t i e s (e.g.: W e l s h i n Great B r i t a i n ) . The Romn 11,
movement i n the nineteenth century supported nationalism and llie
general c o n c e p t i o n o f 'one n a t i o n , one language'.
M i g r a t i o n , e i t h e r i n t h e f o r m o f i n v o l u n t a r y o r v o l u n t a r y m i g r a t i o n is
a n o t h e r f a c t o r t h a t characterizes t h e c u r r e n t language s i t u a t i o n i n m a m
p a r t s o f t h e w o r l d . T h e A f r i c a n slave t r a d e b r o u g h t m a n y speakers o f
A f r i c a n languages i n t o the East a n d West I n d i e s a n d t h a t paved t h e way
f o r t h e f o r m a t i o n o f m a n y p i d g i n s a n d creles w h i c h h a d n o t e x i s t e d
before. A n o t h e r e x a m p l e w o u l d be t h e case o f S o v i e t p o l i c y t h a t f o r c e d
the m i g r a t i o n o f t h e Russian p o p u l a t i o n i n t o o t h e r Soviet republics. T i n ise
f o r m e r r u l e r s i n places l i k e the B a l t i c states are faced n o w w i t h t h e need
t o l e a r n l o c a l languages s u c h as E s t o n i a n , L a t v i a n a n d L i t h u a n i a n .
V o l u n t a r y m i g r a t i o n has a l s o d e t e r m i n e d t h e l i n g u i s t i c shape o l
m o d e r n c o u n t r i e s l i k e t h e USA a n d t o a lesser extent, A u s t r a l i a . T h r o u g h
the m e l t i n g - p o t p o l i c y i n the U n i t e d States, large a m o u n t s o f people f r o m
different E u r o p e a n a n d Asian countries, speakers o f languages like Polish,
I t a l i a n , Germn, N o r w e g i a n , Japanese o r d i f f e r e n t Chnese languages
e n t e r e d the c o u n t r y i n the n i n e t e e n t h a n d early t w e n t i e t h centuries. M o s i
o f these i m m i g r a n t g r o u p s a c q u i r e d E n g l i s h a n d m a n y a b a n d o n e d t h e i r
languages, a l t h o u g h they kept t h e i r social i d e n t i t y t o v a r i o u s extents. T h i s
m o n o l i n g u a l t r e n d has c h a n g e d l a t e r i n t h e n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y as
i m m i g r a t i o n f r o m S o u t h A m e r i c a a n d Asia has d i s r u p t e d the m o n o l i n g u a l
l e n d e n c y a n d has g i v e n w a y to t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f n e w e t h n i c i d e n t i t i e s
in t h i s o f f i c i a l l y m o n o l i n g u a l c o u n t r y .
8. L A N G U A G E CONTACT
I n places w h e r e t w o o r m o r e languages share a c o m m o n g e o g r a p h i c
c o n t e x t (e.g.: t h e c i t y o f B r u s s e l s ) o r s i m p l y w h e r e o n e l a n g u a g e s t o p s
b e i n g used b y speakers a n d a d i f f e r e n t language is used (e.g.: because o f
the existence o f a n i n t e r n a t i o n a l b o r d e r ) , a s i t u a t i o n o f language i n contact
is encountered. There are m a n y factors t h a t play a r o l e i n m u l t i l i n g u a l i s m
and language contact a n d a larger n u m b e r o f outeomes f r o m such a
I II
I I n . i i ion are possible. I n arcas cise lo i n t e r n a t i o n a l borders, f o r instance,
'.I akers o l each o f t h e d i f f e r e n t languages o f t e n d e v e l o p a c o n t i n u u m ,
I llh'y speak dialects o f t h e i r o w n languages w h i c h are cise e n o u g h t o the
" i l " i language t o p e r m i t successful c o m m u n i c a t i o n (e.g.: p e o p l e l i v i n g
MU ihe l w o sides o f t h e b o r d e r b e t w e e n P o r t u g a l a n d S p a i n n o r m a l l y
u n d e r s t a n d each o t h e r w i t h o u t a n y p r o b l e m , a s i t u a t i o n t h a t w o u l d be
l l i o s l un l i k e l y b e t w e e n people c o m i n g f r o m f u r t h e r a w a y i n P o r t u g a l a n d
Upain). F r o m a d i a c h r o n i c perspective, a c o n t a c t s i t u a t i o n between
languages m a y r e s u l t i n t h e loss o f one o f t h e languages, i f t h e y are i n a
i r e l a t i o n s h i p , or i n the m e r g i n g of b o t h , i f b o t h languages are
I considered t o have equal status a n d social c o n s i d e r a t i o n . W i t h o u t d o u b t ,
i ui nage c o n t a c t is t h e m a i n source o f language e v o l u t i o n a n d language
t hange over t i m e . (See language change, c h a p t e r 1)
l a n g u a g e C o n t a c t c a n cause p o l i t i c a l c o n f l i c t . B e l g i u m c o n f o r m s a
lilliugual state b u t i t contains W a l l o o n speakers o f F r e n c h dialects, Flemish
pi akers o f D u t c h d i a l e c t s , a n d speakers o f Germn d i a l e c t s . T h e r e , a
i l o n i i n a n t language g r o u p ( F r e n c h ) c o n t r o l s a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , p o l i t i c s a n d
I I i inomy, p r e s u m a b l y g i v i n g e m p l o y m e n t preferences t o a p p l i c a n t s w h o
l i v e c o m m a n d o f t h e d o m i n a n t language ( H a n s Nelde, 2 0 0 2 ) . However,
i n some cases, s o c i a l l y o r p s y c h o l o g i c a l l y w e a k e n e d g r o u p s , o r g r o u p s
n ilnced i n number, m i g h t move towards assimilation of the d o m i n a n t
Innguage ( a n d c u l t u r e ) . W h e n those g r o u p s are n u m e r o u s or, i f t h e y have
.i s o u n d c u l t u r a l t r a d i t i o n , t h e m o s t l i k e l y o u t e o m e is o p p o s i t i o n a n d
i istance t o t h e d o m i n a n t g r o u p , r e s u l t i n g i n language c o n f l i c t .
L a n g u a g e c o n f l i c t s c a n be v i e w e d as natural o r artificial language
i o n l l i c t s . Natural l a n g u a g e c o n f l i c t s h a v e b e e n t r a d i t i o n a l l y caused b y
p o l i l i c a l d e c i s i o n s r e g a r d i n g m a j o r i t y o r m i n o r i t y social g r o u p s . As was
Itated a b o v e , a s s i m i l a t i o n o r o p p o s i t i o n r e p r e s e n t s t h e k e y f a c t o r i n
Innguage c o n f l i c t as i t m o s t u n e q u i v o c a l l y arises f r o m t h e latter. T h i s type
i il e o n f l i c t is seen i n Canad w i t h t h e F r e n c h - s p e a k i n g c o m m u n i t y o r i n
Ipain w i t h t h e B a s q u e - s p e a k i n g c o m m u n i t y a n d i t i n t e n s i f i e s w h e n
ii le ilogical o r p o l i t i c a l a r g u m e n t s are posed a n d i n t e r t w i n e w i t h l i n g u i s t i c
ones. A n o t h e r aspect that intensifies these problems c a n be based, a l t h o u g h
Bol solely, o n r e l i g i o u s g r o u n d s , s u c h as t h a t b e t w e e n Belfast ( N o r t h e r n
heland) a n d Connemara, to the n o r t h o f Galway i n the I r i s h Republie of
I reland. Artificial language c o n f l i c t s arise w h e n a c o m p r o m i s e is a t t a i n e d
.mil a language is disfavored. The E u r o p e a n U n i o n , f o r instance, faces the
p r o b l e m o f w h a t languages s h o u l d be o f f i c i a l l y spoken w i t h i n the E U . The
l i l l c e n m e m b e r states a t t h e m o m e n t ( 2 0 0 4 ) speak e l e v e n d i f i e r e n !
languages w h i c h t u r n s t h e i r headquarters i n Brussels i n t o a veritable Tower
ol Babel a n d t h e tasks o f t r a n s l a t i o n a n d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i n t o a d a u n t i n g
 112
I 'ii i i
e n t e r p n s e T h e decisin t o a d o p t E n g l i s h a n d F r e n c h as the . . I I , .
languages m the E U has r a i s e d conflicts w i t h c o u n t r i e s t h a t a I ,
deserved thzs c o n s t d e r a t i o n o f language f o r i n t e r n a t i o n a l c o n f i e , \ f f
(Please go t o t h e exercises s e c t i o n a n d d o exercises 7 a n d 8.)
9. EXERCISES
1. R e a d t h e text a n d t h i n k o f the d i f f e r e n t d o m a i n s i n w h i c h R< iborl
his parents a n d his sister use S p a n i s h a n d E n g l i s h . T h e n fill i n a table Ii
t h i s f o r each o f t h e m ( R o b e r t ; Carlos a n d F a b i a n a ; a n d , M a i r a ) :
LOCATION ROLE RELATIONSHIP
TOPIC LANGUAGE
2 . T h i n k a b o u t t h e issues r a i s e d i n t h e s e c t i o n ' B i l i n g u a l i s m :
d e f i n i t i o n s ' . Elabrate o n each o f t h e f o u r q u e s t i o n s r a i s e d t h e r e :
a) To w h a t extent does t h e b i l i n g u a l speaker need to be p r o f i c i e n t in
b o t h languages so t h a t s/he c a n q u a l i f y as b i l i n g u a l ?
b) Does a b i l i n g u a l speaker n e e d t o s h o w e q u a l p r o f i c i e n e y i n b o l h
languages?
c) Does t h e b i l i n g u a l p r o f i c i e n e y o f t h e l a n g u a g e e n t a i l a s p o k e n or
w r i t t e n c o m m a n d o f b o t h languages?
d) W h a t l a n g u a g e c o m p o n e n t s s h o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d as c r i t e r i a f o r
assigning the label o f ' b i l i n g u a l ' : vocabulary, p r o n u n c i a t i o n , syntax,
flueney, etc?
3 . Analyze the f o l l o w i n g d e f i n i t i o n s of b i l i n g u a l i s m . Discuss the
i m p l i c a t i o n s o f each d e f i n i t i o n a n d c o m p o s e y o u r o w n t a k i n g these as a
s l a r t p o i n t . Y o u s h o u l d incorprate any c o n s i d e r a t i o n s t h a t y o u feel are
i elevant.
l ' i n i l o R i c a n speaker a n d taken f r o m I.abov ( 1 9 7 1 : 4 5 7 ) . W h a t types o l
113
'(T)he use of at least two languages either by an individual [... 1 or
by a group of speakers, such as the inhabitants of a particular regin < i
nation. Bilingualism is common, for example, i n the Province of Quebec
in Canad where b o t h English and French are spoken, and parts of
Wales, where both Welsh and English are spoken.'
(Richards, Platt and Platt, 1992: 36)
'A bilingual (or multilingual) person is one whose linguistic ability
in two (or more) languages is similar to that of a native speaker. I t is
estimated that half the population of the w o r l d is bilingual [...]. I t is as
difficult to set up exact criteria for what is to count as bilingualism as
it is to describe exactly all that a native speaker can do w i t h her or his
language. Besides, not all native speakers w i l l have the same ability in
all aspects of t h e i r language: specialist registers, for instance, are
typically only accessible to specialists. Similarly, most bilinguals w i l l
not have access to all registers i n both their languages, or to the same
registers i n b o t h languages; for instance, i f a native speaker of one
language leaves her or his native country for another, and learns a new
skill t h r o u g h the language of the new country of residence, s/he w i l l
typically be unable to converse fluently about this skill i n her or his
native language: typically, s/he w i l l not have the required terminology
at her or his disposal. [...]'
(Malmkjaer and Anderson, 1997: 57-58)
'The ability to speak two languages. Bilingualism may be the property
of an individual or of a whole community.'
(Trask, 1997: 29)
'The general sense of this t e r m a person w h o can speak two
LANGUAGES provides a pre-theoretical frame of reference for
linguistic study, especially by SOCIOLINGUISTS, and APPLIED
LINGUISTS involved i n foreign- or second-language teaching. The focus
of attention has been on the many kinds and degrees of 'bilingualism'
and 'bilingual situations' which exist. Definitions of bilingualism reflect
assumptions about the degree of proficieney people must achieve before
they qualify as bilingual (whether comparable to a monolingual NAT1VK-
SPEAKER, or something less than this, even to the extent of m i n i m a l
knowledge of a second language).
(Crystal, 1997: 42)
4. Read a n d analy/.e the f o l l o w i n g u t t e r a n c e s p o k e n b y a N e w York
 AN INTKODIK TION T<) S()( l()l.IN( IfNli i

c o d e - m i x i n g c a n y o u find? I n w h a t ways is it d i f f e r e n t f r o m the frag III. I U I E R E N C E S

in t h i s u n i t t a k e n f r o m Valds Falls (1976) (p. 102)?
rl'i i , R. y P. M U Y S K E N . 1996. Bingismo y contacto de lenguas. Barcelona:
Por eso cada, you know it's nothing to be proud of, poique v<> II
estoy proud of it, as a matter o f fact I hate it, pero viene Vierne y Sal>M I ditorial Ariel.
yo estoy, t u me ve haci a m i , sola with a, aqui slita, a veces que Frun' MAMK, C. 1993. Foundations of Bingual Education and Bilingualism. Clevedon,
me deja, you know a stick or something, y y o equi slita, queccs Fu IIK: Multilingual Matters.
no sabe y yo estoy haci, viendo televisin, but I rather, y cuando < |i SCHYSIAI , D. 1997. A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics. Oxford, U.K.: Blackwell
con gente yo me ... borracha porque me siento mas, happy, mas 11. .
you know, pero si yo estoy com mucha gente yo no estoy, you know, hlg' Publishers Ltd.
more or less, I couldn't get along w i t h anybody. ni U n , K . 2002. 'Home Language a n d Language Proficieney'. Journal of
Multilingual and Multicultural Development. 23/3: 175-194.
5. I n t e r v i e w someone w h o v i e w s h i m s e l f o r herself as b i l i n g u a l . W l i a l 11 id ,IISON, C. 2003. 'Diglossia', i n C. Bratt Paulston and G. Richard Tucker (eds.),
differences d o t h e y perceive i n t h e i r o w n p r o f i c i e n e y over each languagi 2003, Sociolinguistics: The Essential Readings. Malden, USA: Blackwell
Does y o u r i n t e r v i e w e e r e p o r t h a v i n g any p r o b l e m s w i t c h i n g b e t w e e n l I i Publishing.
t w o languages? I n w h a t d o m a i n s does s/he use each language? H o w ol i m I i IIMAN, J . 2003. 'Bilingualism w i t h and w i t h o u t diglossia; diglossia w i t h and
does s/he use them? Does s/he feel at ease i n b o t h languages i n a l l c o n t e x t i ' without bilingualism', in C. Bratt Paulston and G. Richard Tucker (eds.), 2003,
W h y ? ( I n the case o f m u l t i l i n g u a l interviewees, ask a b o u t a l l the languagM Sociolinguistics: The Essential Readings. Malden, USA: Blackwell Publishing.
s/he k n o w s . ) and M . H . A . B L A N C . 1989. Bilinguality and Bilingualism. Cambridge,
I I W I I RS, J . F .
USA: Cambridge University Press.
6. C h o o s e o n e o f these g e o g r a p h i c reas (Canad, S o u t h A f r i i u IAIIOV, W. 1971. 'The notion o f "System" i n Crele Studies', i n D. H . Hymes (ed.),
A u s t r a l i a , any E n g l i s h - s p e a k i n g c o u n t r y i n the C a r i b b e a n rea, o r Spain), 1971, Pidginization and Creolization of Languages. Cambridge: Cambridge
o r a n y o t h e r t h a t i n t e r e s t s y o u , a n d f i n d o u t a b o u t t h e l a n g u a g e use University Press.
s i t u a t i o n . W h a t is t h e p a t t e r n o f use o f the languages/dialects/varietics m I \MBERT, W. E. 1955. 'Measurement of the linguistic dominance i n bilinguals.'
t h a t rea? W h a t t y p e o f r e l a t i o n s h i p p e r t a i n s : d i g l o s s i a o r b i l i n g u a l i s m '
Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 50: 197-200.
Please n o t e t h a t t h e I n t e r n e t a n d reference b o o k s s u c h as encyclopedias
MAC AMARA, J . 1967. 'The b i l i n g u a l s linguistic performance'. Journal of Social
m a y be very u s e f u l f o r t h i s activity.
Issues, 23: 58-77.
7. T h i n k a b o u t t h e l i n g u i s t i c s i t u a t i o n i n y o u r s p e e c h c o m m u n i l y . MAI.MKJ/ER, K. and J. M . A N D E R S O N (eds.) 1997. The Linguistics Encyclopedia.
E x p a n d o n t h e p o s i t i v e a n d n e g a t i v e effeets t h a t m u l t i l i n g u a l i s m m i g h l London: Routledge.
have o n y o u r society. I f y o u a l r e a d y l i v e i n a m u l t i l i n g u a l speech
Mi S I I I RE, R. 2001. Concise Encyclopaedia of Sociolinguistics. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
c o m m u n i t y , describe t h e s i t u a t i o n a n d the effeets o f m u l t i l i n g u a l i s m .
Ni i DE, H . 2002. 'Germn i n Belgium: linguistic variation from a contact linguist
8. A n a l y z e e a c h o f t h e f o l l o w i n g s t a t e m e n t s . E x p a n d o n e a c h i t e m point of view'. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development. 23 : 1-
p r o v i d i n g y o u r opinin a n d s u p p o r t i n g y o u r a r g u m e n t s . 2, pp. 65-79.
KICIIARDS, J . C , J . PLATT a n d H . PLATT. 1992. Longman Dictionary of Language

a) Creles a r e n o t r e a l l a n g u a g e s a n d , t h e r e f o r e , they s h o u l d n o t be Teaching and Applied Linguistics. Harlow, UK: Longman.

used as a mdium o f i n s t r u c t i o n o r i n the m e d i a . KOMAINE, S. 1989. Bilingualism. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers.
b) I n m u l t i l i n g u a l c o u n t r i e s , i t i s t o o e x p e n s i v e a n d o f t e n time TKASK, R. L. 1997. A Students Dictionary of Language and Linguistics. London: Arnold.
c o n s u m i n g t o i n s t r u c t c h i l d r e n i n v a r i o u s languages. VALDS FALLS, G. 1976. 'Social interaction and code-switching patterns; A case
study o f Spanish/English', i n Keller, G. D. et al. (eds.). Bilingualism in the
c) B i l i n g u a l i s m is r a t h e r i n f r e q u e n t a n d i t n o r m a l l y i n t e r f e r e s w i t l i
bicentennial and beyond. New York: Bilingual Press.
the c h i l d c o g n i t i v e d e v e l o p m e n t .
WAKDIIAUGU, R. 2002 (4th ed.). An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. (4th ed.) Malden,
d) B e i n g b i l i n g u a l m e a n s t h a t y o u c a n speak, r e a d a n d w r i t e i n t w o USA: Blackwell Publishing.
languages w i t h ease.
Wi INREICH, U. 1953. Languages in Contact. The Hague: Mouton.
 116
AN INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLINGUISTK
11. R E S O U R C E S O N T H E W E B
N o w you c a n v i s i t t h e w e b p a g e f o r t h i s s u b j e c t w h e r e y o u w i l l l i m l
f u r t h e r references a n d c o m p l e m e n t a r y readings.
12. F U R T H E R R E A D I N G S A N D QUESTIONS
12.1. Text 7
R e a d the f o l l o w i n g text c a r e f u l l y a n d c o m m e n t o n i t e m p h a s i z i n g anj
aspect y o u consider of relevance. After the text y o u w i l l nd some questi< il 11
t h a t m a y be h e l p f u l . W r i t e a r o u n d 2 5 0 - 3 0 0 w o r d s i n t o t a l .
By way of summary, let me identify a n u m b e r of i m p o r t a n !
questions that must be addressed whenever parents, educators and
administrators discuss the prospects of multilingual education for thell
communities:
What are the explicit or implicit goals for formal education in llie
regin?
Is there general satisfaction throughout the regin with the level
of educational attainment by all participants (both those who
termnate their education relatively early and those who wish t0
go on to tertiary studies)?
Is the regin relatively homogeneous or is i t heterogeneous
linguistically and culturally and how w o u l d bilingual education
complement the l i n g u i s t i c and c u l t u r a l characteristics of t h l
community?
Does the regin have an explicit or implicit policy w i t h respect lo
the role of language i n education, and how w o u l d bilingual
education fit or not fit with this existing policy? Is this policy b a s a I
upon tradition or the result of language (education) planning?
What priorities are accorded to goals such as the development ol
broadly based permanent functional literacy, the valu ol
education for those who may termnate their schooling at an ca K
age, and the power of language to foster national identity and
cohesiveness?
Are the language(s) selected for i n s t r u c t i o n w r i t t e n , codified,
standardized, and elaborated?
Is there a well-developed curriculum for the various levels/stages
of f o r m a l education (i.e., a framework w h i c h specifies fairly
explicitly a set of language, content, cognitive, and affective
objectives that are then licd to or i l l u s l i a l e d by exemplary
techniques and aclivilies. a n d luppoi l e d hv written materials).'
117
liNI I 4
Are sufficient core and reference materials available for teachers
and for students i n the language(s) of instruction? I f not, are there
trained individuis available who can prepare such materials?
Is there a sufficient number of trained and experienced teachers
who are fluent speakers of the languagc(s) of instruction and who
are trained to teach via that language(s)?
Richard Tucker (2003: 469)
INSIICS to c o n s i d e r :
a) M a k e a n analysis o f the c u r r e n t s i t u a t i o n o f b i l i n g u a l e d u c a t i o n i n
y o u r country/community. Try a n d answer the questions listed above.
Please note t h a t y o u w i l l p r o b a b l y need t o d o some research before
a n s w e r i n g these q u e s t i o n s .
12.2. T e x t 8
Read t h e f o l l o w i n g text carefully a n d c o m m e n t o n i t e m p h a s i z i n g any
aspect y o u consider o f relevance. After the text y o u w i l l find some questions
i l i . i t m a y be h e l p f u l . W r i t e a r o u n d 2 5 0 - 3 0 0 w o r d s i n t o t a l .
When code-switching is discussed the question of speakers'
competence is frequently raised: are code-switching a n d linguistic
competence mutually exclusive? Because i t is popularly believed that
switching is a result of incompetence rather than of a fine sense o I he
unique effeets that it can achieve, switching is often stigmatized. People
say that those who switch 'can't speak properly' or 'make a mess' ol llie
languages they use.
On closer examination i t appears that two types of switching are
differently regarded. Whereas diglossic and situational code-switching
are often regarded as necessary manifestations of bilingualism, and are
valued as part of a speakers communicative competence, conversalional
switching is often overtly stigmatized. Covertly i t may be valued ol its
rhetorical possibilities and as a group-marker. The crucial linguistic
difference between the two types of switching that probably accounls
for this difference i n attitude is that situational switching involves the
p r o d u c t i o n and comprehension of long strings i n each language, so
flueney is apparent, whereas in conversational code-switching the switch
is frequently intrasentential, allowing for an impression thal speakers
are insufficiently proficient i n either language to be able to linish whai
they want to say, i n one language.
A common assumption is that people switch languages because o l
gaps in their personal voeabularv. As is shown i n examples eited above,
l i l i s is 11 l i e n i s o i n c ( . i s e s 11111 n o l in ol l i l i s. The si u i l v o l ,i large c 01 p u
118 AN IN I KODIK I ION TO SOCIOl.INGUISI I I

of data f r o m a member o a bilingual, eotle-switching c o m m u i n l \

o f t e n s h o w t h e s p e a k e r u s i n g the w o r d s f o r a c o n c e p t f r o m h
l a n g u a g e s . W i t t y , q u i c k , e l e g a n t s h i f t s b e t w e e n c o d e s are <>ll
appreciated i n the speech c o m m u n i t y . Procient bilinguals o r bidialei Id
w h o s w i t c h codes consciously o r u n c o n s c i o u s l y achieve p a r t i c u l a i si l
p o l i t i c a l , o r r h e t o r i c a l effeets. They are able t o d r a w o n a bigger l i n g n l *
p o o l t h a n t h e y w o u l d be i f t h e y a n d t h e i r i n t e r l o c u t o r s w t
monodialectal o monolingual.

M e s t h r i e (2001 I

I s s u e s to c o n s i d e r :

a) T h i s f r a g m e n t a n a l y s e s w h e t h e r c o d e - s w i t c h i n g is a m a t t e r
l a n g u a g e dficit o r a l a n g u a g e s k i l l . A c c o r d i n g t o y o u r ovVI
e x p e r i e n c e as a s p e a k e r o f E n g l i s h a n d S p a n i s h ( o r a n y othl 1

l a n g u a g e ) , d o y o u ever c o d e - s w i t c h ? W h y (not)?

b) C a n y o u t h i n k o f a n y o t h e r t y p e s o f c o d e - s w i t c h i n g a p a r t ( 11 i h
ones d e s c r i b e d i n t h i s text?

c) W o u l d y o u say t h a t c o d e - s w i t c h i n g is m a i n l y r e l a t e d t o the t o p i i
t o the r o l e o f the speaker? E x p l a i n .

13. K E Y W O R D S

The f o l l o w i n g l i s t o f key w o r d s c o n t a i n s s o m e i m p o r t a n t t e r m s l l i . i i
are p r e s e n t e d i n t h i s u n i t . A d e f i n i t i o n f o r each t e r m c a n be f o u n d a l 1 h e
e n d o f t h i s b o o k , i n t h e glossary.

Bidialectal
Compound bilingual
Communicative competence
Co-ordinate b i l i n g u a l
Domain
Dormant bilingual
Interference
Linguistic competence
M i n o r i t y language
Proficieney
Sociolinguistic competence
Sociolinguistic relativity
I Kll I N C U A L EDUCATION

Milu igual E d u c a t i o n entails the a c c o m p l i s h m e n t of a n u m b e r o f actions

unI i l * isions r e g a r d i n g m u l t i d i s c i p l i n a r y p e r s p e c t i v e s w h i c h c a n be
j t u l l l H , i l , c c o n o m i c a l , s o c i a l , c u l t u r a l a n d p e d a g o g i c a l . T h e s e c a n be

j l l i i i l s i l f r o m d i f f e r e n t angles. I n t h e f i r s t p l a c e , b i l i n g u a l e d u c a t i o n
IIM-'. b o t h a g i v e n l a n g u a g e p o l i c y a n d a p e d a g o g i c r e a l i z a t i o n i n a
i il.n c l a s s r o o m p r a c t i c e . I n t h e second place, b i l i n g u a l e d u c a t i o n
wi111 national o r regional matters and by means of language p l a n n i n g
i ' i assimilate m i n o r i t i e s , intgrate m i n o r i t y g r o u p s and/or spread
l i l i n u l i i i r a l u n d e r s t a n d i n g . P o l i t i c s are d o u b t l e s s a l w a y s p r e s e n t i n
M i l e d u c a t i o n as, f o r i n s t a n c e , i n t h e case o f Canad. T h e a i m o f
11 111111 icrsion i n Canad is to give students the o p p o r t u n i t y to achieve,
In ' . I I n n d a r y s c h o o l g r a d u a t i o n , a level o f b i l i n g u a l i s m s u f f i c i e n t t o
lliiii w e l l i n a French-speaking c o m m u n i t y , accept a j o b u s i n g F r e n c h
II iln w i >rk i i g language, o r take university o r college education i n F r e n c h .
lli nlilil i o n l o t h i s , C a n a d i a n i m m e r s i o n p r o g r a m s h e l p t o p r o m o t e
l i l i Ii ' i Hiding between t w o m a i n language groups a n d solve sociopolitical
1

in Mi I I r . i hat have existed for decades a n d that m i g h t otherwise eventually

11" ii 11 m o r e serious social p r o b l e m s .

\s e x p l a i n e d i n p r e v i o u s chapters, languages evolve over t i m e as

nll ol social, p o l i t i c a l a n d e c o n o m i c a l changes i n societies. U n d e r
u n i u c u instances s o m e languages m a y s h r i n k i n t e r m s o f n u m b e r s
i l i i s, w h i l e o t h e r s m a y g r o w . A t a l l events, i t seems t h a t f o r a
i l u o i i i v ) language t o survive i t is necessary t o meet c e r t a i n c o n d i t i o n s
Ii i i lie ones p u t f o r w a r d b y B a k e r (2002):

i iinguages need t o be used at h o m e f o r i n t e r p e r s o n a l

iniunication; that way they become m o t h e r tongues of new

i h i n n English and French, a n u m b e r of heritage languages are spoken i n

122
AN INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOI.IN
m e m b e r s i n t h e f a m i l y . T h e best w a y t o e n s u r e t h e s u b s i i
o f ( m i n o r i t y ) languages is t o raise c h i l d r e n i n t h a t language M
w i l l , nevertheless, n e e d t o be r e i n f o r c e d l a t e r i n s c h o o l i n j '
i s t h e case, f o r i n s t a n c e , o f W e l s h i n W a l e s a n d B a s q u e m
Basque Country.
b) A second b e n c h m a r k for the maintenance a n d d e v e l o p n i . n i
( m i n o r i t y ) l a n g u a g e is i t s p r e s e n c e t h r o u g h f o r m a l s c h o o l
T h i s p r o v i d e s t h e speakers w i t h w i d e r l i n g u i s t i c t o o l s t o inti
outside a l i m i t e d domestic setting a n d help i n the social |
p s y c h o l i n g u i s t i c d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l . LanjMi.i
p l a n n i n g t h r o u g h b i l i n g u a l e d u c a t i o n has succeeded i 11 ( i lli il i n g , o r t h e absence o f i t , c a n e v e n t u a l l y cause l a n g u a g e d e a t h , t h e
a n d W a l e s a n d also i n t h e B a s q u e C o u n t r y a n d C a t a l o n i a , I >i 11 111 |
t o t h e s a m e extent i n I r e l a n d , w h e r e t h e n u m b e r o f I r i s h - s p c a l l
has decreased i n favor o f E n g l i s h i n spite o f the continuos ellurl
m a d e b y t h e I r i s h a u t h o r i t i e s . I n 1922, t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t o l l h
I r i s h F r e e S t a t e ( l a t e r t h e I r i s h R e p u b l i c o f I r e l a n d ) m a d e Ii i
the first official language i n the c o u n t r y a n d occasione.l i
i m p l a n t a t i o n i n the educational system.
c) A t h i r d decisive f a c t o r f o r t h e c o n t i n u a t i o n o f a ( m i n o r i t y ) langu
is its presence i n e c o n o m i c circles as t h i s guarantees t h a t speak)
w i l l m a i n t a i n o r l e a r n i t for e m p l o y m e n t purposes. T h i s may explnlii
t h e case o f I r i s h . F o r decades t h e I r i s h e c o n o m y has r e m a i n c i l In
some extent dependent u p o n the economy o f other English-spcakinu
c o u n t r i e s (e.g., f a v o r i n g t h e use o f E n g l i s h i n t h e e m p l o y i n c n l
m a r k e t ) , a n d l a t e r t h e i n c o r p o r a t i o n o f I r e l a n d i n t o t h e E U lu*
stressed t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e o f o t h e r E u r o p e a n U n i o n languages s u . I.
as E n g l i s h , F r e n c h a n d Germn. Parents m a y also play a role in llie
spread o f a m a j o r i t y l a n g u a g e as t h e y m a y encourage t h e learning
a n d use o f t h a t l a n g u a g e b y t h e i r c h i l d r e n , m o t i v a t e d b y t h e aoj
t h a t i t m a y be f a c i l i t a t i v e f o r e m p l o y m e n t a n d e c o n o m i c r e a s o n i ,
d) A f o u r t h a s p e c t is r e l a t e d t o t h e a s s o c i a t i o n o f t h e ( m i n o i i i \
l a n g u a g e w i t h the c u l t u r e a n d the l i t e r a r y t r a d i t i o n o f t h e speei Ii
c o m m u n i t y . W h e n t h e ( m i n o r i t y ) language is socially a n d c u l t u r a l l v
v a l u e d ( o f t e n r e p r e s e n t i n g a c u l t u r a l o r e t h n i c i d e n t i t y ) a n d ||
c o m m o n l y used i n t h e m e d i a a n d i n social i n t e r a c t i o n s , i t has mi >i.
social functions and, consequently, m o r e chances t o spread o r simply
t o be m a i n t a i n e d . F o r i n s t a n c e , o n e o f t h e m a i n r e a s o n s f o r l l n
decrease i n n u m b e r s o f A u s t r a l i a n A b o r i g i n a l languages speak. i 1
was t h e l a c k o f social valu associated w i t h these languages. S i n . I
1 8 t h c. t h e r e w a s a n o v e r t a t t e m p t o n t h e p a r t o f c o l o n i z e r s tO
12.,
. o n v e r t A b o r i g i n e s i n t o E u r o p e a n s . M o r e r e c e n t l y , i n t h e past
decades, y o u n g e r g e n e r a t i o n s d i d n o t f i n d m a n y a d v a n t a g e s i n
l . a r n i n g the language o f t h e i r ancestors as they o f t e n saw that t h e i r
I .i < >i',cnitors represented a socially a n d economically deprived g r o u p .
I In f o u r fundamentis r e f e r r e d t o b e f o r e s h o w h o w t h e c o u r s e o l
1 i. . e s c a n be g u i d e d t o s o m e e x t e n t . T h i s f a c t m a k e s b i l i n g u a l
i l i o n a n d language p o l i e y m a k e r s o f p a r a m o u n t i m p o r t a n c e f r o m a
I i *' 'ini of view f o r the progress o f nation-states a n d c a n certainly pave
(In w , i \r social interethnic understanding or conflict. From the point
\l linguistic heritage and linguistic diversity, t h i s k i n d o f decision-
1111 ucnee o f one language over another, o r the development o f b i l i n g u a l -
hl. nll ni al societies ( w h i c h seems to be the m o r e advantageous o u t e o m e ) .
l l i e a d o p t i o n o f a w e l l - f o u n d e d language p l a n n i n g p o l i c y i n b i l i n g u a l
Mili ii 11 i o n , however, does encounter some difficulties i n its i m p l e m e n t a t i o n .
Mu., i id>id.) identifies t h r e e l i m i t a t i o n s o f language p l a n n i n g i n b i l i n g u a l
i m al i o n t h a t need t o be c o n s i d e r e d as i t s h o u l d n o t be f o r g o t t e n t h a t
n.ige p l a n n i n g a n d p o l i c y d e a l f u n d a m e n t a l l y w i t h p e o p l e a n d n o t
nl u i i h languages. F i r s t , he i d e n t i f i e s a t e m p t a t i o n o n t h e p a r t o f t h e
> n . ' c p l a n n e r t o give p r o m i n e n c e t o t h e language r a t h e r t h a n t o t h e
lilld, i.e., w h a t is g o o d f o r t h e l a n g u a g e is n o t necessarily g o o d f o r t h e
i n l i l So, a h u m a n i s t i c e d u c a t i o n i s t m a y arge t h a t ' [ . . . ] b i l i n g u a l
ni . i l i o n needs t o be d e f e n d e d f o r i t s valu a n d f o r i t s c o n t r i b u t i o n t o
le v e l o p m e n t o f the c h i l d , r a t h e r t h a n f o r its s u p p o r t o f t h e language.'
I I I il I T , 2 0 0 2 : 2 3 3 ) . S e c o n d , l a n g u a g e p l a n n i n g i n t h e f o r m o f b i l i n g u a l
'Im i l i o n g e n e r a l l y has a l i m i t e d v i e w o f t h e f u n c t i o n s a n d p u r p o s e s o f
im il i o n as i t o f t e n focuses o n the benefits a n d needs f o r t h e a c q u i s i t i o n
II! ' d i i a l - l i n g u i s t i c s y s t e m , s o m e t i m e s s e t t i n g aside o t h e r s o c i a l a n d
llNVi'hological c o n s i d e r a t i o n s . T h i r d , B a k e r p o i n t s o u t t h a t t h e r e is o f t e n
un' Hiiided o p t i m i s m a n d t o o h i g h expectations o n b i l i n g u a l e d u c a t i o n i n
i H.ilizing a language. B i l i n g u a l e d u c a t i o n plays a n i m p o r t a n t role i n
i ingiiage m a i n t e n a n c e a n d r e v i v a l b u t i t is n o t t h e o n l y e l e m e n t .
K e c e n t l y t h e r e has b e e n a g e n e r a l t e n d e n e y t o p e r c e i v e b i l i n g u a l
i d l i c a t i o n as v e r y a d v a n t a g e o u s f o r e v e r y o n e . T h i s is d u e p a r t l y t o t h e
ral r e a w a k e n i n g o f c u l t u r a l i d e n t i t i e s a n d t h e s u b s e q u e n t r e v i v a l o f
l o r i t y languages, a n d p a r t l y t o t h e g l o b a l i z a t i o n process t h a t m a k e s
i'enerations a w a r e o f t h e need t o have a c o m m a n d o f m o r e t h a n one
liini'.uage. I t b e c o m e s a l m o s t a m u s t i n E U c o u n t r i e s w h e r e t h e general
ii n i l e i i c y , e n c o u r a g e d b y g o v e r n m e n t a l p o l i c i e s , is t o m o v e t o w a r d s a
I i i l i n g u a l a n d m u l t i c u l t u r a l society. I n t h i s respect, B a k e r a n d Jones
I zt
AN INTUODIK TION TO SOCIOI.INC I i | \
(1998) display eight particulai' advanlagcs ol bilingual educaon in
societies:
1. B i l i n g u a l e d u c a t i o n a l l o w s the f u l l d e v e l o p m e n t o f the langu i
involved (often t w o languages a n d sometimes three). T i n .
enables c h i l d r e n t o engage i n w i d e r c o m m u n i c a t i o n a n d ha\ n i "
alternatives i n patterns o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n w i t h different generat Id
different c u l t u r a l g r o u p s a n d different geographical reas.
2. B i l i n g u a l e d u c a t i o n p r o m o t e s a m o n g c h i l d r e n deeper insighls In
the cultures each language represents. I t also avoids the sterei ii \ >i
o f different social a n d c u l t u r a l groups, encourages soci.il . i
cultural relativism and promotes a multiperspective viewpmni
3. B i l i n g u a l e d u c a t i o n often results i n b i l i t e r a c y i.e., the possibi 111 \
r e a d i n g a n d w r i t i n g i n m o r e t h a n one language. Some ol i
o u t e o m e s are t h a t i t p r o v i d e s m o r e p o s s i b i l i t i e s f o r e n j o y l
l i t e r a t u r e f o r pleasure, b r o a d e n s e m p l o y m e n t o p p o r t u n i l i c
p r o m o t e s a deeper u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f heritage a n d t r a d i t i o n s .
4. I t seems that c h i l d r e n are favored w i t h some cognitive benefits h
they can speak t w o well-developed languages. C h i l d r e n may be im nt>
creative i n t h i n k i n g i n t h e sense t h a t t h e y b e c o m e interpersonallv
aware, f o r example as regards the need t o c o d e - s w i t c h .
5. B i l i n g u a l e d u c a t i o n m a y raise t h e children's self-esteem espci inll
w h e n t h e l a n g u a g e o f h o m e is n o t t h e m a j o r i t y l a n g u a g e i n 11
society b u t is s t u d i e d at s c h o o l . Since i t is o n e o f the languagi
s c h o o l i n g , t h e c h i l d c a n p e r c e i v e t h a t t h e l a n g u a g e is socially
accepted, w h i c h is so i m p o r t a n t i n c u r r i c u l u m success. H o w i
i f the language o f h o m e does n o t f o r m p a r t o f the school currieti I
t h e c h i l d m a y experience feelings o f r e j e c t i o n .
6. C a n a d i a n i m m e r s i o n studies suggest t h a t c u r r i c u l u m achieve
is c o n n e c t e d t o b i l i n g u a l e d u c a t i o n . Nevertheless, i t is d i l f u nll lu
d e t e r m i n e i f t h i s is caused b y a n a d d i t i o n a l s u p p o r t at h o m e , lln'
e x t r a i n v o l v e m e n t o f teachers a n d e d u c a t i o n a l i n s t i t u t i o n s , or tlio
c o n n e c t i o n b e t w e e n language a n d c o g n i t i v e d e v e l o p m e n t , a m i m
o t h e r factors.
7. The establishing o f a secure i d e n t i t y w i t h i n a p a r t i c u l a r c o m n lunltj
especially i n t h e case o f m i n o r i t y languages.
8. B i l i n g u a l e d u c a t i o n also b r i n g s e c o n o m i c a d v a n t a g e s as i l can
secure e m p l o y m e n t b o t h i n p u b l i c services a n d prvate c o m p a n i i
T h i s m a y b e t r u e at a l o c a l , r e g i o n a l , o r n a t i o n a l level (e.g,,
125
|l
Ii i Btalonia, Canad, etc.) b u t also i n i n t e r n a t i o n a l c o r p o r a t i o n s t h a t
ni.iv need m u l t i l i n g u a l employees.
IVspitc the aforesaid s t r o n g p o i n t s of b i l i n g u a l e d u c a t i o n i t also needs
|ii l a k e n i n t o a c c o u n t t h a t r e c e n t r e s e a r c h has i d e n t i f i e d s o m e
wlnicks s u c h as t h e f o l l o w i n g : (a) b i l i n g u a l e d u c a t i o n d o e s n o t
pintee effective schooling, i n spite o f the fact t h a t i t is often associated
ili ni .iilcinic success a n d , v e i y often, i t is the type of education preferred
11111 ii i - n i iddle classes i n western societies a n d i t is sometimes associated
th .ni c l i t i s t e d u c a t i o n ; ( b ) t h e l a n g u a g e r e g i s t e r u s e d i n f o r m a l
i . i l i o n does n o t n e c e s s a r i l y c o r r e s p o n d w i t h t h e l a n g u a g e r e g i s t e r
iled o u t s i d e t h e c l a s s r o o m , i.e., t h e type o f a c a d e m i c l a n g u a g e used
llie means f o r t e a c h i n g o f t e n does n o t c o r r e s p o n d w i t h t h e c o l l o q u i a l
i le t h a t s t u d e n t s i n a b i l i n g u a l p r o g r a m c a n f i n d o u t s i d e t h e
I n, a n d this m a y result i n some sort o f exclusin b y m o t h e r tongue
nkers; (c) p r o d u c t i v e s k i l l s a r e s o m e t i m e s n o t f u l l y d e v e l o p e d i f t h e
ifuingc o f e d u c a t i o n is not present b e y o n d the s c h o o l , a n d t h i s is
i isely o n e o f t h e m o s t s t r i k i n g o u t e o m e s o f C a n a d i a n b i l i n g u a l
leal ion programs. Students, u n d e r ideal circumstances, seem t o develop
full i o m m a n d o f t h e l a n g u a g e as f a r as r e c e p t i v e skills are c o n c e r n e d
|i i iing a n d reading). P r o d u c t i v e skills (speaking a n d w r i t i n g ) , however,
to d e v e l o p t o a lesser e x t e n t , w h i c h is n o t u n u s u a l i n l a n g u a g e
li'ni u i n g i n o t h e r contexts.
(I'li ase go to the exercises section and d o exercises I and 2.)
SI. I A N G U A G E P O L I C Y
I . 11 iguage is rarely a causal factor and language decisions are essentially
liiised o n p o l i t i c a l a n d e c o n o m i c reasons. L a n g u a g e use a n d e v o l u t i o n
a l i e n m i r r o r s w h a t is t h o u g h t a b o u t i t a n d w h a t a c t u a l l y h a p p e n s i n
i v, for e x a m p l e , m i g r a t i o n w h i c h is one o f t h e m a i n reasons f o r the
l l i t i case of people l e a r n i n g languages a n d f o r t h e revival a n d c u r r e n t need
I m language p o l i c y a n d p l a n n i n g .
I .uiguage p l a n n i n g is a c t u a l l y p a r t o f a l a n g u a g e p o l i c y t h a t a g i v e n
)|ovei n m e n t adopts as regards one o r m o r e o f the languages spoken i n the
n i i y . I n S p a i n , f o r i n s t a n c e , Cataln w a s f o r b i d d e n d u r i n g F r a n c o s
(lli l a l o r s h i p b e t w e e n 1937-1976. D u r i n g t h a t p e r i o d t h e use o f Cataln
I allowed i n schools a n d n o books o r newspapers c o u l d be published
i n i li.it language because i t was considered o f i m p o r t a n c e f o r the Cataln
11 lent, w h i c h was believed to threaten the unin o f Spain. I n t h i s way,
 A N IN''* T I O N T O SOCIOI.INC;
t o , Z T " , T ^ ' " * t ' n g u a g e because n e w ge,,, ul
M e l i m i
3. L A N G U A G E PLANNING
Language p l a n n i n g consists o f a delibrate a n d i n s t i t u t i o n a l l y o r g
a t t e m p t t o c h a n g e the d e v e l o p m e n t o f a l a n g u a g e variety, o r a lan
itself, o r t o a l t e r i t s f u n c t i o n s i n society. S o m e t i m e s , language pla
results f r o m t h e need o f a m u l t i l i n g u a l c o u n t r y t o i m p l e m e n t a lang\
p o l i c y r e g u l a t i n g t h e s c o p e a n d use o f t h e l a n g u a g e s and/or langU
v a r i e t i e s w i t h i n i t s t e r r i t o r y . W a r d h a u g h ( 2 0 0 2 ) p o s i t s t h a t langU I
p l a n n i n g c o n s t i t u t e s a delibrate a t t e m p t t o i n t e r f e r e w i t h t h e n a l n i
d e v e l o p m e n t o f a language o r o n e o f its varieties, i.e., i t involves h u
i n t e r v e n t i o n i n t h e n a t u r a l p r o c e s s o f languages o r v a r i e t i e s t o chai]
s p r e a d o r e r o d e . L a n g u a g e p l a n n i n g b e g a n s e v e r a l c e n t u r i e s ago >
various purposes m a y lie b e h i n d t h i s i n t e n t i o n a l interference i n the n a t l l
p r o c e s s o f l a n g u a g e e v o l u t i o n a n d c h a n g e . I t m u s t be s a i d t h a l lili
attempts have n o t always been h o n o r a b l e ; w h i l e the a i m may I i
m a i n t a i n a language t h a t is a b o u t t o disappear because o f a c o n t i n u a I Ii i
o f n a t i v e speakers, o n s o m e occasions the g o a l is to repress a n d d i 11111 > i
a c u l t u r a l o r e t h n i c m i n o r i t y t h a t f o u n d i n t h e i r c o m m o n language a si
o f i d e n t i t y a n d a source o f self-assertion.
A f e w d e c a d e s ago, d e c i s i o n s c o n c e r n i n g l a n g u a g e p l a n n i n g wecf.
c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f d e v e l o p i n g c o u n t r i e s w h i c h o f t e n n e e d e d t o mnk
decisions o n w h e t h e r t o use the f o r m e r c o l o n i a l language o r o t h e r nation
languages as a u n i f y i n g code. M o r e recently, language p l a n n i n g has bci 11)
a n issue i n w e s t e r n societies as there has been a social d e m a n d to presi 11
m i n o r i t y languages (e.g., I r i s h , Welsh, Cataln, etc.) o r a p o l i t i c a l d e m a n d
t o e x p a n d the use o f i n t e r n a t i o n a l languages to p r o m o t e i n t e r c u l t u r a l uild
s u p r a n a t i o n a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n (e.g., E n g l i s h , F r e n c h a n d Germn i n llie
EU). The variety o f factors affecting language p l a n n i n g (econonm ,
e d u c a t i o n a l , h i s t o r i c a l , j u d i c i a l , p o l i t i c a l , religious a n d social) give an idi |
o f its c o m p l e x i t y .
Languages reflect h u m a n r e l a t i o n s h i p s b e t w e e n individuis a n d also
b e t w e e n s o c i a l g r o u p s a n d t h e y c h a n g e i n t h e c o u r s e o f t i m e as a r e s u l l
of the changes i n social relationships. This means that, i n a waj
l a n g u a g e s are a l i v e a n d , t h e r e f o r e , are b o r n (e.g., p i d g i n s a n d creles I
B p i iver t i m e (e.g., A n g l o - S a x o n e v o l v e d i n t o Present-day E n g l i s h ) ,
I a n d d i e (e.g., M a n x o n t h e I s l e o f M a n n ) . T h i s raises t h e issue t o
l extent m a n c a n a l t e r t h e course o f a language b y delibrate
I p u l a t i o n . I t is n o t c l e a r h o w f a r l a n g u a g e s c a n b e c o n t r o l l e d b y
lu i ii p o l i t i c a l m a n e u v e r i n g as t h e r e are instances o f languages t h a t ,
il . i m p l e , w e r e l o s t b e c a u s e c e r t a i n states o r p o l i c i e s w a n t e d i t so
m a n y A m e r i n d i a n languages i n N o r t h a n d S o u t h America), and
IH Mime o t h e r i n s t a n c e s w h e r e p o l i t i c a l r e p r e s s i o n w a s u n s u c c e s s f u l
II ii u i c t i n g l a n g u a g e m a i n t e n a n c e (e.g., Cataln i n S p a i n d u r i n g
hiun n s d i c t a t o r s h i p ) .
A l u l l y developed language p o l i c y o r at least c e r t a i n i d e o l o g i c a l trends
iilin, ' i invariably lie b e h i n d language p l a n n i n g . Indeed, Cobarrubias (1993)
n/.ed f o u r m a i n types o f ideology t h a t t y p i c a l l y p r o m p t t h e r a t i o n a l e
liliul d e c i s i o n s r e g a r d i n g l a n g u a g e p l a n n i n g : linguistic assimilation,
iHiitr.iic pluralism, vemacularization and internationalism.
Linguistic assimilation considers t h a t a n y o n e f o r m i n g p a r t o f a society,
O i'.inllcss o f t h e i r o r i g i n , s h o u l d l e a r n t h e d o m i n a n t l a n g u a g e o f t h a t
i ' l e l y . T h i s seems, prima facie, a reasonable decisin f o r t h e i n t e g r a t i o n
|)| m i n o r i t y g r o u p s , b u t i t raises t h e p r o b l e m o f c o n s e r v a t i o n a n d respect
Im m i n o r i t y g r o u p identities a n d c u l t u r a l heritage, w h i c h are often deemed
Mi d i s a p p e a r u n d e r t h i s m o t i v a t i o n f o r l a n g u a g e p l a n n i n g , f o r e x a m p l e
lln i ase o f R u s s i f i c a t i o n i n t h e f o r m e r S o v i e t U n i o n w h e r e S o v i e t r u l e r s
l l l r i l lo s p r e a d t h e R u s s i a n l a n g u a g e a n d c u l t u r e t h r o u g h o u t t h e w h o l e
Pnvicl U n i o n . A d i f f e r e n t a c t i o n c o u l d be s i m p l y o f f i c i a l neglect, i.e. t h e
lack ol o f f i c i a l actions u n d e r t a k e n t o preserve a language, w h i c h c a n also
I I ' I H I lo language a s s i m i l a t i o n .
In A u s t r a l i a , t h e r e w e r e a b o u t 2 0 0 l a n g u a g e s a t t h e t i m e o f t h e
|',inopean c o n q u e s t a n d o n l y a r o u n d 20 w e r e s t i l l s p o k e n b y y o u n g e r
i ' in i ations i n the 1990s. A m a j o r f a c t o r i n A b o r i g i n a l language d e a t h i n
\\ 11 alia was the l i n g u i s t i c a s s i m i l a t i o n p o l i c y u n d e r t a k e n u p t o the 1970s
i i l i t h e i r ' E n g l i s h o n l y ' p o l i c y i n schools. I n 1972 t h e a d v e n t o f a L a b o r
It ivcrnment meant the recognition of the r i g h t for all A b o r i g i n a l children
i " liecome l i t e r a t e i n t h e i r n a t i v e l a n g u a g e b e f o r e b e c o m i n g l i t e r a t e i n
I nglish. This resulted i n the i n t r o d u c t i o n o f b i l i n g u a l schools f o r A b o r i g i n a l
, I n i , l i e n i n v a r i o u s p a r t s o f t h e c o u n t r y . Today, they are m a i n l y s t i l l open
i n the N o r t h e r n Territories, w h e r e A b o r i g i n a l languages are m o s t l y spoken.
I n lliese b i l i n g u a l schools c h i l d r e n receive t h e i r i n t r o d u c t i o n t o l i t e r a c y
s k i l l s i n t h e i r n a t i v e l a n g u a g e a n d a l l t h e i r a c a d e m i c w o r k is i n E n g l i s h .
I hese p r o g r a m s have helped t o raise the status o f b o t h A b o r i g i n a l teachers
nuil A b o r i g i n a l languages b u t u n f o r t u n a t e l y t h e y have been u n d e r m i n e d
 128
AN INTRODUCTION TOSOCIOI INUlij
i n r e c e n t y e a r s ( S h o p e n , 1999). T h e s i t u a t i o n is c r i t i c a l as Al
languages i n A u s t r a l i a are s u f f e r i n g a n i m p o r t a n t decrease i n m i i i i l i
speakers i n spite o f the fact t h a t the delibrate linguistic assimihitu >< \
seems t o have ceased. Shopen (ibid.) p o i n t s o u t t h a t there is n o pe n u i l !
i n s t i t u t i o n a l s u p p o r t t h a t w o u l d h e l p d e v e l o p adequate s k i l l s , resoi|f|
a n d g u i d a n c e f o r these p r o g r a m s .
Linguistic pluralism, however, i m p l i e s the acceptance ol vnil
languages o r varieties, a n d it can be centered o n i n d i v i d u a l o r geogrnp'
criteria, i.e., a n i n d i v i d u a l m a y be s t i m u l a t e d t o m a i n t a i n his/her lat |
i n t h e case o f a m u l t i l i n g u a l e n v i r o n m e n t , w h e r e his/her hupil
represents a m i n o r i t y t h a t does n o t i d e n t i f y w i t h a specific g e o g r n p l i l
rea ( s u c h as a g r o u p o f i m m i g r a n t s i n a b i g c i t y ) ; or, m o r e p r o b a h l
t h e case o f a m u l t i l i n g u a l state t h a t a d o p t s v a r i o u s o f f i c i a l l a n g u a g e !
t h e y are s p o k e n i n d i f f e r e n t g e o g r a p h i c a l reas (e.g. F r e n c h a n d I i r h
s p e a k i n g Canad; F r e n c h a n d E n g l i s h - s p e a k i n g B e l g i u m ; a n d , l u *
and Afrikaans-speaking South Africa).
Vernacularization e n t a i l s t h e r e c o n s t r u c t i o n o r r e n e w a l o f a lanu.ll
t h a t is n o t u s e d b y a w i d e g r o u p o f speakers b u t a f t e r s o m e c h a m s
alphabet, p r o n u n c i a t i o n , r e l e x i c a l i z a t i o n , etc.) b e c o m e s w i d e s p i v . u l I
a d o p t e d as a n o f f i c i a l language (e.g. Tok P i s i n i n Papua N e w Guinea) <
Tok Pisin i n chapter 3 ) .
Intemationalism is reached w h e n t h e m o t i v a t i o n i n language p l a n n l
is to adopt a non-vernacular language f o r w i d e r i n t e r e t h n i c communicilltH|
as a p o l i t i c a l s o l u t i o n t o a n i n t e r n a l p r o b l e m o f t e n a r i s i n g f r o m eqiinll
p o w e r f u l m i n o r i t i e s , o n e o f t h e m a i m i n g at i m p o s i n g t h e i r languagi
t h e o f f i c i a l language, o r t h e language o f e d u c a t i o n a n d trade, f o r a l l (e,||,
English i n I n d i a a n d Singapore).
3.1. S o m e f a c t o r s affecting l a n g u a g e p l a n n i n g
The f o l l o w i n g significantly determine the development and lln
i n c i d e n c e o f l a n g u a g e p l a n n i n g i n a speech c o m m u n i t y .
a) S o c i o - d e m o g r a p h i c f a c t o r s p r o f o u n d l y affect language p l a i i n i i i |
as t h e n u m b e r o f l a n g u a g e s t h a t are s p o k e n a n d the n u m b e i ol
speakers m a y f a v o r t h e use o f one language o r t h e other.
b) L i n g u i s t i c f a c t o r s m a y a l s o p l a y a r o l e as t h e degree ol
d e v e l o p m e n t o f one language as w e l l as t h e existence o f a Iiterar)
t r a d i t i o n m a y be t a k e n i n t o a c c o u n t w h e n d e c i d i n g w h i c h langungi
s h o u l d be p r o m o t e d o r preserved.
129
I S o c i o - p s y c h o l o g i c a l f a c t o r s affect p e o p l e s a t t i t u d e t o w a r d s one
language o r the o t h e r a n d t h e i r acceptance i n a speech c o m m u n i t y .
d i P o l i t i c a l factors c a n i n f l u e n c e t h e a d o p t i o n o f a specific alphabet,
for example, the case o f t h e C y r i l l i c a l p h a b e t i n t r o d u c e d i n m i d d l e -
i c u t r a l Asia b y t h e Russians, a n d t h e a d o p t i o n o f the L a t i n alphabet
in Turkey.
II Keligious factors are also i m p o r t a n t . F o r instance Sudan, as a former
colony, h a d E n g l i s h as o f f i c i a l language (spoken b y a m i n o r i t y ) b u t
i his was changed to Arabic, a language spoken by h a l f the p o p u l a t i o n ,
because o f the s t r o n g e r p o s i t i o n o f I s l a m i n t h e c o u n t r y . T h e B i b l e
has also been t r a n s l a t e d i n t o m a n y d i f f e r e n t languages . 2
II,2. A c t i o n s i n l a n g u a g e p l a n n i n g
There f o l l o w f o u r s t a r t i n g p o i n t s t h a t l a n g u a g e planners have
l l M i l i l i o n a l l y a d o p t e d i n t h e i r t a s k o f l a n g u a g e p l a n n i n g a n d w h i c h are
l l l e i n p t s i n themselves t o describe t h e processes o r steps r a t h e r t h a n t h e
|
l l mis (please n o t e t h a t t h e f o l l o w i n g a c t i o n s are n o t m u t u a l l y exclusive
hu n i a y b e c o m p l e m e n t a r y ) :
a) S e l e c t i o n o f a n o n t i . M u l t i l i n g u a l c o u n t r i e s v e r y o f t e n n e e d t o
m a k e i m p o r t a n t decisions r e g a r d i n g t h e language o r languages t h a t
w i l l become official, o r s i m p l y the language for education o r any
i n s t i t u t i o n a l p u r p o s e . Sometimes, t h i s t u r n s i n t o a c r i t i c a l decisin
as r i v a l r y a m o n g d i f f e r e n t language g r o u p s m a y cause c o n f l i c t s as
some o f t h e m m a y t h i n k t h a t they are b e i n g disadvantaged. Because
o f this, i t is sometimes necessary t o i n t r o d u c e a language as a lingua
franca, w h i c h is t h e case o f E n g l i s h i n I n d i a a n d G h a n a . O n o t h e r
occasions, a p a r t i c u l a r v a r i e t y is chosen o r a n e w v a r i e t y is created.
A l l these decisions are o b v i o u s l y based o n p o l i t i c a l g r o u n d s .
b) Codification. Given the circumstance described i m m e d i a t e l y above,
i f a n i n d i g e n o u s l a n g u a g e is c h o s e n as t h e s t a n d a r d , i t m a y be
necessary t o m a k e some changes a n d adapt i t t o meet the
requirements of a language for w i d e r c o m m u n i c a t i o n w i t h i n a
m u l t i l i n g u a l country. Changes m a y be needed, f o r instance, to adapt
the language a n d update its vocabulary, t o adopt a new alphabet
or, simply, t o standardize a language t h a t previously was f o u n d o n l y
i n the spoken f o r m .
In ihe web page for lliis subjeel, some instances of the Bible being translated into
iilhei languages can be seen, for instance, the Bible in Swahili and Haitian Crele lnglish
 130
AN INTKOIMK T I O N T O S O C I O U N O I r . i
c) Modernization. Technological and scicnlific development.s |>i < >l mi
r e q u i r e m o d e r n i z a t i o n o s p e c i f i c v o c a b u l a r y a n d v e r y oftefl
decisin needs t o be m a d e o n w h e t h e r t o a d o p t l o a n w o r d s ol l
c o i n new t e r m s based o n indigenous roots. Language polli I
s o m e t i m e s g o b e y o n d a c t u a l l a n g u a g e e v o l u t i o n because o l ih
speedy t e c h n o l o g i c a l d e v e l o p m e n t t h a t c l e a r l y favors t h e ad< >\i i
of loan words.
d) I m p l e m e n t a t i o n . O n c e a decisin has b e e n m a d e , t h e choi
language needs t o be o f f i c i a l l y i m p l e m e n t e d a n d used i n a l l si >i i
o f o f f i c i a l f o r u m s : e d u c a t i o n , p a r l i a m e n t , m e d i a , etc. T h i s w |
u n d o u b t e d l y raise i t s s o c i a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n a n d i t w i l l b e c o i n . |
prestige language o r variety, p r o b a b l y used i n literary a n d acade
circles. E v e n t u a l l y , a n d as a r e s u l t o f c o n t i n u o u s a n d prest i}
use, i t w i l l s p r e a d as t h e n o r m , a n d i t s p r e s e n c e i n d i c t i o n a i le
g r a m m a r s a n d literary w o r k s w i l l consoldate its status as t h e n o r m
3.3. A i m s of l a n g u a g e p l a n n i n g
I n previous sections i t was said that there is a cise connection between
language p o l i c y a n d language p l a n n i n g and, as a m a t t e r o f fact, the f o n 1i. |
governs the latter. A given language policy w i t h far-reaching o r very p r o i i
a i m s affecting a speech c o m m u n i t y generally makes use o f m o r e d e f i n i l e
language p l a n n i n g a c t i o n s t o achieve these goals.
N a h i r ( 2 0 0 3 ) sets f o r t h eleven language p l a n n i n g f u n c t i o n s o r g o a l l
w h i c h c a n i n fact be c o m b i n e d t o h a n d l e t h e language-related p r o b l e m s
a n d needs o f s p e e c h c o m m u n i t i e s . T h i s a u t h o r p o i n t s o u t t h a t e a r l i c i
models, like the one i m m e d i a t e l y above, a t t e m p t t o analyze the steps taken
b y language policies o r t h e agencies/academies i n the process o f p l a n n i i i ) '
language. H i s classifcation, however, describes the f u n c t i o n s o r goals they
h a v e s o u g h t u n t i l n o w i n r e s p o n s e t o t h e i r l a n g u a g e - r e l a t e d needs
( c o m m u n i c a t i v e , p o l i t i c a l , s o c i a l , e c o n o m i c , r e l i g i o u s , etc.). Needs a n d
a s p i r a t i o n s are l i k e l y t o change i n t h e course o f t i m e .
a) L a n g u a g e p u r i f i c a t i o n c a n be d i v i d e d i n t o t w o types: e x t e r n a I
p u r i f i c a t i o n a n d i n t e r n a l p u r i f i c a t i o n . Extemalpurification consisis
o f t h e development o f p r e s c r i p t i o n s o f usage i n o r d e r t o protect the
language f r o m u n w a n t e d f o r e i g n influence b y means, f o r example,
o f a Language Academy. S o m e o f the actions t a k e n are the c r e a t i o n
of prescriptive grammars and dictionaries w h i c h contain the
n o r m a l i z e d use o f t h e l a n g u a g e a n d f o l l o w i n g t h e c r i t e r i a set o u l
b y the Academy. P a r t i c u l a r l y n o t o r i o u s i n t h i s respect is the c o n t r o l
131
over f o r e i g n l e x i c a l b o r r o w i n g s , e s p e c i a l l y w h e n t h e r e are
indigenous w o r d s that represent the same concept, a n d i n such
i a s e s a p u r i s t p o i n t o f v i e w is adopted. M o r e d i f f i c u l t is t h e case o f
recent t e c h n o l o g i c a l advances t h a t r e q u i r e , t o a l a r g e extent, the
i n c o r p o r a t i o n o f f o r e i g n w o r d s . Internal purification refers t o t h e
a c c e p t a n c e o f t h e c o d e as i t exists a t a c e r t a i n p o i n t i n h i s t o r y ,
p r o t e c t i n g i t f r o m u n d e s i r a b l e developments w h i c h are considered
as n o n - n o r m a t i v e ( i n c o r r e c t ) o r s i m p l y as d e v i a t i o n s f r o m t h e
s t a n d a r d . T h e g e n e r a t i o n o f these n o r m a t i v e p o l i c i e s a n d t h e i r
enforcement are tasks actively u n d e r t a k e n b y language academies.
/O L a n g u a g e r e v i v a l consists o f a n a t t e m p t t o r e v i t a l i z e a language
w i t h a s m a l l n u m b e r o f speakers (e.g., I r i s h a n d W e l s h ) , o r even a
1
c o m p l e t e l y dead language (e.g., H e b r e w a n d C o r n i s h ) , a n d t u r n i t
i n t o a m e a n s o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n f o r a speech c o m m u n i t y . S o m e
instances o f t h i s p h e n o m e n o n have b e e n seen since t h e m i d d l e o f
the n i n e t e e n t h century, together w i t h general s u p p o r t f o r n a t i o n a l
identity w h i c h entails the a d o p t i o n a n d standardization o f a national
language.
c) L a n g u a g e r e f o r m involves t h e i n c o r p o r a t i o n o f specific changes
i n t h e l a n g u a g e (e.g., s p e l l i n g , g r a m m a r , p r o n u n c i a t i o n , etc.)
a t t e m p t i n g t o f a c i l i t a t e i t s use. T h e a i m o f t h i s ' r e f o r m ' c a n be t o
facilitate the use o f the language b y its users, the internationalization
o f t h e language, o r m a n y o t h e r f a c t o r s , b u t always d e p e n d i n g o n
p o l i t i c a l , i d e o l o g i c a l , r e l i g i o u s o r e c o n o m i c a l factors. Instances o f
l a n g u a g e r e f o r m s c a n be f o u n d i n m a n y l a n g u a g e s s i n c e t h e
b e g i n n i n g of the n i n e t e e n t h century (e.g., Icelandic, Germn, Greek,
Spanish, etc.) b u t t h e m o s t representative example is Turkish. K e m a l
Atatrk u n d e r t o o k t h e m o d e r n i z a t i o n o f T u r k e y a n d d e c l a r e d i t a
l a y c o u n t r y ; he u r g e d a h u g e r e f o r m i n t h e T u r k i s h lexicn a n d
o r t h o g r a p h y , a d o p t i n g t h e Romn s c r i p t instead o f t h e A r a b script.
d) L a n g u a g e s t a n d a r d i z a t i o n implies a n a t t e m p t t o adopt a language,
o r v a r i e t y o f language, as the m a j o r language o f a regin o r n a t i o n
for wider c o m m u n i c a t i o n w i t h official, educational, commercial
o r o t h e r f u n c t i o n s . L a n g u a g e s t a n d a r d i z a t i o n is seen i n t h e
u n i f i c a t i o n o f s m a l l p o l i t i c a l u n i t s , t h e divisin o f o t h e r s a n d the
recent i n d e p e n d e n c e o f f o r m e r c o l o n i a l t e r r i t o r i e s .
e) L a n g u a g e s p r e a d involves a n a t t e m p t t o increase t h e n u m b e r of
speakers of a p a r t i c u l a r language, n o r m a l l y at the expense of another
language or languages. This m o t i v a t i o n for language shift often
responds t o p o l i t i c a l considerations i n m u l t i l i n g u a l countries. Some
 AN INTKOIMK IIONTOSOCIOUNOIIK
e x a m p l e s c a n be f o u n d i n f o r m e r c o l o n i a l t e r r i t o r i e s t l i a l l>
i n d e p e n d e n t states d u r i n g the n i n e t e e n t h century. Language spu
is necessarily c o n n e c t e d t o language s t a n d a r d i z a t i o n b y del i i til|
as t h e expansin o f a l a n g u a g e p r o m o t e d b y l a n g u a g e p l a n n j
a g e n c i e s e n d e a v o r s t o i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z e o n e l a n g u a g e f o i 10
p o l i t i c a l o r e c o n o m i c r e a s o n (e.g., t h e U S S R a n d Quebec).
/)
f) L e x i c a l m o d e r n i z a t i o n c o n s i s t s o f t h e a d a p t a t i o n o f e x i s i l
vocabulary, o r the c r e a t i o n o f n e w one, t o assist s t a n d a r d languttg
t h a t m a y h a v e b o r r o w e d f o r e i g n v o c a b u l a r y t o o fasl
a c c o m m o d a t e i t t o t h e i r o r t h o g r a p h y , p r o n u n c i a t i o n , etc. N.ilii
(ibid.) d i s t i n g u i s h e s t w o t r e n d s i n t e r m i n o l o g i c a l w o r k : a) as p|
o f either the process o f c o d i f i c a t i o n o r i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f langi i.ir
seeking revival (e.g., H e b r e w ) o r r e f o r m (e.g., T u r k i s h ) t h a t involvel
d e v e l o p i n g p r e v i o u s l y u n w r i t t e n languages a n d a i m s at b r i d f . m i
the gap between t h e m a n d m o d e r n k n o w l e d g e a n d technologv; and
b) as p a r t o f a process o f m o d e r n i z a t i o n o f s t a n d a r d languages l lint
h a v e b o r r o w e d c o n c e p t s a n d t e r m s h a v i n g a lexicn u n p r e p a n I
f o r those changes, i.e., t h e n a t u r a l d e v e l o p m e n t o f the language h j
n o t s u p p l i e d the relevant t e r m i n o l o g y a n d i t is necessary t o pr< vld
t h e t e r m s t h a t have c o m e u p as a r e s u l t o f social a n d technolo'i, ul
advance.
Lexical modernization is applied i n m a n y countries and constili n.
i n itself a n effect o f globalization w i t h the resulting increase i n conee| >i
b o r r o w i n g f r o m l e a d i n g i n t e r n a t i o n a l languages s u c h as E n g l i s h
I n t e r n a t i o n a l g l o b a l i z e d languages e s p e c i a l l y E n g l i s h a r t
exercising a considerable influence over the rest o f languages i n thf
w o r l d due to the g r o w t h of i n t e r n a t i o n a l relations and m o b i l i u
Language p l a n n i n g agencies collect new ideas a n d concepts i m p o r t e d
i n t o t h e i r c o m m u n i t y a n d adapt or crate new vocabulary to designatl
t h e m . L e x i c a l m o d e r n i z a t i o n has been p r a c t i s e d i n m a n y countries
a r o u n d the w o r l d such as: Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Israel.
Hungary, France, V i e t n a m , I n d i a , etc.
g) T e r m i n o l o g y u n i f i c a t i o n t a k e s p l a c e w h e n i t is necessary t o
establish u n i f i e d terminologies, m a i n l y i n the technological and
s c i e n t i f i c d o m a i n s , i n o r d e r t o d i m i n i s h a m b i g u i t y . A g a i n t h i s is
largely a n effect o f g l o b a l i z a t i o n a n d cross c u l t u r a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n
i n the present w o r l d .
h) S t y l i s t i c s i m p l i f i c a t i o n is f o u n d w h e n a language use needs to be
disentangled i n o r d e r t o reduce c o m m u n i c a t i o n a m b i g u i t y between
t w o groups, f o r instance, professionals a n d b u r e a u c r a t s o n t h e one
I I I n d a n d o r d i n a r y people o n t h e other. S u c h a s i t u a t i o n may have
been caused b y the use of a n a r c h a i c o r l i t e r a r y style. Instances o f
such stylistically c o m p l e x language, b o t h i n terms o f lexical intricacy
a n d g r a m m a t i c a l e l a b o r a t i o n , c a n be f o u n d i n l e g a l a n d m e d i c a l
language.
I nlerlingual communication implies the adoption of a LWC w i t h
llie i n t e n t i o n o f f a c i l i t a t i n g c o m m u n i c a t i o n b e t w e e n m e m b e r s o f
different speech c o m m u n i t i e s . T h i s lingua franca c a n take t h e f o r m
ol a n a u x i l i a r y o r a r t i f i c i a l l a n g u a g e s u c h as E s p e r a n t o . M o r e
c o m m o n l y , a n d as a result o f the spread o f Anglo-Saxon c u l t u r e and
the l e a r n i n g o f E n g l i s h as a n L 2 , E n g l i s h is f r e q u e n t l y u s e d these
days as a lingua franca i n d i f f e r e n t p a r t s o f t h e w o r l d .
A n o t h e r w a y i n w h i c h i n t e r l i n g u a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n c a n be
a t t a i n e d is b y i m p r o v i n g m u t u a l i n t e l l i g i b i l i t y b e t w e e n speakers o f
cognate languages. T h i s can be a c c o m p l i s h e d b y p a r t i a l l y
s i a n d a r d i z i n g the v a r i o u s l i n g u i s t i c codes i n o r d e r to m i n i m i z e
differences. N o r d i c language agencies, f o r instance, are c o m m i t t e d
l o c o o p e r a t e a n d a v o i d u n n e c e s s a r y c h a n g e s (e.g., N o r w e g i a n ,
D a n i s h , I c e l a n d i c , S w e d i s h , etc.)
/) L a n g u a g e m a i n t e n a n c e consists i n t h e p r e s e r v a t i o n o f a g r o u p s
native language w h e n p o l i t i c a l , social, economic, educational or
any o t h e r pressures t h r e a t e n its f u r t h e r existence b y causing a
decline i n status o r i n the n u m b e r of speakers. Language
m a i n t e n a n c e c a n be exercised at t w o levis; f i r s t w i t h t h e a i m o f
preserving a widely spoken language f r o m u n w a n t e d foreign
influence; a n d , second, as a p r o t e c t i o n o f a m i n o r i t y ethnic language
w h o s e a c q u i s i t i o n a n d use needs t o be e n c o u r a g e d b y m e a n s o f
s o c i a l , e d u c a t i o n a l o r p o l i t i c a l a r r a n g e m e n t s . I n t h e case o f N e w
Z e a l a n d , f o r i n s t a n c e , speakers o f A b o r i g i n a l l a n g u a g e s o f t e n
perceive t h e i r language as h a v i n g a l o w e r status t h a n E n g l i s h , w h i c h
d i s c o u r a g e s t h e m f r o m t a k i n g t h e i r p r o g e n i t o r s as m o d e l s a n d
m a i n t a i n i n g the use o f the t r a d i t i o n a l languages. E n g l i s h is,
therefore, associated w i t h social success a n d e c o n o m i c power.
k) A u x i l i a r y - c o d e s t a n d a r d i z a t i o n e n t a i l s t h e m o d i f i c a t i o n o f
a u x i l i a r y aspects o f t h e language (signs f o r t h e deaf, place ames,
rules o f t r a n s c r i p t i o n , etc.) to lessen a m b i g u i t y o r t o satisfy changing
s o c i a l , p o l i t i c a l o r o t h e r recent needs. C h a n g i n g p l a c e ames c a n
serve t h e f u n c t i o n s o f t e r m i n o l o g y u n i f i c a t i o n o r s t y l i s t i c
s i m p l i f i c a t i o n , b u t m o s t often they j u s t take place w h e n a given
p o l i t i c a l p a r t y is i n power.
 AN INTRODUCTION TO SOCIO
I t s h o u l d be t a k e n i n t o a c c o u n l l l i a l t h e l a n g u a g e p l a n n i i i f
d e s c r i b e d above are n o t m u t u a l l y exclusive a n d t w o o r m o r e p h e i i o
c a n co-occur. O n some occasions the goals a n d t h e p r o c e d u r e s can
be c o n t r a d i c t o r y as t h e r e m a y b e s o m e tensin b e t w e e n , f o r exti
language p u r i f i c a t i o n a n d l e x i c a l m o d e r n i z a t i o n .
(Please go t o the exercises s e c t i o n a n d d o exercise 3.)
3.4. I n d i v i d u a l l a n g u a g e p l a n n i n g
O n some occasions language p l a n n i n g does n o t need t o be a n i n 111 I
f r o m g o v e r n m e n t s o r p r o m i n e n t i n s t i t u t i o n s b u t t h e y c a n also In
v e n t u r e o f individuis. T h a t is t h e case, f o r i n s t a n c e , o f t h e N o t v\
language. Today there are t w o o f f i c i a l f o r m s o f N o r w e g i a n : Bokml I1 >
language) a n d Nynorsk ( n e w N o r w e g i a n ) . Bokml is also c a l l e d Ril H
(national language) a n d Dano-Norwegian. I t was influenced by h . m i
w h i c h w a s t h e d o m i n a n t l a n g u a g e w h i l e N o r w a y w a s u n d e r Da ni si i i
(1397-1814). Nynorsk is also k n o w n as Landsml ( c o u n t r y languav> |
is based o n r u r a l dialects u n i n f l u e n c e d b y D a n i s h .
B y t h e m i d d l e o f t h e 1 9 t h c e n t u r y some a t t e m p t s were m a d e to en ll
a p u r e l y N o r w e g i a n language. O n the one h a n d , K n u d K n u d s e n undei Im
a revisin o f w r i t t e n D a n i s h w i t h the a i m o f i n c o r p o r a t i n g c o l l o q u i . i l 11|
f o r m s c o m i n g f r o m N o r w e g i a n dialects. O n the o t h e r h a n d , a n o t h e r g m u
of specialists, led by the N o r w e g i a n p h i l o l o g i s t a n d lexicographer l v "
Aasen, u n d e r t o o k t h e t a s k o f f o r g i n g a N o r w e g i a n l a n g u a g e w h i c h w
conceived f r o m a c o m p r e h e n s i v e s t u d y o f t h e dialects s p o k e n a l l ovei l l i
c o u n t r y a n d w h i c h were at t i m e s very d i s s i m i l a r due to geographli
isolation. The o u t c o m e o f this huge project was a language called LandsmA
('the language o f t h e c o u n t r y ' ) w h i c h is c u r r e n t l y k n o w n as Nynorsk. Vi
some t i m e Nynorsk was p e r c e i v e d b y N o r w e g i a n s as r u s t i c a n d 'vulgin
T h i s s i t u a t i o n h a s c h a n g e d o v e r t h e y e a r s . Nynorsk r e c e i v e d ofii In
r e c o g n i t i o n i n 1885 t h r o u g h a p a r l i a m e n t a r y r e s o l u t i o n . I n 1930 a lu
was passed i n the P a r l i a m e n t w h i c h stated t h a t o f f i c i a l d o c u m e n t s hai I ta
use b o t h v a r i e t i e s a n d , as a m a t t e r o f fact, i f a c i t i z e n sends a n y sor! o|
w r i t t e n request t o t h e g o v e r n m e n t s/he has t h e r i g h t t o o b t a i n a n answ i i
i n the language t h a t was u s e d i n his/her request.
Nowadays, f r o m the e i g h t h level of p r i m a r y school o n w a r d s , both
v a r i e t i e s a r e c o m p u l s o r y , o n e as t h e m a i n l a n g u a g e a n d a n o t h c i al
secondary language, a c c o r d i n g t o t h e s t u d e n t s c h o i c e . B o t h Bokml and
Nynorsk are e m p l o y e d by the g o v e r n m e n t , the schools, a n d t h e m u M
135
i i l i i all h o u g h Bokml is s t i l l the m o s t w i d e l y used. I t s h o u l d also be
t l n h i l o u t t h a t i t r e m a i n s the language m o r e c o m m o n l y u s e d i n u r b a n
iir. w b creas Nynorsk is e m p l o y e d m a i n l y i n w e s t e r n r u r a l reas a n d
\\\\", in the w e s t l i k e B e r g e n . I n o p p o s i t i o n t o o t h e r m i n o r i t y languages,
'\ih>/ -.k a n d Bokml are m u t u a l l y i n t e l l i g i b l e , so these v a r i e t i e s d o n o t
il lo be u s e d exclusively w i t h i n a m i n o r i t y g r o u p .
I'li n i l o the exercises s e c t i o n a n d d o exercises 4 a n d 5.)
MINORITY L A N G U A G E S
Policy m a k e r s i n m u l t i l i n g u a l n a t i o n s need t o m a k e c e r t a i n i m p o r t a n t
is r e g a r d i n g t h e s t a t u s o f t h e l a n g u a g e s i n c o n t a c t i n a g i v e n
i i i o i y: f i r s t , arises t h e c h o i c e o f o f f i c i a l o r n a t i o n a l l a n g u a g e , w h i c h
l l be p r o b l e m a t i c i n the case o f developing nations c o m p o s e d o f different
l l n i u g r o u p s ; second, d e c i s i o n s need t o b e m a d e r e g a r d i n g i n s t r u c t i o n
ncbools, w h i c h w i l l d e f i n i t e l y d e t e r m i n e n o t o n l y t h e g e n e r a l a t t i t u d e
II (Is a language b u t also the p o i n t o f v i e w o f c o m i n g generations; a n d ,
i n l . o n s o m e o c c a s i o n s t h e r e is a l s o a n e e d t o d e c i d e o n t h e
l a r d i z a t i o n p r o c e d u r e s s u c h as t h e c h o i c e o f a n a l p h a b e t o r a g i v e n
i ii-i v, especially i n t h e case o f languages h a v i n g s c r i p t s d i f f e r e n t t o t h e
ol c u r r e n t l y i n t e r n a t i o n a l i z e d languages.
The i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f m u l t i l i n g u a l p o l i c i e s i n m u l t i l i n g u a l states t o
riilate the interaction a m o n g different language groups i n a m o d e r n
HMlion o r s t a t e is a r e s u l t o f t h e s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c d e m a n d s o f m o d e r n
ICKieties. I t c a n have t h r e e possible o u t e o m e s t h a t d e t e r m i n e t h e degree
ni success o r f a i l u r e o f a specific language p o l i c y :
a) L a n g u a g e m a i n t e n a n c e , i.e., as a r e s u l t o f a c o u r s e o f a c t i o n , t h e
s u r v i v a l o f a s p e c i f i c l a n g u a g e , e n d a n g e r e d o r n o t , m a y be
d e t e r m i n e d b y p o l i t i c a l decisions.
b) B i l i n g u a l i s m seems t o be one o f t h e m o s t desirable o u t e o m e s i n a
p r o l o n g e d c o n t a c t o f language g r o u p s as i t guarantees the s u r v i v a l
o f t h e l a n g u a g e s a n d seems t o be t h e best w a y f o r m u l t i c u l t u r a l
and/or m u l t i e t h n i c societies t o reach a c o m m o n g r o u n d o n linguistic
a n d s o c i o p o l i t i c a l fields.
c) L a n g u a g e shift seems t o be a n o t h e r possible d e v e l o p m e n t a n d it
w o u l d n o t e n t a i l one o f the m o r e d e s i r a b l e o u t e o m e s as i t c a n give
w a y t o l a n g u a g e loss. However, i t is necessary t o u n d e r s t a n d that
l a n g u a g e d e v e l o p m e n t does n o t d e p e n d solely o n l a n g u a g e p o l i c y
decisin m a k i n g b u t also o n s o c i o c u l t u r a l forces. M o r e o f t e n t h a n
 136 AN I N I K O I M K T I O N T O . M M K H . I N I . U
not, the spread o f a language i n terms o f n u m b e r s o f speakei t f
place at the expense o f a n o t h e r o r o t h e r languages. Paulson (I
9) supports this p o i n t b y stating that e t h n i c groups w i t h i n a m<
nation-state usually shift t o the language spoken b y the pre-ei mu
group, assuming that the adequate incentive has been prvido I 11
p o i n t c e r t a i n l y has h u g e i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r t h e i m p l e m e n l a l i o i i
language policies as i t c a n have w i d e r a n g i n g repercussions foi d
f u t u r e o f a language o r t h e i n t e g r a t i o n o f a n i m m i g r a n t g r o u p
5. L A N G U A G E S H I F T I N M I N O R I T Y L A N G U A G E S
A t t i t u d i n a l factors also play a role i n language maintenance o r langu
shift. V o l u n t a r y i n d i v i d u a l o r s m a l l g r o u p m i g r a t i o n t y p i c a l l y results lu |
q u i c k language s h i f t , whereas large g r o u p m i g r a t i o n o f t e n occasions 11u>
m a i n t e n a n c e o f s o c i a l a n d l i n g u i s t i c h a l l m a r k s . T h i s is t h e case, l o f
i n s t a n c e o f S w e d i s h i n F i n l a n d o r F r e n c h i n Canad, w h e r e a m i n o i ' l M j
e t h n i c g r o u p i n d e m o g r a p h i c decay uses its language as a sign o f culi i n J
a n d social identity. T h i s is m o r e o f t e n so i n m i n o r i t y groups w i t h a si |i
sense o f i d e n t i t y o r w i t h cise c u l t u r a l t r a d i t i o n s a n d vales because llit
use o f a d i f f e r e n t language w i l l s l o w d o w n a n d occasionally imped
their assimilation by the d o m i n a n t ethnic group. I n b o t h examples repc ules!
above, recent censuses s h o w h o w the m i n o r i t y languages t e n d t o decren i
i n n u m b e r o f speakers over the years. Besides, as Paulston (1994) suggesl
m a i n t a i n e d g r o u p b i l i n g u a l i s m is r a t h e r u n u s u a l because i f there is aci i
to t h e d o m i n a n t language, a n d s o c i o e c o n o m i c i n c e n t i v e s , speakers will
most likely eventually shift t o the d o m i n a n t language, a l t h o u g h this proi o
m a y take g e n e r a t i o n s . A n e x a m p l e o f t h i s k i n d o f language s h i f t can In
c l e a r l y seen i n A u s t r a l i a w i t h a b o r i g i n a l l a n g u a g e s . A b o r i g i n a l speei Ii
c o m m u n i t i e s are s h r i n k i n g a n d n e w g e n e r a t i o n s t e n d t o a d h e r e to i In
d o m i n a n t language a n d c u l t u r e as i t presents l o t s o f social, e d u c a t i o n a l
and economic advantages c o m p a r e d to the t r a d i t i o n a l way o f lili
Nevertheless, l a n g u a g e m a i n t e n a n c e is n o t a l w a y s necessary f o r llie
continuation o f c u l t u r a l a n d e t h n i c i d e n t i t y .
Notice the f o l l o w i n g example o f language shift w i t h i n the U n i t e d Stales
and h o w c o n v e r g i n g c i r c u m s t a n c e s c a n i n f l u e n c e t h e r a t e o f l a n g u a g l
Bhift:
For example, i n Pittsburgh the Greeks shift over a four general ion
span compared w i t h the three generation shift of the Italians. Some
factors which contribute to the slower Greek shift are (a) knowledge and
access to a standardized, w r i t t e n language w i t h cultural prestige aml
tradition, which is taught by the Greek churches i n Pittsburgh, and (h)
arranged marriage partners directly f r o m Greece ( w h o are then
m o n o l i n g u a l i n Greek). The Italians i n contrast speak/spoke a non-
standard, non-written dialect w i t h no prestige, and they shared their
Romn Catholic churches with the English-speaking Irish, typically with
Irish priests and nuns, so they found no language maintenance support
in the churches. or was there any pressure for endogamy as long as
the marriage was w i t h i n the Romn Catholic Church.
(Paulston, 1994: 15-16)
I uiguage s h i f t is n o t a l w a y s t h e o u t e o m e o f language c o n t a c t , one o f
lliein a m i n o r i t y language. Languages c a n also be m a i n t a i n e d d u e t o self-
llliposed o r e x t e r n a l l y i m p o s e d b a r r i e r s . T h e f o r m e r c o u l d b e caused b y
i' |i i il< >gical o r religious constraints t h a t t r y t o preserve some sort o f identity,
I I I M I l l i e l a t t e r c o u l d orignate, f o r i n s t a n c e , b e c a u s e o f s o m e k i n d o f
| * o g r a p h i c a l i s o l a t i o n . A n o t h e r p o s s i b i l i t y is a diglossic s i t u a t i o n w h e r e
i >r m o r e languages are used f o r d i f f e r e n t f u n c t i o n a l p u r p o s e s .
I anguage p l a n n i n g does n o t o n l y refer t o t h e a t t e m p t s m a d e t o solve
liini'iiage-related p r o b l e m s w i t h m i n o r i t y languages i n m o d e r n n a t i o n s 3
U I l a n g u a g e p l a n n i n g a l s o , a n d m o s t o f t e n these d a y s , r e f e r s t o a
\c s e t t i n g o f g o a l s r e g a r d i n g s o c i a l a n d l i n g u i s t i c aspects i n
d e r n societies, t h e p u r s u i n g o f goals a n d m e a n s t h a t w i l l d e t e r m i n e
lln l u t u r e o f n a t i o n a l a n d f o r e i g n l a n g u a g e s i n a g i v e n c o u n t r y ( f o r
i n i.mee, t h e s t a t u s a n d t e a c h i n g o f S p a n i s h , as a n a t i v e l a n g u a g e , a n d
I i i i l i s h , F r e n c h o r G e r m n as a f o r e i g n l a n g u a g e i n t r a d i t i o n a l l y
im n i o l i n g u a l regin s u c h as A n d a l u s i a o r Castile-La M a n c h a i n Spain.)
(l'lease g o t o t h e exercises s e c t i o n a n d d o exercise 6.)
i. SOME PARTICULAR SOCIOLINGUISTIC SITUATIONS
(>. I . I n d i a
This c o u n t r y gained independence i n 1947 a n d the federal g o v e r n m e n
in I n d i a e s t a b l i s h e d a l a n g u a g e policy. E n g l i s h , w o u l d be s u b s t i t u t e d b
11indi as t h e o f f i c i a l l a n g u a g e a n d , as t h e c o u n t r y w a s d i v i d e d i n states
u isi o f t h e m h a v i n g t h e i r o w n language. E a c h r e g i o n a l language w o u l
non due to immigration).
 AN INTKOIMK TION T o SOCloi | N ( i l
also g a i n t h e s t a t u s o f o f f i c i a l l a n g u a g e i n e a c h state. l l w.e.
a c k n o w l e d g e d i n t h e n a t i o n s e o n s t i t u t i o n . I n 1950 t h e C o n s l i l t i
r e c o g n i z e d fifteen m a j o r languages: f o u r l i t e r a r y languages b e l o n g l l
the D r a v i d i a n g r o u p a n d eleven l i t e r a r y languages o f the Indi i \
g r o u p . A n u m b e r o f actions w e r e u n d e r t a k e n i n t h i s respect (translnll
4
n e w d i c t i o n a r i e s , encyclopaedias, n e w t y p e w r i t e r s , etc.) w i t h l l n - uirfl
s p r e a d i n g t h e use o f H i n d i a n d o f d e t a c h i n g i t f r o m t h e f o r m e r 11 ' I . MI
language. However, this language p l a n n i n g d i d n o t succeed a mi i
decades later, E n g l i s h was r e i n t r o d u c e d a n d a d o p t e d as the second < >l I n
language . I n 1956, L i n g u i s t i c States were f o r m e d a n d m o s t o f t h e m i I "
3
the m a j o r i t y l a n g u a g e as t h e o f f i c i a l language i n the state, except l< n i l
n o r t h e a s t e r n h i l l states w h e r e there seems n o t t o b e a d o m i n a n t langU
( K r i s h n a m u r t i , 1999).
N o w a d a y s , m u l t i l i n g u a l i s m is encouraged i n I n d i a a n d m a n y c h i l d n
l e a r n E n g l i s h a n d H i n d i i n t h e D e v a n a g a r i s c r i p t i n s c h o o l , the ofiii i
language o f the country, apart f r o m t h e i r m o t h e r tongue, spoken al h< >
a n d t h e o f f i c i a l l a n g u a g e o f t h e i r state. Today, t h e r e a r e s t i l l sei lu
p r o b l e m s r e g a r d i n g the spread o f H i n d i t h r o u g h o u t the c o u n t r y a n d lint
is caused b y t h e l i t e r a r y n a t u r e o f H i n d i a n d i t s differences f r o m ol In i
l o c a l a n d r e g i o n a l varieties a l l t h i s r e s u l t i n g i n m u l t i l i n g u a l i s m .
A t t h e m o m e n t , t h e c e n t r a l g o v e r n m e n t i n I n d i a ( N e w D e l h i ) de
w i t h a l l types o f issues r e l a t e d t o i n t e r n a t i o n a l p o l i c y a n d t h e c o m
interests o f the I n d i a n people. T h e State g o v e r n m e n t , however, looks al'lcf
local a n d r e g i o n a l concerns a n d i n m a n y instances, especially i n the soul
t h e l a n g u a g e u s e d is n e i t h e r H i n d i o r E n g l i s h , as i n t h e cen ral
g o v e r n m e n t , b u t a local language. F o r years there has been a n atteni| il 11
i n t r o d u c e a 'Three Language F o r m u l a ' i n schools a i m i n g at p r o v i d i n .
e v e r y h i g h - s c h o o l s t u d e n t w i t h a c o m m a n d o f t w o m o d e r n Indian
languages (one o f t h e m b e i n g H i n d i ) a n d E n g l i s h , b u t t h i s endeavor li.r.
p r o v e d unsuccessful. E n g l i s h has spread a n d is t h e language p r e f e r i d I m
the u n i v e r s i t i e s a n d t h e language o f p u b l i c a t i o n i n l e a r n e d j o u r n a l s , hu
i t is also t h e l a n g u a g e o f h i g h e r c o u r t s , p a r l i a m e n t a r y debate, i n d u s i i v
e c o n o m i c t r a n s a c t i o n s a n d i n t e r n a t i o n a l trade.
T h e case o f I n d i a is a g o o d e x a m p l e o f h o w g o v e r n m e n t i n s t i t u t i o n s
s o m e t i m e s n e e d t o engage i n t h e t a s k o f m a k i n g f a r - r e a c h i n g decisions.
These, however, are o b v i o u s l y easier t o a p p l y i n s m a l l e r c o u n t r i e s w i l h
less i n h a b i t a n t s a n d a s m a l l e r n u m b e r o f languages i n v o l v e d .
' FnrtVh 1 9 9 2 ' t h r e t m o r e g a g e s were added to this list.
l a n u
English was grven the status of an 'Associate Official' language.
,|
I
fj>'. New Z e a l a n d
Ahnosl all M a o r i s i n N e w Zealand speak E n g l i s h a n d a large p r o p o r t i o n
til llie voung people are b i l i n g u a l . However, m a n y youngsters especially
I n , i u e s d o n o t speak M a o r i a n y m o r e . M a o r i is e n d a n g e r e d f o r several
M'II . m i s . First, E n g l i s h is the language o f education; second, M a o r i is
||niken m o r e c o m m o n l y i n r u r a l reas a n d people prefer t o live i n cities
altere K n g l i s h is spoken.
I n 1999 t h e p o p u l a t i o n o f fluent M a o r i speakers w a s a b o u t 35.000,
11 8 p e r c e n t o f t h e t o t a l M a o r i p o p u l a t i o n i n N e w Z e a l a n d
(Mi ( allery, 1999). F r o m the late 1960s measures were t a k e n w i t h the a i m
I i v i n l r o d u c i n g M a o r i i n p r i m a r y schools as w e l l as i n universities. These
n e usures m e t w i t h l i t t l e success d u e t o t h e l o w s t a t u s g i v e n t o t h e i r
language i n s o c i e t y a n d t h e l a c k o f r e c o g n i t i o n o f M a o r i as a n a t i o n a l
i i l l u ial l a n g u a g e . I n t h e l a t e 1990s t h e b i l i n g u a l M a o r i a n d E n g l i s h -
feeaking p o p u l a t i o n c o n s i s t e d m a i n l y o f a n age g r o u p o v e r 60 w h o s e
tVscendants d i d n o t speak M a o r i as a m o t h e r tongue.
I'he s i t u a t i o n w a s s u c h t h a t t h e g e n e r a t i o n b e a r i n g c h i l d r e n d i d n o t ,
h\d large, speak M a o r i as a m o t h e r tongue, a n d there was n o w a y they
Id teach t h a t language t o t h e i r c h i l d r e n . The M a o r i l a n g u a g e seemed
l l stined t o disappear i n N e w Z e a l a n d . However, the s i t u a t i o n s t a r t e d t o
h.inge t h a n k s t o a n i n n o v a t i v e e d u c a t i o n m o v e m e n t w h i c h b e g a n at the
1
I n e school level i n the early 1980s w i t h a n imaginative idea w h i c h involved
r i i n d p a r e n t s as a f u n d a m e n t a l c o m p o n e n t i n t h e e d u c a t i o n o f t h e i r
r i . u i d c h i l d r e n . I n 1999, o v e r 7 0 0 Kohanga ( p r e s c h o o l l a n g u a g e nests)
I n s i m e t e d m o r e t h a n 12.000 c h i l d r e n i n t h e language o f t h e i r ancestors
[ M i Caffery, 1999) passing o n the language, t h e c u l t u r e a n d t h e t r a d i t i o n s
ni llie M a o r i s d i r e c t l y f r o m t h e i r g r a n d p a r e n t s , u s i n g M a o r i as t h e o n l y
Innguage o f t e a c h i n g a n d c o n v e r s a t i o n . N o w a d a y s , t h e l a n g u a g e a n d
i usioms o f t h e N e w Z e a l a n d A b o r i g i n e s seem t o have a f u t u r e .
In spite o f these efforts t o m a i n t a i n the M a o r i c u l t u r e a n d language,
llie lack o f government s u p p o r t o r b i l i n g u a l p r o g r a m s i n the p u b l i c
e d u c a t i o n a l system m e a n t t h a t c h i l d r e n c o m i n g f r o m Kohanga w e r e n o t
nhle to m a i n t a i n t h e i r M a o r i language. After c o n t i n u o u s pressures a l l that
l l i e M a o r i c o m m u n i t y o b t a i n e d w a s t h e inclusin o f a M a o r i - s p e a k i n g
c o m m u n i t y language assistant i n schools w h i c h was insufficient l o
i'u.II antee c o n t i n u e d M a o r i language development. Later, a self-determincd
group o f p a r e n t s t o o k t h e i n i t i a t i v e a n d e s t a b l i s h e d t h e K K M (Kura
Kanpapa Maori), a n i m m e r s i o n m o v e m e n t t h a t settled s o m e i n d e p e n d e n l
i i n i n e r s i o n schools i n o r d e r t o let t h e i r c h i l d r e n d e v e l o p t h e i r l a n g u a g e
 140
AN INTRODUCTION TO SOCIO
skills a l t e r the Kohanga. T h i s m o v e m e n t has c l a i m e d b o t h govern
r e c o g n i t i o n a n d f u n d i n g b u t has o n l y g a i n e d p a r t i a l s u p p o r l . KK \
e m p l o y s a n d t r a i n s fluent speakers o f M a o r i a n d o n l y accepls r h l l
c o m i n g f r o m t h e Kohanga as t h e y r e q u i r e f u l l M a o r i i m m e r s i o n i. >
first 4-6 years a n d d e m a n d active p a r e n t a l i n v o l v e m e n t t o spe; i k M n I
h o m e . U n d e r these c i r c u m s t a n c e s , i t is a very l o w p e r c e n t a j e " I M , i
speaking c h i l d r e n t h a t can have access t o t h i s t y p e o f educa i n ni w l l
f u r t h e r g o v e r n m e n t a l s u p p o r t ( M c C a f f e r y , 1999). T h e f u t u r e " I
language, l i k e m a n y o t h e r s a r o u n d t h e w o r l d , d e p e n d s t o a largo 0 H |
o n government support and funding.
6.3. T h e C a n a d i a n e x p e r i e n c e
I n 1982, Canad b e c a m e a c o n s t i t u t i o n a l l y b i l i n g u a l c o u n t i \
b i l i n g u a l i s m contines t o be a s o c i o p o l i t i c a l issue i n t h i s c o u n l i \j
B y m e a n s o f t h i s r e c e n t C o n s t i t u t i o n , t h e E n g l i s h r i g h t s i n Q u e b o u,
p r o t e c t e d as m u c h as t h e F r e n c h r i g h t s o u t s i d e Q u e b e c . H o w c \ i
French rights were revoked i n the new province of M a n i t o b a a n d i
French-speaking p o p u l a t i o n saw themselves c i r c u m s c r i b e d t o the provf
o f Q u e b e c , w h i c h is r u l e d b y t h e E n g l i s h - s p e a k i n g M o n t r e a l I
p a r t i c u l a r s i t u a t i o n gave w a y t o f r e q u e n t social a n d p o l i t i c a l tensii M
t h a t p a r t o f Canad a n d , n o t s u r p r i s i n g l y , language is perceived as a l
of i d e n t i t y and c u l t u r a l heritage t h a t unifies members of the French <>i |u
c o m m u n i t y w h i c h r e p r e s e n t s a p p r o x i m a t e l y a 3 0 p e r c e n t o f t h e Intu
C a n a d i a n p o p u l a t i o n , m o s t o f t h e m ( a r o u n d 80 p e r cent) l i v i n g i n Quehi
B i l i n g u a l i s m i n the t w o official languages is m a i n l y f o u n d i n the population
o f F r e n c h o r i g i n i n t h e East o f t h e c o u n t r y s u c h as M o n t r e a l , Sherbi < n iki<
a n d Ottawa.
B y m e a n s o f t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n A c t i n 1982, t h e C a n a d i a n cent i ni
g o v e r n m e n t u n d e r t o o k the task o f p r o t e c t i n g the F r e n c h rights t h r o u g l n m i
t h e c o u n t r y , w h e r e a s t h e g o v e r n m e n t i n t h e p r o v i n c e o f Q u e b e c look
m e a s u r e s a g a i n s t t h e use o f E n g l i s h w i t h i n t h e p r o v i n c e c l a i m i n g thal
b i l i n g u a l i s m i n Quebec l e d t o u n i l i n g u a l i s m i n E n g l i s h . N o w a d a y s , l l i e
6 llie second language w i t h the a i m of a c q u i r i n g a h i g h level o f proficieney
a c t i o n s u n d e r t a k e n t o r e s t r a i n t h e use o f E n g l i s h i n Quebec have been
b a n n e d at t h e s a m e t i m e t h a t s o m e l e g i s l a t i o n i n M a n i t o b a t h a t denli d
f r a n c o p h o n e r i g h t s has b e e n m o d i f i e d , b u t the F r e n c h - E n g l i s h d i v i s i n
a n d debate is s t i l l present. A p a r t f r o m t h i s h i s t o r i c a l d i s p u t e between thl
t w o o f f i c i a l languages, i t s h o u l d be t a k e n i n t o a c c o u n t t h a t Canad h a j
* It should be taken into aeeount that edueation in Canad is a provincial responsibilltj
141
a b o r i g i n a l m i n o r i l i e s w i t h their o w n i n d i g e n o u s languages a n d that
(tinada is a c o u n t r y o f i m m i g r a n t s a n d t h a t , especially i n b i g cities, there
u , i ( o n s i d e r a b l e n u m b e r o f p e o p l e h a v i n g S p a n i s h , I t a l i a n , Germn,
Pni tugese, etc., as t h e i r m o t h e r tongue. Canad contines t o be a hotspot
tt'i l a r as the s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c a n d s o c i o p o l i t i c a l s i t u a t i o n is c o n c e r n e d a n d
flile situation worsens because the French-English controversy is b e c o m i n g
to i ili nially based, i n spite o f c o n t i n u e d governmental efforts. Nevertheless,
Innguage p l a n n i n g actions are being u n d e r t a k e n to help solve the p r o b l e m .
I l u c l o l l o w some examples o f b i l i n g u a l e d u c a t i o n p r o g r a m s t h a t a i m at
i' ' i o p m g a b i l i n g u a l a n d b i c u l t u r a l society i n Canad.
f r e n c h i m m e r s i o n b e g a n 30 years ago, i n 1965, w i t h a n e x p e r i m e n t
ni i ied o u t at St. L a m b e r t s c h o o l , M o n t r e a l , w h e r e a g r o u p o f E n g l i s h -
Mpcaking p a r e n t s s u c c e e d e d i n g e t t i n g t h e s c h o o l d i s t r i c t t o i n i t i a t e a
lili i i igual i m m e r s i o n p r o g r a m w i t h t h e i r c h i l d r e n i n k i n d e r g a r t e n ( F r e n c h
i i second language). A t t h a t t i m e i t b e c a m e a p p a r e n t t o t h e m t h a t the
I iirlish-speaking c o m m u n i t y needed t o a t t a i n a h i g h proficieney i n French
lo overeme t h e i r m i n o r i t y language s i t u a t i o n i n Quebec a n d guarantee
their social a n d e c o n o m i c m a i n t e n a n c e w i t h i n t h e p r o v i n c e . T h i s i n i t i a l
|n i igram was r a t h e r e x t r e m e as m o n o l i n g u a l E n g l i s h - s p e a k i n g k i d s w e r e
m u u c t e d i n F r e n c h f r o m t h e very first d a y i n k i n d e r g a r t e n a n d later, i n
j -1 .i le t w o , t h e y w o u l d s t a r t t o develop f i r s t language l i t e r a c y skills. L a t e r
o n , by grade 6, h a l f o f the c u r r i c u l u m w o u l d be t a u g h t i n E n g l i s h a n d h a l f
I n French. A b i t later, s o m e changes w e r e i n t r o d u c e d as these p r o g r a m s
I n ead w i d e l y across the c o u n t r y , a n d m i d - i m m e r s i o n a n d l a t e - i m m e r s i o n
I n i igrams w e r e also developed. The a i m o f these p r o g r a m s is f o r c h i l d r e n
lo r e a c h a level o f b i l i n g u a l i s m , a n d e v e n t u a l l y o f b i c u l t u r a l i s m , b y 1
mecondary school g r a d u a t i o n t h a t allows t h e m t o f u n c t i o n w e l l i n a French-
speaking c o m m u n i t y o r t o access the j o b m a r k e t o r h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n i n
French.
French i m m e r s i o n is a general t e r m used t o refer t o this type o f content-
hased i n s t r u c t i o n i n w h i c h F r e n c h is used as the means o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n
w i l l i i n the c l a s s r o o m a n d i n w h i c h s t u d e n t s are, therefore, i n s t r u c t e d i n
m s p e a k i n g , l i s t e n i n g a n d l i t e r a c y s k i l l s . H o w e v e r , n o t a l l p r o g r a m s are
ei [ual a n d three types of i m m e r s i o n c a n be f o u n d as far as t h e s t a r t i n g age
Is concerned, (a) early i m m e r s i o n , w h i c h is offered f r o m the earliest years
il schooling ( k i n d e r g a r t e n , grade 1 o r 2) a n d represents the m o s t frequent
Ion o f i m m e r s i o n ; (b) d e l a y e d o r i n t e r m e d i a t e i m m e r s i o n , is offered i n
' T h T g h proficieney i n the L2 and a deep knowledge of the L2 culture influences
BOiltively the L2 learners attitude towards the L2 culture.
 142
\ K ( n i l i( I I O N T O S O C I O I , I N ( I
later o f s c h o o l i n g b e g i n n i n g i n g r a d e 4, a n d ; (c) late i m m e r s i o n is ol,
b e g i n n i n g i n grades 6, 7 o r later. I m m e r s i o n c a n also be t o t a l - inv .1
the i n s t r u c t i o n o f a l l subjects i n the second l a n g u a g e o r par t i l ]
r e q u i r i n g i n s t r u c t i o n i n the s e c o n d language f o r h a l f the school d . i \
T h e s e F r e n c h i m m e r s i o n p r o g r a m s h a v e n o t f o u n d a n e q u h ll
c o u n t e r p a r t i n E n g l i s h i m m e r s i o n i n Canad as t h e F r e n c h - s p e a k l
c o m m u n i t i e s d o n o t offer a n exact p a r a l l e l t o t h e i r F r e n c h m o l lu i
speakers i n spite o f t h e p o p u l a n t y a n d success o f these p r o g r a m
S w a i n a n d J o h n s o n ( 1 9 9 7 : 6 ) set f o r t h s o m e c o r e f e a l i
9
p r o t o t y p i c a l i m m e r s i o n p r o g r a m s . They indicate that the f o l l o v lii|
c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s c a n n o t be u n d e r s t o o d o n a n a l l - o r - n o t h i n g basis b u l |
p a r t o f a c o n t i n u u m . T h e y a d d t h a t f o r a b i l i n g u a l p r o g r a m t o be lahi I
as ' i m m e r s i o n ' , i t s h o u l d a c c o m m o d a t e e a c h o f these c h a r a c t e r i s t i s
m u c h as possible:
a) T h e L 2 is used as a mdium o f i n s t r u c t i o n , i n spite o f being l a u u j i l
f o r m a l l y a n d o n l y as a s u b j e c t . T h e u n d e r l y i n g m e t h o d o l o e e .1
r a t i o n a l e is t h a t o f the c o m m u n i c a t i v e a p p r o a c h t h a t proposes lht<
increase o f c o m p r e h e n s i b l e i n p u t .
b) T h e i m m e r s i o n c u r r i c u l u m is a n a l o g o u s t o t h e o n e used w i l h
s t u d e n t s n o t i n c l u d e d i n a n i m m e r s i o n p r o g r a m . I n t h i s way, 11 I
g u a r a n t e e d t h a t i m m e r s i o n students get the same c o n t e n t a n d i h i
o n l y v a r i a b l e is t h e use o f t h e L 2 as a mdium o f i n s t r u c t i o n .
c) The L l receives o b v i o u s s u p p o r t as a n essential c o m p o n e n t o l the
c u r r i c u l u m , s o m e t i m e s as a subject a n d s o m e t i m e s as the mdium
of instruction.
d) 'Additive b i l i n g u a l i s m ' constitutes the chief a i m of the p r o g r a m
T h i s p r i n c i p i e e n t a i l s t h a t at t h e e n d o f t h e p r o g r a m s t u d e n t s ' I I
p r o f i c i e n e y s h o u l d be c o m p a r a b l e t o t h o s e w h o h a v e s t u d i e d
t h r o u g h t h e i r L l , i.e., L 2 p r o f i c i e n e y s h o u l d n o t be a t t a i n e d at l be
expense o f t h e L l .
e) L 2 exposure is b y a n d large r e s t r i c t e d t o the c l a s s r o o m context, al
least i n some i m m e r s i o n p r o g r a m s s u c h as those i n Canad, w h e r e
" It should be p o i n t e d out that extensive research has been carried out w i t h these
programs and i n spite of a number of shortcomings that research has pointed out, French
inmersin n (aada contines to be one ol the most successful examples of biliniMi.il
education.
This article is part of a book that is an essential reference for those interested ni
hilingual immersion programs. This book provides a thorough introduction to the topic and
supplies some interesting examples of immersion programs in different countries.
143
II
I'. 11 e i 11 s o r friends d o n o t use the language o f i n s t r u c t i o n . Obviously,
this constitutes a disadvantage f o r t h e students.
j /) A l l students j o i n t h e p r o g r a m w i t h s i m i l a r levis o f L 2 proficieney.
Some tlegree o f h o m o g e n e i t y i n t h i s respect facilitates the adopt i< >i i
o l a c u r r i c u l u m a n d pedagogy t h a t m a t c h e s m o s t s t u d e n t s ' needs.
rj Teachers are b i l i n g u a l i n t h e s t u d e n t s ' L l a n d t h e L 2 mdium o l
instruction.
Ii) The classroom c u l t u r e o f a p r o t o t y p i c a l i m m e r s i o n p r o g r a m is thal
< >l t he local L l c o m m u n i t y i n s t e a d o f t h a t o f t h e c u l t u r e o f the 1.1,
Le., w h e r e t h a t language is used as a n L l .
i l HOPEAN U N I O N L A N G U A G E P L A N N I N G
AND POLICY
I here is a need t o c o n v e r t t h e r i c h heritage o f diverse languages a n d
l nll ni es i n E u r o p e f r o m a b a r r i e r t o c o m m u n i c a t i o n i n t o a s o u r c e o f
mutual understanding. A better knowledge o f E u r o p e a n m o d e r n languages
di l . u i l i t a t e c o m m u n i c a t i o n a n d i n t e r a c t i o n a m o n g E u r o p e a n s a n d w i l l
plomte m o b i l i t y a n d m u t u a l u n d e r s t a n d i n g . I n t h i s case, t h e a i m o f a
i M I i i c u l a r language p l a n n i n g a n d p o l i c y is t o u n i f y m i l l i o n s o f speakers
uiiilcr a p o l i t i c a l and economical a d m i n i s t r a t i o n a n d given the a m o u n t
o l d i f f e r e n t languages i t seems necessary t o f i n d a c o m m o n g r o u n d f o r
Interaction w i t h o u t losing either cultural or linguistic identity.
II is n o t easy t o o b t a i n a n aecurate p i c t u r e o f the l i n g u i s t i c s i t u a t i o n
w il b i n t h e E U g i v e n t h e w i d e - r a n g e o f c o u n t r i e s , c u l t u r e s a n d p o l i t i c a l
lystems i n v o l v e d . A t t h e t i m e o f w r i t i n g t h e E U c o m p r i s e s 15 c o u n t r i e s
(very s o o n 10 m o r e c o u n t r i e s w i l l j o i n t h e E U ) w i t h 13 d i f f e r e n t o f f i c i a l
languages a n d all these countries include considerable l i n g u i s t i c m i n o r i t i e s
I Ither because they have s o m e t e r r i t o r y h o l d i n g a n i n h e r i t e d language o r
ns . i result o f a n extensive m i g r a t i o n g i v i n g w a y t o a p l e n t i f u l i m m i g r a n t
i o m m u n i t y . O n l y P o r t u g a l c a n be c o n s i d e r e d ' o f f i c i a l l y ' m o n o l i n g u a l
a l l b o u g h i t contains speech c o m m u n i t i e s u s i n g a d i s s i m i l a r language f r o m
the official one. I n a l l the o t h e r c o u n t r i e s there are reas w h e r e a different
language is l e a r n e d as a m o t h e r t o n g u e (at t h i s p o i n t i t s h o u l d be kept in
n i i n d t h a t the d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n l a n g u a g e s a n d d i a l e c t s is n o t a l w a y s
elear a n d is o f t e n d e t e r m i n e d b y s o c i o p o l i t i c a l m a t t e r s . See c h a p t e r 1).
I b i s s i t u a t i o n gives us a p i c t u r e o f t h e d i v e r s i t y o f t h e state o f a f f a i r s ,
which w i l l change s h o r t l y a n d n o t f o r the better, because t h e r e is already
a p l a n to b r o a d e n the E U t o n e i g h b o r i n g c o u n t r i e s w i t h n e w languages,
 I -TT AN IN I IU)I)1I< I |()N TO SOCIOI.INGUIS
new e d u c a t i o n systems a n d v a r i o u s degrces ol c o m m i t m e n l lo langua
teaching. T h i s m u l t i p l i c i t y o f c i r c u m s t a n c e s e x h i b i t s the need to develop
a c o m m o n E U language p o l i c y i n o r d e r to p r o m o t e i n t e r r e l a t i o n a m
the d i f f e r e n t m e m b e r states a n d the c o m m o n u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f pe ipl
To a d d c o n t r o v e r s y t o t h e issue, T r i m m (1999) m e n t i o n s t h a t a majo!
p r o b l e m c o n c e r n i n g the subject o f language l e a r n i n g and lanjMi.iitti
p l a n n i n g is t h e l a c k o f a n o r g a n i c u n i t t o t a k e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y foi 11 Su
d i f f e r e n t l a w s a n d p u b l i c o r g a n i s m s m a y be i n v o l v e d i n t h e t e a c h i n i|
state languages t o n a t i v e speakers, t o m i n o r i t y c h i l d r e n a n d t h e tea l i h i f j
o f second/foreign languages. H e a d d s t h a t t h e r e is n o l o n g i t u d i n a l i
as r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s c h a n g e w i t h t h e t r a n s f e r o f c h i l d r e n f r o m e le m e nt a l
s c h o o l t o h i g h s c h o o l a n d t h e u n i v e r s i t y , a n d d i f f e r e n t agencies m a j
i n v o l v e d i n t h e s e t t i n g o f c u r r i c u l a r g u i d e l i n e s , t e a c h i n g m a t e r i a l s and
a s s e s s m e n t . G i v e n t h e a f o r e s a i d c i r c u m s t a n c e s a h i g h d e g r e e <>i
v a r i a b i l i t y is t o be e x p e c t e d w i t h i n a n i n t e r n a t i o n a l o r g a n i z a d o n llkl
theEU.
P o l i c y m a k e r s , a w a r e o f t h e f a r - r e a c h i n g r e p e r c u s s i o n s o f a g o o d o|
b a d language p o l i c y f o r the f u t u r e o f t h e E u r o p e a n c o m m o n m a r k e t , havi
established s o m e guidelines t h a t t r y t o p r o m o t e t h e use o f i n t e r n a t ional
languages f o r i n t e r c u l t u r a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n . T h e y have also u n d e r t a k e n
s o m e a c t i o n s r e g a r d i n g t h e m a i n t e n a n c e o f m i n o r i t y languages. S o lai
the f o l l o w i n g d o c u m e n t s have b e e n already e l a b o r a t e d :
a) The European Charter for M i n o r i t y or Regional Languages.
b) The CE F r a m e w o r k C o n v e n t i o n for the Protection of National
Minorities.
c) The Oslo R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s regarding the L i n g u i s t i c Righis o
N a t i o n a l M i n o r i t i e s w i t h i n t h e O r g a n i z a t i o n f o r S e c u r i t y a n d < 11
operation i n Europe (OSCE).
d) The H a g u e R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s R e g a r d i n g t h e E d u c a t i o n R i g h i s < .1
National Minorities.
(Please go t o t h e exercises s e c t i o n a n d d o exercises 7 a n d 8.)
T h e E U has a l r e a d y t a k e n s o m e a c t i o n r e g a r d i n g t h e s e c ond /f ore ijn
language t e a c h i n g a n d l e a r n i n g w i t h i n t h e m e m b e r states, a n d i n a W h i l e
Paper published i n 1995 (Teaching and learning: towards the learning society)
i t is s t a t e d as a g e n e r a l o b j e c t i v e t h a t everyone, i r r e s p e c t i v e o r his/het
a c a d e m i c t r a i n i n g s h o u l d g a i n p r o f i c i e n e y i n t w o languages a p a r t f r o m
t h e i r m o t h e r t o n g u e so t h a t t h e y c a n c o m m u n i c a t e i n those l a n g u a g e s
W i t h this a i m , the E U has reached a strong consensus o n the fundamentis
145
UN i 5
Ii n foreign language teachi ng a n d some p r o g r a m s have been developed for
llie exchange o f students a n d teachers i n o r d e r t o favor the l ear ni ng o f other
l'.l l languages, t o a i d teacher t r a i n i n g , t o encourage awareness-raising, a n d
lo p r o m o t e t h e c u l t u r a l exchange a m o n g d i f f e r e n t e d u c a t i o n a l systems.
l o m e o f these p r o g r a m s are Scrates ( i n c l u d i n g E r a s m u s , L i n g u a a n d
' .<" rales), Leonardo (exchange programs i n the vocational field) and Tempus
11"i t he development o f h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n systems).
T h e Common European Framework of Reference for Languages is a
ili lemnent t h a t provides a p r a c t i c a l t o o l f o r establishing c e r t a i n standards
ni successive stages o f l e a r n i n g a n d e v a l u a t i n g l a n g u a g e k n o w l e d g e . I t
aims at p r o v i d i n g t h e basis f o r s e t t i n g c o m m o n s t a n d a r d s w i t h i n t h e E U
1 .ii . n i i n t e r n a t i o n a l level a n d provides t h e basis f o r t h e m u t u a l r e c o g n i t i o n
o l language q u a l i f i c a t i o n s w i t h i n the E U , a n d therefore f a c i l i t a t i n g
e d u c a t i o n a l a n d o c e u p a t i o n a l m o b i l i t y . T h e F r a m e w o r k describes:
a) The competences necessary f o r c o m m u n i c a t i o n ;
b) T h e r e l a t e d k n o w l e d g e a n d skills;
c) The situations and domains of c o m m u n i c a t i o n .
T h e f r a m e w o r k pavs t h e w a y f o r a c o m p r e h e n s i v e d e f i n i t i o n o f
teaching a n d l e a r n i n g objectives a n d m e t h o d s a n d is, therefore, o f special
interest t o course designers, textbook w r i t e r s , testers, teachers a n d teacher
Irainers, a n d the w h o l e academic c o m m u n i t y as a w h o l e ( fo r i n s t r u c t i o n s
o n h o w t o get a synopsis o f t h i s d o c u m e n t , o r t h e w h o l e d o c u m e n t , see
) * nir C D ) .
( Please go t o t h e exercises s e c t i o n a n d d o exercise 9.)
B. IHE ROLE OF ENGLISH
E n g l i s h has s p r e a d w i d e l y a l l o v e r t h e w o r l d , f i r s t because o f t h e
influence of the B r i t i s h E m p i r e and, second due to the preeminence of
N o r t h A m e r i c a n i n f l u e n c e i n t h e w o r l d . I n E u r o p e , E n g l i s h has advanced
as an i n t e r n a t i o n a l l a n g u a g e especially a f t e r t h e W o r l d W a r I I , l e a v i n g
b e h i n d o t h e r p r e e m i n e n t languages s u c h as F r e n c h . E n g l i s h is n o w used
hv m i l l i o n s o f speakers f o r a n u m b e r o f c o m m u n i c a t i v e f u n c t i o n s across
E u r o p e a n d H o f f m a n n (2000) p o i n t s o u t t h a t :
[...] the presence of and need for English have become so
widespread, and access to and provisin for i t so varied, that it is now
(
possible to talk about 'bilingualism w i t h English' rather than just the
use of English as a foreign language. The expression 'bilingualism w i t h
 AN INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOI.INGUINTI
English' is ainhitioiis: |... |. Tin- le m 'multilingualism' is therclori i
prelerred one here, as il allows for a variety ol linguistic conslelli
involving two or more languages in speakers and communities,
(Hoffmann, 2 0 0 0
H o f f m a n n refers t o the use o f E n g l i s h f o r m a n y purposes inside .m
o u t s i d e t h e E U scope, w h e r e i t is one o f t h e p r e f e r r e d languages. So i Ii
language has b e c o m e t h e p r e f e r r e d language i n a n u m b e r o f a m b i l s llk
i n t e r n a t i o n a l b u s i n e s s o r E U i n s t i t u t i o n s . T i m e a n d a g a i n i t is also 11IM
language c h o s e n f o r a c a d e m i c d i s c u s s i o n as m o s t scholars face the neu|
t o read a n d p u b l i s h i n E n g l i s h f o r i n t e r n a t i o n a l d i f f u s i o n . E n g l i s h is al
d i r e c t l y i n f l u e n c i n g o t h e r E u r o p e a n languages at d i f f e r e n t levis b u l il IM
especially m a n i f e s t i n the f i e l d o f t e c h n i c a l t e r m s l e x i c a l b o r r o w ni
are often i n t r o d u c e d i n m a n y languages w i t h o u t t h e slightest a d a p l a l l o i i ,
E n g l i s h seems t o have been a d o p t e d as the language o f g l o b a l i / . i i
these days. Proficieney i n E n g l i s h is seen as a desirable goal f o r youngi i i
a n d elderly people i n a l l E U c o u n t r i e s a n d i n m a n y p a r t s o f the w< irld ll
the p o i n t o f e q u a t i n g i n a b i l i t y i n the use o f E n g l i s h to disability. (See Wm 1,1
Englishes i n C h a p t e r 6.)
9. T H E U N I V E R S A L D E C L A R A T I O N O F L I N G U I S T I C
RIGHTS
I n 1996, a w o r l d - w i d e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f n o n - g o v e r n n u n i . i l
o r g a n i z a t i o n s w i t h t h e s u p p o r t o f t h e U N E S C O a p p r o v e d The Uni\
Declaration of Linguistic Rights ( h e n c e f o r t h U D L R ) i n B a r c e l o n a , Spain
T h e m a i n a i m o f t h i s d o c u m e n t is t o t u r n t h e w o r l d ' s n a t i o n s ' a t t e n l
t o the p r o b l e m s a r i s i n g f r o m a g l o b a l i z e d w o r l d w i t h greater m o v e m e n l
o f p e o p l e , a n d t o p r e s e r v e everyone's r i g h t t o a l a n g u a g e i d e n t i l v Phl
o r i g i n a l d o c u m e n t c o n t a i n s 52 rdeles a n d s o m e a d d i t i o n a l d i s p o s i i |
e m b r a c i n g m a n y aspects o f l i n g u i s t i c rights. B e l o w are some o f the g o ICI ni
p r i n c i p i e s t h a t t h i s d o c u m e n t tries to e s t a b l i s h :
10
1. T h e U D L R safeguards the p e r s o n a l r i g h t s to adhere t o a l i n g u i lli
i d e n t i t y a n d t o develop o n e s o w n c u l t u r e .
2. The U D L R considers t h a t a l l language c o m m u n i t i e s are equal and
therefore m e r i t o f f i c i a l r e c o g n i t i o n i n a l l k i n d s o f social, poln. ||
a n d e c o n o m i c respeets (e.g.: e d u c a t i o n , l a w , t r a d e , p u b l l i
a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , etc.).
^ J o u c a n go to the w e b s i t e for this s u b j e c t to find the w e b l i n k to the origin,
147
Nll s
I T h e U D L R is especially c o n c e r n e d a b o u t t h e r o l e t h a t e d u c a t i o n
plays i n the m a i n t e n a n c e a n d spread o f a language a n d accordingly
il states t h a t e d u c a t i o n m u s t h e l p t o m a i n t a i n a n d d e v e l o p t h e
language s p o k e n b y t h e language c o m m u n i t y . I n a d d i t i o n to t h i s ,
it encourages " t h e m o s t extensive possible c o m m a n d o f any o t h e r
language t h e y m a y w i s h to k n o w . " ( A r t . 26).
I The U D L R c l a i m s t h e r i g h t to use p r o p e r ames a n d place ames
i n t h e language specific t o the t e r r i t o r y , b o t h o r a l l y a n d i n w r i t i n g .
5. The U D L R supports the right to decide the extent to w h i c h a m i n o r i t y
language s h o u l d be present i n t h e m e d i a i n a given t e r r i t o r y , a n d t o
receive a t h o r o u g h k n o w l e d g e o f its c u l t u r a l heritage t h r o u g h i t .
6. The U D L R declares t h e right to preserve t h e i r l i n g u i s t i c a n d c u l t u r a l
heritage.
7. T h e U D L R w a t c h e s o v e r t h e r i g h t t o use t h e l a n g u a g e i n all
s o c i o e c o n o m i c a c t i v i t i e s a n d to have f u l l legal v a l i d i t y .
T h i s d o c u m e n t has h a d f a r - r e a c h i n g i m p l i c a t i o n s i n recent years f o r
l l n - social r e c o g n i t i o n a n d acceptance o f m i n o r i t y languages a r o u n d t h e
v o r l d b u t t h e r e exists, n e v e r t h e l e s s , s o m e c o n t r o v e r s y o v e r i t s
l i i i n l a m e n t i s . B r u m f i t (1995) considers t h a t t h i s d o c u m e n t is based o n
l l i e idea o f " l a n g u a g e c o m m u n i t i e s " a n d l i t t l e a c c o u n t is t a k e n o f t h e
l . i i i i i i a g e r i g h t s o f individuis. B r u m f i t f i n d s l i t t l e r o o m f o r i n d i v i d u a l
i hoice i n f a v o r o f t h e i m p o s i t i o n o f a l a n g u a g e i d e n t i t y . B r u m f i t (ibid.)
a l s o c r i t i c i z e s t h e r e s t r i c t i v e d e f i n i t i o n o f " l a n g u a g e c o m m u n i t y " as
i |,i r i n g t o a people b e i n g h i s t o r i c a l l y established i n a t e r r i t o r y as opposed
l o ihe n o t i o n o f "language g r o u p " w h i c h refers t o a g r o u p of persons
s h a r i n g t h e s a m e l a n g u a g e b u t w h i c h d o e s n o t posses h i s t o r i c a l
n i i l e c e d e n t s (see a r t i c l e 1.1 a n d 1.5). I n t h i s respect t h e l o n g - s t a n d i n g
< t u c k - s p e a k i n g p o p u l a t i o n i n Australia a n d the Turkish-speaking
p o p u l a t i o n i n G e r m a n y w o u l d f a l l i n t o a second-class c a t e g o r y as t h e y
w o u l d be considered "language g r o u p s " b u t n o t "language c o m m u n i t i e s " .
I ' l h s raises t h e q u e s t i o n o f h o w l o n g a l a n g u a g e g r o u p n e e d t o exist i n
i II i le to q u a l i f y as a c o m m u n i t y . B r u m f i t (ibid.) also refers t o t h e l a c k o f
i r h i enees i n t h i s d o c u m e n t t o the s i t u a t i o n i n countries w h e r e a language
Is used to avoid giving one language a m o n g m a n y h i s t o r i c a l l y established
Ones a p r i o r i t y o v e r t h e o t h e r s , w h i c h c o u l d e v e n t u a l l y g i v e rise t o a
n i i i i i b e r o f c o n f l i c t s ( f o r i n s t a n c e , i n f o r m e r colonies t h a t n o w a d a y s use
English o r F r e n c h f o r i n t e r e t h n i c c o m m u n i c a t i o n ) .
(Please go t o t h e exercises s e c t i o n a n d d o exercises 10 a n d 11.)
 -Til
AN INTRODUCCION TO SOCIOI.INGIUN
10. E X E R C I S E S
1. F i n d o u t i f there is a b i l i n g u a l school i n y o u r city. Try to gel ;
i n f o r m a t i o n as p o s s i b l e o f i t s c u r r i c u l a , o r g a n i z a t i o n a n d a i m s Pin
note t h a t E n g l i s h does n o t need t o be one o f the languages involved In I
i m m e r s i o n p r o g r a m . E x p a n d o n the advantages a n d disadvani.ip
b i l i n g u a l e d u c a t i o n f r o m y o u r o w n p o i n t o f view.
2 . B a k e r a n d J o n e s ( 1 9 9 8 ) s e e m t o be q u i t e i n f a v o r o f b i l i u g i l l
e d u c a t i o n a n d t h e y i n d i c a t e e i g h t p o t e n t i a l b e n e f i t s o f b i l i n y i i i|
e d u c a t i o n . C o m m e n t o n e a c h o f t h e m a n d express t o w h a t extent vH|
agree/disagree w i t h t h e m . Y o u s h o u l d p r o v i d e e x a m p l e s t o supp< >i i yotll
p o i n t s . (See p a g e 124).
3 . Take a n instance o f language p l a n n i n g t h a t y o u k n o w abou t (Eugll H
does n o t need t o be one o f the languages involved) a n d analyze i t aec< irdltij
t o the eleven g o a l s o r f u n c t i o n s p o s e d b y N a h i r (2003). W h i c h o l i In i
goals affect the i n s t a n c e y o u have chosen? H o w ?
4 . Analyze a n d assess each o f the f o l l o w i n g s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c d e n -
a n d p r o v i d e y o u r opinin:
a) M a k i n g Canad a n o f f i c i a l l y b i l i n g u a l c o u n t r y , h a v i n g most o l l l n
French-speaking p o p u l a t i o n i n a concrete rea i n the east ( Q u e l i<
b) T r y i n g t o give status t o Bokml a n d Nynorsk i n N o r w a y i n s l c . n l i >l
c h o o s i n g one o f the varieties as the s t a n d a r d .
c) G i v i n g Basque a n d Cataln o f f i c i a l status together w i t h Spanisli In
t h e Basque C o u n t r y a n d i n C a t a l o n i a .
d) R e i n t r o d u c i n g I r i s h i n I r e l a n d .
5. E x p l o r e t h e language p o l i c i e s o f y o u r o w n c o u n t r y o r regin . n u l
h o w t h e y a r e e n f o r c e d i n y o u r e d u c a t i o n a l s y s t e m . H o w does yoill
e d u c a t i o n a l s y s t e m d e a l w i t h i m m i g r a n t s w h o d o n o t speak t h f
m a i n s t r e a m l a n g u a g e ? A r e t h e r e a n y c o n t r o v e r s i e s a b o u t language u II
and implementation i n your country?
6. T h i n k a b o u t the f o l l o w i n g h y p o t h e t i c a l s i t u a t i o n s . F i n d a mode i .1
a c t i o n f o r each o f t h e f o l l o w i n g u n r e s o l v e d issues:
a) I m a g i n e y o u r are a p p o i n t e d g o v e r n o r i n a c o l o n i a l t e r r i t o r y y o u i
c o u n t r y has i n a r e m o t e rea w h i c h is c a l l e d Sealand. I n Sealand
y o u , as the governor, a n d a m i n o r i t y o f the p o p u l a t i o n c o m i n g f r o m
y o u r h o m e l a n d speak y o u r m o t h e r t o n g u e , t h e l a n g u a g e o l l l i e
metrpolis, b u t m o s t n a t i v e s i n S e a l a n d s p e a k a n i n d i g e n o u s
149
UNIT 5
language. Y o u have to organize the educational system a n d legislate
accordingly. Y o u r c h i l d r e n go t o s c h o o l w i t h natives f r o m Sealand
a n d a m o n g other t h i n g s y o u need t o decide u p o n the language used
i n t h e e d u c a t i o n a l system. W r i t e a set o f 10-15 p r i n c i p i e s that w i l l
g o v e r n language use i n Sealand schools.
b) You are m e m b e r o f a language p l a n n i n g ageney t h a t needs to decide
w h e t h e r t o r e f o r m y o u r w r i t i n g s y s t e m f o r t w o reasons, f i r s t , the
w r i t i n g system is r a t h e r u n i q u e ( w i t h i t s o w n a l p h a b e t ) a n d that
difference prevents y o u r c o u n t r y f r o m f u l l y developing economicallv
i n the same w a y as n e i g h b o r i n g c o u n t r i e s a n d the w o r l d s economic
p o w e r ; second, y o u r language has changed very l i t t l e i n the last t w o
h u n d r e d y e a r s a n d , as a r e s u l t , a s u r f e i t o f b o r r o w i n g s a r e
i n u n d a t i n g y o u r language. Present a n a c t i o n p l a n t h a t w i l l satisfy
t h e e c o n o m i c p o w e r s o f y o u r c o u n t r y (eager f o r d e v e l o p m e n t a n d
i n t e g r a t i o n i n the i n t e r n a t i o n a l c o m m u n i t y ) , a n d t h e l i t e r a r y lite
( v e r y c o n c e r n e d a b o u t t h e c o n s e r v a t i o n of language a n d c u l t u r a l
heritage).
7 . Search the web for i n f o r m a t i o n o n E U language policy. F i n d
i n f o r m a t i o n r e g a r d i n g E U language p o l i c y o n :
a) B i l i n g u a l / t r i l i n g u a l e d u c a t i o n i n schools.
1
b) M i n o r i t y languages i n E U c o u n t r i e s .
c) E U o f f i c i a l languages.
d) L a n g u a g e p o l i c y
8. S e a r c h t h e w e b f o r these f o u r d o c u m e n t s a n d w r i t e a s u m m a r y
(about 100 w o r d s ) w i t h t h e i n f o r m a t i o n y o u c o n s i d e r m o r e i m p o r t a n t .
a) T h e E u r o p e a n C h a r t e r f o r M i n o r i t y o r R e g i o n a l Languages.
b) T h e C E F r a m e w o r k C o n v e n t i o n f o r t h e P r o t e c t i o n o f N a t i o n a l
Minorities.
c) T h e O s l o R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s regarding the Linguistic Rights of
N a t i o n a l M i n o r i t i e s w i t h i n t h e O r g a n i z a t i o n f o r S e c u r i t y a n d Co-
operation i n Europe (OSCE).
d) T h e H a g u e R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s R e g a r d i n g the E d u c a t i o n R i g h t s o f
National Minorities.
9. The W h i t e Paper published i n 1995 b y the E U C o m m i s s i o n (Teaching
and learning: towards the learning society) o n f o r e i g n l a n g u a g e l e a r n i n g
Itates t h a t i n r e l a t i o n t o p r o f i c i e n e y i n t h r e e C o m m u n i t y l a n g u a g e s : ' [ . . . ]
 150
AN INTRODUCCION! TO SOCIOI IN(,I I
everyone, irrespective o f t r a i n i n g a n d e d u c a t i o n routes chosen, | sin i|
be able t o a c q u i r e a n d keep u p t h e i r a b i l i t y t o c o m m u n i c a l e n ul Ii
t w o c o m m u n i t y languages i n a d d i t i o n to t h e i r m o t h e r tongue.' T h i n k . i l
t h i s objective a n d state the possible s h o r t c o m i n g s i t m a y have as n
people's a t t i t u d e , t r a i n i n g i n schools, i n f r a s t r u c t u r e , c o g n i t i v e a b i l i l l i
a n y o t h e r aspect y o u c o n s i d e r relevant. To w h a t extent d o y o u t h i n k I I
a p l a u s i b l e objective i n the s h o r t t e r m ?
1 0 . F i n d the f u l l text o f T h e Universal D e c l a r a t i o n o f Linguist ii HI
(see the w e b s i t e o r t h e a c c o m p a n y i n g C D ) a n d r e a d i t . Choose 3 a r t l
a n d c o m m e n t o n t h e m p r o v i d i n g y o u r o w n p o i n t o f view.
1 1 . F i n d o u t a b o u t t h e l i n g u i s t i c s i t u a t i o n , f r o m a s y n c h r o n i i und
d i a c h r o n i c p o i n t o f view, o f one o f t h e f o l l o w i n g c o u n t r i e s : Carne
Nigeria, South Africa, Belize o r T r i n i d a d a n d Tobago. You m i g h t be i n t e r d i
i n the language o r languages t h a t are c u r r e n t l y used, language plaan)' .un
policy, educational system, etc. Y o u w i l l p r o b a b l y find a l o t o f i n f o r m a
o n the web, i n encyclopaedias o r i n the reference books listed below.
11. REFERENCES
APPLE, R. a n d P. M U Y S K E N . 1996. Bilingismo y contacto de lenguas. B a o el
Editorial Ariel.
BAKER, C. 2002. 'Bilingual Education' i n R.B. Kaplan (ed.) The Oxford Handb,
of Applied Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
BAKER, C. and S. JONES. 1998. Encyclopedia of bilingualism and bilingual educan* >n
Clevedon: Philadclphia, PA: Multilingual Matters.
BRUMFIT, Ch. 1995. 'People's choice and language rights' [videorecording]: El I m
language policy. University of York, Audio-Visual Centre Kent: IATEFL.
COBARRUBIAS, J. 1983. 'Ethical issues i n status planning' i n J. Cobarrubias a n d I
A. Fishman (eds.), Progress in Language Planning: International Perspecth
The Hague: M o u t o n Publishers.
1 IOFFMANN, Ch. 2000. 'The Spread of English and the Growth of Multilingual iIR|
w i t h English i n Europe.' i n J. Cenoz and U. Jessner (eds.) English in Europe:
The Acquisition of a Third Language. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
KRISHNAMURTI, Bh. 1999. 'Indian Language Education Policy' i n B. Spolsky (ed I
Concise Encyclopedia of Educational Linguistics. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
MCCAFFERY, J. J . 1999. 'Maori language revitalization' i n Spolsky, B. (ed.) 1 9 9 9 . 1
Concise Encyclopedia of Educational Linguistics. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
N A I I I R , M. 2003. 'Language Planning Goals: A Classification' i n C.B. Paulston, a n d
G.R. Tucker, Sociolinguistics: The Essential Readings. Malden, USA: Blackwell
Puhlishing.
151
I'M I I O N , C. B. 1994. Linguistic Minorities in Multilingual Settings. Amsterdam:
l o l i n Benjamins Publishing Company.
Nn<H'i'.N, T. 1999. 'Australian Indigenous Languages' i n Spolsky, B. (ed.) 1999.
i micise Encyclopedia of Educational Linguistics. Amsterdam: Elsevier,
i .. M. and R. K. J O H N S O N . 1997. ' I m m e r s i o n education: A category w i t h i n
hilingual education' i n R. K. Johnson and M . Swain (eds.) Immersion
I lucation: International Perspectives. Cambridge University Press.
I I M M M , J. L. M . Language Education Policy-Europe' i n Spolsky, B. (ed.) 1999.
('oncise Encyclopedia of Educational Linguistics. Amsterdam. Elsevier.
WAKDIIAUGH, R. 2002 (4th ed.). An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. Malden, USA:
lilackwell Publishing.
12. R E S O U R C E S O N T H E W E B
N o w y o u c a n visit the website for this subject where y o u w i l l find some
Im i her references a n d c o m p l e m e n t a r y readings.
3. F U R T H E R R E A D I N G S AND QUESTIONS
1 3 . 1 . Text 9
Read t h e f o l l o w i n g text carefully a n d c o m m e n t o n i t e m p h a s i z i n g a n y
aspect y o u consider o f relevance. After the text y o u w i l l find some questions
that m a y be h e l p f u l . W r i t e a r o u n d 250-300 w o r d s i n t o t a l .
Note t h a t H a m e r s a n d B l a n c d i s t i n g u i s h between the t e r m s b i l i n g u a l i t y
and b i l i n g u a l i s m . The f o r m e r refers t o psychological state o f the i n d i v i d u a l
who has access t o m o r e t h a n one l i n g u i s t i c code, whereas the l a t t e r refers
lo the state o f a l i n g u i s t i c c o m m u n i t y i n w h i c h t w o l a n g u a g e s o r codes
.ne i n c o n t a c t . Therefore, b i l i n g u a l i t y sees t h e issue f r o m t h e perspective
ol the i n d i v i d u a l w h i l e b i l i n g u a l i s m i n c l u d e s b i l i n g u a l i t y a n d centers o n
i he social dimensin o f i t a t a m a c r o level.
[...] The outeome of bilingual education depends upon a number of
pre-school factors as well as upon the way the two languages are planned
i n education. Two factors are of relevance i n education; (1) to what extent
is the child proficient in the school language? and (2) to what extent has
he developed the cognitive function i n one or both of his languages before
starting school? Considering the interplay of educational factors with
the following factors: social psychological and cognitive developmenlal
factors, such as onset of, and proficieney i n , both languages; functions
developed for language; valorization of one or both languages for all or
a limited number of functions; and the social representations which the
child developed as a consequence, we make the following hypotheses:
 153
AN INTRODUCCION TO SOCIOI.INGUIN
UNIT S

( I ) II bolh languages are acquired simultaneously or il i h c c h l h) To w h a t e x t e n t y o u t h i n k t h a t p r e - s c h o o l f a c t o r s p r e v a i l o v e r

fully proficient in both languages before entering school, he di><
s c h o o l i n g factors i n b i l i n g u a l e d u c a t i o n i n m o n o l i n g u a l countries?
have the double learning burden of acquiring new language skill |
literacy skills simultaneously; if, i n a d d i t i o n , the child has ah . c) D o y o u t h i n k b i l i n g u a l e d u c a t i o n p r o g r a m s i n S p a i n m a n a g e t o
developed language as a cognitive tool, the acquisition of literao 1
develop b i l i n g u a l c h i l d r e n c o m i n g f r o m Spanish m o n o l i n g u a l
w i l l be facilitated; and, i f the child has also developed and anal |
representation of language i n w h i c h b o t h languages are perceived | families? W h y (not)?
interchangeable, thus amplifying this functioning and the child is m u l t
likely to develop an additive form of bilinguality. This is the case " I lili
child i n an educated mixed-lingual family. 13.2. T e x t 1 0
(2) I f the child is only proficient i n his L, when starting school In Read t h e f o l l o w i n g t e x t car eful l y a n d c o m m e n t o n i t e m p h a s i z i n g any
L , he w i l l have to acquire the primary communicative skills in I... al llie
2
aspect y o u consider o f relevance. After the text y o u w i l l find some questions
same t i m e as the literacy skills i n L . I f he has already developed ill
2

analysed representation of language through his L l , he can transli < ||
to the acquisition of literacy skills; the t w o languages w i l l bet
interchangeable for cognitive operations, thus amplifying c o g n i i l n
functioning. Because b o t h languages are valorized i n their c o g n i l U i
function, this transfer w i l l be relatively easy. The degree to whii h hl
analysed representation o f language includes both language
interchangeable tools w i l l determine the degree of additivity. This i 11>>
case of immersion-school children and of some advantaged s u b m e i s l n t i
children.
(3) I f a child proficient i n his L, only or w i t h a limited knowledgl
of L at the onset of schooling i n a relatively more prestigious L has m >i
2 2
that m a y be h e l p f u l . W r i t e a r o u n d 250-300 w o r d s i n t o t a l .
Language p l a n n i n g is an attempt to interfere deliberately w i t h a
language or one of its varieties: i t is h u m a n intervention into natural
processes of language change, diffusion, and erosin. That attempt may
focus on either its status w i t h regard to some other language or variety
or its internal condition with a view to changing that condition, or on
both of these since they are not mutually exclusive. The first focus results
i n status planning, the second results i n corpas planning.
Status planning changes the function of a language or a variety of
a language and the rights of those w h o use i t . For example, when
speakers of a minority language are denied the use of that language i n

developed the cognitive functions of language i n his L,, he also faces t h l

educating their children, their language has no status. Alternatively,
double burden of acquiring the p r i m a r y communicative skills in I
when a government declares that henceforth two languages rather than
simultaneously w i t h the literacy skills. Because he does not posses thl
one of these alone w i l l be officially recognized i n all functions, the newly
analytic representation of language the task of acquiring literacy skillm
recognized one has gained status. Status itself is a relative concept; it
is harder (as is the case for some monolingual children schooled in I , i
may also be improved or reduced by degrees, and usually is. So far as
If, i n addition, his L, is devalorized and stigmatized, he w i l l not transfi I
languages and their varieties are concerned, status changes are nearly
the newly acquired skills to his L, but l i m i t them to a L in which he i
always very slow, are sometimes actively contested, and often leave strong
2

not proficient. I n the worse case, because he does not use his l u l l
language potential as does a monolingual child coping with the prohlem
of acquiring literacy, the development of the analysed representation < >!
language might be slowed down. Further devalorization of L, by societ)
and the school, where it is not used for the development of literacy skills,
w i l l lead to a perception that his two languages are not interchangeable
as cognitive tools and that only L can be used i n that function. TI i r .
2
might ultimately lead to a subtractive for of bilinguality.
Hamers and Blanc (1989: 196-197)
I s s u e s to c o n s i d e r :
a) Do y o u t h i n k the situations described i n the three hypotheses
presented above are equally advantageous for the c h i l d r e n ? D o y o u
consider any o f t h e m m o r e d e m a n d i n g t h a n the others for the child?
residual feelings. Even relatively minor changes or proposals for changes
can produce such effeets, as the residents of many countries, e.g.,
Norway, Belgium, Canad, and India, are well aware.
Corpus p l a n n i n g seeks to develop a variety of a language or a
language, usually to standardize it, that is, to provide i t w i t h the means
for serving every possible language function i n society [...]. Consequently,
corpus pl anni ng may involve such matters as the development of an
orthography, new sources of vocabulary, dictionaries, and a literature,
together with the delibrate cultivation of new uses so that the language
may extend its use into such reas as government, education, and trade.
Corpus p l a n n i n g has been p a r t i c u l a r l y i m p o r t a n t i n countries l i k e
Indonesia, Israel, Finland, India, Pakistn, and Papua New Guinea. These
two types of planning often co-oecur, for many planning decisions involve
some combination of a change i n status w i t h internal change. As one
particular language i n Papua New Guinea is developed, all other
 E
AN INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOI.IN(,

. M;Y WORDS
languages aro alfeetcd, whether or not the effeets are recog i i y.cd o l l l i I
The f o l l o w i n g l i s t o f k e y w o r d s c o n t a i n s s o m e i m p o r t a n t t e r m s t h a t
We must also note then that, just as planning may either be ili llht |
or proceed somewhat haphazardly, even accidentally, so its i s t i l l | pi esented i n t h i s u n i t . A d e f i n i t i o n f o r each t e r m c a n be f o u n d at the
be deliberately intended or not at all as intended. Even l l Ii II I ol this b o o k , i n t h e glossary.
possible to recognize most of the relevant parameters, language plnil 1
is still far from being any kind of exact science. Linguists have UINI I
quite involved in many planning activities and surrounding conlrovi i Aboriginal languages
African American Vernacular English
Wardhaugh ( 2 0 0 2
Corpus planning
I s s u e s to c o n s i d e r : Endangered language
a) Provide some s o c i o p o l i t i c a l s i t u a t i o n s t h a t m a y lead a languajt Heritage language
g a i n status, a n d o t h e r s t h a t m a y cause a language t o lose i l . Hypercorrection
Language Academy
b) A c c o r d i n g t o the t e x t , h o w d o l a n g u a g e p l a n n i n g a n d l a n g u
Language election/selection
policy interact? W h i c h one do y o u t h i n k comes first, langUI
Language revitalization
p l a n n i n g o r language policy? W h y ?
Language attrition
c) I n the case o f a need for c o r p u s p l a n n i n g , w h a t k i n d o f institu l< ni Language conflict
d o y o u t h i n k s h o u l d a s s u m e t h a t r e s p o n s i b i l i t y ? Are p o l i l i i al it| Language loss
e d u c a t i o n a l i n s t i t u t i o n s better prepared? W h y ? Language spread
Lingua franca
d) I n a way, l a n g u a g e p l a n n i n g goes a g a i n s t t h e n a t u r a l proco i
Language conflict
language e v o l u t i o n a n d m a t u r a t i o n . U n d e r w h a t circumstances i ll |
Language Policy Divisin
y o u f i n d a n ' a r t i f i c i a l i n t e r v e n t i o n ' justifed?
Linguistic competence
Sociolinguistic relativity
Status planning
U n i t 6
1. S O C I O L I N G U I S T I C S A N D L A N G U A G E T E A C H I N G /
LEARNING

Language t e a c h i n g a n d l e a r n i n g a n d s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s have c e r t a i n
c o m m o n c o n c e r n s , s u c h as t h e r o l e o f E n g l i s h i n t h e w o r l d (as a f i r s t
language or a second/foreign language), the contexts i n w h i c h t h i s
language is a c q u i r e d , the w a y i n w h i c h i t i n t e r a c t s w i t h o t h e r languages,
a n d t h e n o r m s t h a t d e t e r m i n e t h e use o f E n g l i s h . C o m m u n i c a t i v e
c o m p e t e n c e shapes t h e a b i l i t y t o i n t e r a c t s u c c e s s f u l l y i n a n y s p e e c h
c o m m u n i t y . S o m e o n e w h o has a c q u i r e d t h e l a n g u a g e i n a n a t u r a l i s t i c
context f r o m c h i l d h o o d also acquires s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c rules t o g e t h e r w i t h
l i n g u i s t i c k n o w l e d g e a n d o t h e r c o m p e t e n c e s ( o f course, t h i s w o u l d n o t
he so i n the case of some sort of cognitive i m p a i r m e n t or a b n o r m a l social
situation).

T h i s issue b r i n g s u p the i m p o r t a n c e of language l e a r n i n g e i t h e r i n a

Second Language context, o r a F o r e i g n Language context. I n the first case,
llie language l e a r n e r w i l l have c o u n t l e s s occasions t o a c q u i r e / l e a r n t h e
(K i o l i n g u i s t i c r u l e s t h r o u g h i n t e r a c t i o n a n d cise c o n t a c t w i t h n a t i v e
ipeakers o f t h e language. The l e a r n i n g e n v i r o n m e n t also raises t h e issue
w h e t h e r s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c r u l e s c a n , o r s h o u l d , be t a u g h t i n a c l a s s r o o m
i 011 text o r w h e t h e r t h i s is s o m e t h i n g the language l e a r n e r w i l l d e a l w i t h
ni d u e c o u r s e w h e n s/he has t h e c h a n c e t o i n t e r a c t w i t h i n a s p e e c h
( o i n m u n i t y w h e r e t h e l a n g u a g e b e i n g l e a r n e d is s p o k e n as a m o t h e r
ioi igue. A second issue raised i n this respect is the m o t i v a t i o n a n d purpose
i il l e a r n i n g the language, t h a t is, i f i t is l e a r n t t o be used i n t h i s case
\i h i n a n E n g l i s h - s p e a k i n g speech c o m m u n i t y o r i f i t is t o be l e a r n e d as
a I WC t o c o m m u n i c a t e w i t h o t h e r n o n - n a t i v e speakers, f o r e x a m p l e ,
l nglish being used a m o n g m o t h e r tongue speakers o f different languages
in the E U .
llnlil very recely s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c rules have received l i t t l e a t t e n t i o n
in llie I i . l e a r n i n g c o n l c x l a n d malcriis w r i t e r s a n d teachers a s s u m e d
 I OW
AN INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOI.INOUIN'I
l l i a l learners w o u l d learn these c o n v e n t i o n s t h r o u g h i n t e r a c t i o n in .1
course, at h i g h e r levis o r w h i l e i n t e r a c t i n g w i t h n a t i v e speakers . In l l i
last few decades materials w r i t e r s have g r o w n concerned about this nspeu
a n d , n o w a d a y s , s o c i o c u l t u r a l i n f o r m a t i o n is m o r e o f t e n i n c l u d e d I
c l a s s r o o m language i n s t r u c t i o n .
T h e inclusin o f s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c b e h a v i o r i n t e a c h i n g m a t e r i a l s w i l l
help the language learner to develop his/her a b i l i t y to interact successfullj
i n a foreign speech c o m m u n i t y a n d w i l l g r a d u a l l y intgrate b o t h Iinguisl li
a n d s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c i n f o r m a t i o n . However, these s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c p a t l e i I t l
are o f t e n u n r e l i a b l e because t h e y are e i t h e r based o n the i n d i v i d u a l
i n t u i t i o n s o f m a t e r i a l s w r i t e r s w h o m a y be r e p o r t i n g o n c o n v e n t i o n |f|
t h e i r o w n p a r t i c u l a r speech c o m m u n i t i e s , o r v e r y o f t e n t h i s i n f o r m a l n ffl
is based o n c o m m u n i t y n o r m s r a t h e r t h a n o n a c t u a l use. We, as nal \
speakers o f a speech c o m m u n i t y , s h o u l d n o t assume t h a t a l l the l i n g u i s l i.
a n d social resources w e m a k e use o f are p a r t o f o u r conscious k n o w l c t I n
a n d , therefore, w e m a y have i n t u i t i o n s r e g a r d i n g o u r speech behavic n n
a speech c o m m u n i t y w h i c h do n o t clearly correspond w i t h actual beha\< n
T h i s is t h e r e a s o n w h y o u r n a t i v e speaker i n t u i t i o n s are v e r y u s e f u l In
a n a l y z i n g t h e w a y o t h e r s speak b u t w e c a n n o t t r u s t t h e m completis
w i t h o u t f u r t h e r analysis o f t h e r u l e s o f speaking t o p r e d i c t t h e w a y othi I
people w i l l i n t e r a c t . Finally, t w o aspects need t o be t a k e n i n t o accouni 1 1
w h o s e rules o f speaking w e w a n t to i n c l u d e i n the teaching materials; and
b ) t o w h a t e x t e n t w e c a n g e n e r a l i z e t h e m t o t h e p o i n t o f u s i n g t h e m ||)
second language i n s t r u c t i o n .
A n y h o w , i t seems clear t h a t the s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c i n f o r m a t i o n n e e d o l l n
o r d e r t o be c o m m u n i c a t i v e l y c o m p e t e n t s h o u l d c o m e f r o m i n t e r a e l lofl
w i t h n a t i v e speakers o r p r o f i c i e n t speakers o f t h e l a n g u a g e . R e g a r d i n r
t h e issue o f l a n g u a g e l e a r n i n g , i t m u s t be t a k e n i n t o a c c o u n t tlint
n o w a d a y s , t h e extensive d e v e l o p m e n t o f n e w t e c h n o l o g i e s i n language
l e a r n i n g (e.g. l a n g u a g e l e a r n i n g c o m p u t e r p r o g r a m s , o n - l i n e language
l e a r n i n g , etc.) a n d t h e a i d a n d w i d e s p r e a d o f t e c h n o l o g i c a l developinem
(e.g. cable TV, I n t e r n e t , o r i g i n a l s o u n d t r a c k D V D s , etc.) can also pla\l
i m p o r t a n t r o l e i n s o c i o c u l t u r a l d e v e l o p m e n t e s p e c i a l l y i n t h e case o l
a u t o n o m o u s language learners.
(Please go t o t h e exercises s e c t i o n a n d d o exercise 1.)
the bJbSSSS ofel^Zt 1 0 s o c i o l i n ^ tent
^^tio^^ulT^
une,cultural m 7 * ^ E n g l i s h
be taught at a d S p m at a dffflnt T y a u s o c l o c u , l t u r a l
.hrough iun^S!^S7 ' o r t h a t w o u l d b e ' a c q u i r e d
UNIT 6
I, C O M M U N I C A T I V E C O M P E T E N C E IN LANGUAGE
TEACHING/LEARNING
1
The concept o f c o m m u n i c a t i v e competence was i n t r o d u c e d i n chapter
o n e a n d i t c o m p r i s e s v a r i o u s t y p e s o f k n o w l e d g e a n d s k i l l s s u c h as
linguistic, s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c a n d p r a g m a t i c . C o m m u n i c a t i v e c o m p e t e n c e is
n e e d e d f o r successful i n t e r a c t i o n a m o n g m e m b e r s o f t h e s a m e speech
c o m m u n i t y , a n d i n t h i s u n i t i t is a n a l y z e d f r o m t h e p o i n t o f v i e w o f
h a e i g n / s e c o n d l a n g u a g e l e a r n i n g as t h e p r o c e s s o f l e a r n i n g a
loivign/second language i n e v i t a b l y involves some degree o f i n t e r c u l t u r a l
i o m m u n i c a t i o n , a s i t u a t i o n o f c o n t a c t b e t w e e n d i f f e r e n t c u l t u r a l vales,
and social practices.
L i n g u i s t i c c o m p e t e n c e s refer to the knowledge of lexical, phonological
and syntactical elements a n d o t h e r d i m e n s i o n s of language that the
language l e a r n e r has learned as p a r t of the system, such as sociolinguistic
rules a n d p r a g m a t i c k n o w l e d g e . L i n g u i s t i c c o m p e t e n c e c o m p r i s e s t h e
knowledge o f vocabulary, p r o n u n c i a t i o n r u l e s , syntactic p a t t e r n s a n d t h e
cognitive o r g a n i z a t i o n a n d storage o f t h i s k n o w l e d g e i n t h e b r a i n o f t h e
language l e a r n e r . L i n g u i s t i c c o m p e t e n c e w i l l v a r y f r o m one l e a r n e r t o
another d e p e n d i n g o n v a r i o u s factors s u c h as t h e n u m b e r o f years spent
learning t h e second language, t h e rate o f l e a r n i n g , the age w h e n c o n t a c t
w i t h t h e second language s t a r t e d , t h e l e a r n e r s m o t i v a t i o n , t h e l e a r n i n g
context ( w h e t h e r language is l e a r n e d f o r m a l l y o r a c q u i r e d f r o m n a t u r a l
exposure), etc. B u t language is a social b e h a v i o r a n d is m o r e t h a n j u s t a
knowledge o f the l i n g u i s t i c system.
S o c i o l i n g u i s t i c c o m p e t e n c e s are c o n c e r n e d w i t h t h e s o c i a l a n d
c u l t u r a l c o n d i t i o n s for the use of language a n d the social conventions that
rule language use i n a specific speech c o m m u n i t y . These w o u l d c o m p r i s e
n o r m s r e g a r d i n g politeness, n o r m s r e g a r d i n g relations b e t w e e n t h e sexes
or different classes, social groups o r generations, n o r m s r e g a r d i n g different
registers, etc. S o c i o l i n g u i s t i c c o m p e t e n c e s are n o r m a l l y a c q u i r e d a f t e r
some degree o f l i n g u i s t i c c o m p e t e n c e has b e e n a t t a i n e d w h i c h is o f t e n
c o n s i d e r e d t h e v e h i c l e t h r o u g h w h i c h s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c c o m p e t e n c e s are
achieved. I n t h e foreign language c u r r i c u l u m , sociolinguistic competences
are n o t a l w a y s present a n d w h e n t h e y are, t h e y are o f t e n c o n s i d e r e d o
side i m p o r t a n c e a n d s o m e t h i n g t h a t t h e language l e a r n e r w i l l a c q u i r e o n
his/her o w n i n d u e t i m e . T h i s p e r s p e c t i v e o n l y p a r t i a l l y m a k e s sense
because i f i t is t r u e t h a t s o m e basic l i n g u i s t i c competence is needed first,
w a s not motivated I,
s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c c o n t e n t s a n d s e n s i b i l i t y c o u l d , a n d a c t u a l l y s h o u l d , be
for national '
component thal si ,1 i n t r o d u c e d gradually. As a r u l e t h e m o r e d i s t a n t a n d d i f f e r e n t the native
' y
h the le< ' c u l t u r e o f t h e language l e a r n e r a n d t h e target language c u l t u r e , the more
 I pe ple address one a n o t h e r i n different situations. The s t u d y of forms
differences [he language leai nei will find and the harder il w i l l be lo itOl l address is a r e c u r r e n t t o p i c i n s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c research because they are
t h e m . F o r instance, a native Spanish speaker f r o m Spain w i l l find a h| non i n discourse a n d very easily observed. Whenever one person
gap b e t w e e n his/her h o m e c u l t u r e a n d s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c r u l e s a n d | |)i iiks l o a n o t h e r t h e r e is a w h o l e range o f o p t i o n s t h a t t h e speaker can
Japanese c u l t u r e t h a n w i t h t h e I t a l i a n c u l t u r e , so i t w i l l be prcsi Ii i ' i o refer t o t h e addressee a n d these m a y v a r y f r o m one language to the
m o r e d i f f i c u l t t o acquire s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c competences i n Japanese i l O l l i e i tlepending o n t h e social conventions; t h e type o f r e l a t i o n s h i p a m o n g
I t a l i a n as a f o r e i g n language. l l i e i n t e r l o c u t o r s ; a n d t h e s o c i o c u l t u r a l d i s t a n c e b e t w e e n t h e languages
n o . lved. W o l f s o n a n d M a n e s (1978) s t u d i e d t h e use o f t h e address f o r m
N o r m a l l y , lack of knowledge o f sociolinguistic rules a n d behavii H I
m,i 'am i n t h e U n i t e d States a n d f o u n d o u t t h a t i t has d i f f e r e n t m e a n i n g s
govern y o u r i n t e r l o c u t o r ' s speech m a y result i n a c o m m u n n i t l
in i l i e S o u t h o f t h e U n i t e d States t h a n i t has i n o t h e r p a r t s o f t h e country.
b r e a k d o w n . I t s h o u l d be p o i n t e d o u t that the h i g h e r the language l e a r n
l i n g u i s t i c c o m p e t e n c e t h e m o r e s/he w i l l be e x p e c t e d t o have a d e q u | I l i e y observed t h a t t h e t e r m ma'am w a s c o m m o n l y u s e d i n s t e a d o f t h e
s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c a n d p r a g m a t i c c o m p e t e n c e s i n his/her i n t e r a c t i o n vvifl Im nulas 7 begyour pardon?' o r 'Pardon?', t h a t is, t o indcate t h a t y o u h a d
native speaker o f the target language. So, a native speaker of any langUI in ii lieard w h a t y o u r female i n t e r l o c u t o r h a d j u s t said o r t o request f u r t h e r
w i l l n a t u r a l l y e x p e c t a n d a s s u m e a h i g h c u l t u r a l , s o c i o l i n g u i s l i< i | i ' l . m a t i o n . W o l f s o n (1989: 80) provides t h e f o l l o w i n g example:
atic >n. W o t t s o i
p r a g m a t i c competence f r o m his i n t e r l o c u t o r i f s/he has a g o o d c o m ell m e h o w late y o u ' r e n o pneenn tt h
h ii ss evening?
evening.
o f the l i n g u i s t i c system. A- (2 o u l d y o u 1
r\ '
\Aa'am?
P r a g m a t i c c o m p e t e n c e s r e f e r t o t h e f u n c t i o n a l use o f l i n g u l | r. t d l m e h o w late y o u ' r e o p e n t h i s e v e n i n g .
resources s u c h as language f u n c t i o n s a n d speech acts i n i n t e r a c t i o n Could you
A-
also c o n c e r n s i t s e l f w i t h t h e l a n g u a g e l e a r n e r s m a s t e r y o f d i s i
R- T l n t i l six.
m a r k e r s , cohesin a n d c o h e r e n c e a n d t h e r e c o g n i t i o n o f text types, ihfl D. i 11 i ' ^
o p e n o n Sundays?
presence o f i r o n y , p a r o d y a n d politeness a m o n g o t h e r t h i n g s (see sei i A- You're n o t
r\.
6 i n this chapter). D Pardon?
D
. o p e n o n Sundays?
A\ You're no1
3. T H E S O C I O L I N G U I S T I C B E H A V I O R O F E N G L I S H B :: NNo . M n t t h a t the
n r

SPEAKERS: RULES OF SPEAKING I n t h e same v e i n W o l f s o n a n d M a n e s (ibid.) r e p o r t t h a t t h e expression

'Yes, ma'am' is used as a response t o 'Thank you, w i t h the m e a n i n g o f 'You
Speech c o m m u n i t i e s very f r e q u e n t l y e x h i b i t d i f f e r e n t styles o f i n l i
are welcome:
r a c t i o n at the s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c a n d p r a g m a t i c level. The analysis o f so< Ii i 3. A: C o u l d y o u t e l l m e h o w late y o u ' r e o p e n t h i s evening?
l i n g u i s t i c b e h a v i o r i n native E n g l i s h speaking c o m m u n i t i e s c a n p r o \l
useful insights f o r the t e a c h i n g a n d l e a r n i n g o f languages as the descrip B: U n t i l nine.
t i o n o f rules o f s p e a k i n g c a n h e l p the teacher a n d the learner t o systema-
A: T h a n k y o u v e r y m u c h .
tize the process o f language l e a r n i n g . B e l o w are t w o samples o f some r u l e s
o f speaking r e g a r d i n g a d d r e s s b e h a v i o r a n d t e l e p h o n i n g t h a t can cei B : Yes, m a ' a m .
tainly be taught i n the classroom setting w i t h relative ease, a l t h o u g h othei i 4. A: C o u l d y o u t e l l m e h o w late y o u ' r e o p e n t h i s evening?
like greetings, p a r t i n g s o r refusals c o u l d also have been selected.
B : U n t i l ve-thirty.

3. I . A d d r e s s behavior A: T h a n k y o u very m u c h .

B : You're w e l c o m e . W o l f s o n (1989: 80
Some o f the earliest s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c studies o n speech behavior f r o m a
c r o s s l i n g u i s t i c perspective w e r e d o n e o n the f o r m s o f address, that is, t h l
 AN I N T R O D U C *T Im J O f iI /OuI . I INMI . .- 1, , I. ' ,
O N- T iO ' n
In this study, they not leed as w i l l i hat the 'orm ma'am n o l < m l j
different m e a n i n g s i n the S o u t h o f the U n i t e d States, b u t i t was also u
i n d i f f e r e n t s o c i a l c o n t e x t s . I n t h e N o r t h , t h i s f o r m t e n d e d t o bi u
b e t w e e n strangers whereas i n t h e S o u t h i t w a s u s e d n o t o n l y t o s t r a n f l
b u t also t o a c q u a i n t a n c e s a n d f r i e n d s .
F o r m s o f address c o n s t i t u t e a conspicuous s i g n o f status relal ion l\
and different languages m a y offer different possibilities a n d difieren i di gl
of f o r m a l i t y a n d social distance. T h i s is, i n fact, a frequent m i s t a k e [H
b y language learners e s p e c i a l l y at l o w e r p r o f i c i e n e y levis as thl
of L l s o c i o p r a g m a t i c rules leads t o v i o l a t i o n s o f t h e i n t e r l o c u t o r s ' nddu
behavior. I n m a n y E u r o p e a n languages, f o r instance, speakers consum,
choose p r o n o u n s (e.g.: Germn: du a n d Sie; S p a n i s h : tu a n d usted) .un
n o m i n a l (e.g.: f i r s t ame; t i t l e p l u s last ame; etc.), o r v e rb c o n j u g n l l n i i
(e.g.: c o n d i t i o n a l s ) t o reflect status r e l a t i o n s h i p a n d degree o f f o r m a l l l
However, Wolfson (1989: 85) p o i n t s o u t that m a n y non-European langu.i
m a r k a n u m b e r o f m o r e s u b t l e d i s t i n c t i o n s , as i t is t h e case o l A I ni
languages (e.g. Japanese, Chnese, etc.) w h i c h are especially k n o w n foi lln ll
elaboration i n f o r m a l i t y a n d the ampie variety o f politeness resources. N
(2001: 254), for instance, refers t o the Germn address behavior as typii iilly
based o n d u a l register d i s t i n c t i o n : (a) a f o r m a l , respectful, socially el i si a l ti
o n e c h a r a c t e r i z e d b y t h e use o f t h e p r o n o u n Sie a n d a n i n f o r m a l ,
familiar, socially p r o x i m a t e one c h a r a c t e r i z e d b y the use o f the p r o n
du. Germn L 2 l e a r n e r s w o u l d t h e n need to a c q u i r e c o n t r o l over l l i l i
address system w h i c h involves the a c q u i s i t i o n o f the pragmalinguisic loi ni
( t h e l i n g u i s t i c f o r m s du a n d Sie), t h e s o c i o p r a g m a t i c r u l e s ( t o relali
p a r t i c u l a r f o r m s w i t h c o n t e x t u a l variables), a n d the a r r a n g e m e n t ol bull
types o f k n o w l e d g e i n language use.
3.2. T e l e p h o n i n g
T h e w a y people answer the p h o n e o r i n i t i a t e a telephone conversa i Ion
vares f r o m l a n g u a g e t o l a n g u a g e a n d f r o m c u l t u r e t o c u l t u r e . T i n
s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c rules (either s e l f - i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o r a n s w e r i n g rules) are ni il
generally open t o conscious c o n s i d e r a t i o n a n d very o f t e n speakers are ju i
u n a w a r e o f t h e i r existence u n t i l t h e i r s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c expectations un
b r o k e n a n d t h e y realize t h a t these r u l e s a c t u a l l y exist.
I n t h e U n i t e d States, f o r e x a m p l e , a p h o n e c a l i w i l l p r o b a b l y h e g l l l
w i t h t h e c a l l e r o f f e r i n g a n a p o l o g y t o t h e p e r s o n a n s w e r i n g t h e p i n un
especially i f i t is a t i m e o f t h e day w h e n t h e caller m a y be busy o l is liki I
to be d i s t u r b e d , l i k e m e a l t i m e o r l a t e a t n i g h t . I n F r a n c e , t h i s saini
hpology is e v e n m o r e l i k e l y t o h a p p e n a n d i n E n g l a n d a m o n g s t s o m e
(iioiips a n d s o c i a l classes. I n F r a n c e , c a l l e r s are v e r y l i k e l y t o i d e n t i f y
llieinselves a n d t o check t h a t t h e y are c a l l i n g t o the right n u m b e r whereas
Hu is s e l d o m d o n e i n S p a i n . T h e rules o f s e l f - i d e n t i f i c a t i o n i n telephone
i nlls is c e r t a i n l y v e r y v a r i a b l e across c u l t u r e s . I n G e r m a n y , f o r instance,
lln I i i st t h i n g t h e p e r s o n w h o a n s w e r s t h e p h o n e g e n e r a l l y d o e s i s t o
l i l e n l i l y h i m / h e r s e l f w i t h o u t b e i n g asked t o d o so. H o w e v e r , these r u l e s
ili.ii can at s o m e p o i n t be i n c l u d e d i n t h e language c u r r i c u l u m are l i k e l y
10 c hange t h e s e days d u e t o t h e r a p i d d e v e l o p m e n t o f i n f o r m a t i o n
I . Imologies a n d t h e a s t o n i s h i n g a n d s t i l l i n c r e a s i n g n u m b e r o f m o b i l e
pin mes w h i c h lets t h e a n s w e r e r k n o w , o n m a n y occasions, w h o is c a l l i n g .
11 is also i n t e r e s t i n g t h a t as t h e answerer c a n be l o cated a n y w h e r e a n d so
II may n o t be a c o n v e n i e n t m o m e n t , t h e c a l l e r tends t o ask i f i t is a g o o d
im inicnt t o speak.
i Please go t o t h e exercises s e c t i o n a n d d o exercises 2 a n d 3.)
4. S O C I O L I N G U I S T I C P E R S P E C T I V E S O N L A N G U A G E
USE IN IMMERSION C L A S S R O O M S
B i l i n g u a l e d u c a t i o n a n d i m m e r s i o n p r o g r a m s o f t e n r e s p o n d t o social
needs a n d a i m at developing proficieney i n the second language for students
i li.ii w i l l n e e d i t f o r o ne r e a s o n o r t h e other. T h e a c t u a l i m p l e m e n t a t i o n
and degree o f success o f these p r o g r a m s is subjected, however, t o a n u m b e r
i >l external factors resulting f r o m special sociopolitical situation, a variation
in the t e a c h i n g resources a v a i l a b l e , t h e e x t e n t o f i m m e r s i o n ( p a r t i a l o r
l o t a l ; e a r l y o r late), t h e status o f t h e L 2 o u t s i d e t h e c l a s s r o o m , etc. T h i s
means t h a t w h a t e v e r d e c i s i o n s a n d a c t i o n s seem p l a u s i b l e f r o m a
l l i c o r e t i c a l a n d f o r m a l p o i n t o f v i e w m a y n o t have as g o o d r e s u l t s as
expected w h e n they are p u t i n t o practice. Extensive research has been done
on C a n a d i a n i m m e r s i o n i n t h e last decades t r y i n g t o f i n d o u t a b o u t t h e
s h o r t c o m i n g s i n t h e i r i m p l e m e n t a t i o n as w e l l as t h e assessment o f
proficieney a t t a i n e d b y students b y t h e t i m e o f t h e i r g r a d u a t i o n .
O n e o f t h e p r o b l e m s f o u n d t h o u g h c l a s s r o o m o b s e r v a t i o n is t h a t a
diglossic s i t u a t i o n c a n easily develop i n i m m e r s i o n c l a s s r o o m s j u s t as i n
any speech c o m m u n i t y , t h a t is, t h e language o f i n s t r u c t i o n , o r
2
. - 1 5 f e r s ,o , diglossic si.ua.ion . m i c r C . e . . ,ha, >s, w i . h i n ft. d
., hool setting.
 166
AN INTRODUCCION TO SOCIOLIN(;I)ISI I( .
s u p e r o r d i n a t e language, acts as t h e f o r m a l language variety used w i t h lln
t e a c h e r a n d u s e d as a l a n g u a g e f o r a c a d e m i c p u r p o s e s , a n d t h e L l I *
p r e f e r r e d i n i n f o r m a l speech a n d social i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h o t h e r classniates
a n d acts as t h e subordnate language, o r a v e r n a c u l a r , (see diglossia i n
c h a p t e r 4) p r e f e r r e d f o r p e e r i n t e r a c t i o n i n play, c o m p e t i t i o n , arg ni ,
etc. T a r o n e a n d S w a i n ( 1 9 9 5 : 166) indcate t h a t "[] i m m e r s i o n
classrooms are n o t o n l y diglossic b u t b e c o m e increasingly so i n t h e uppei
p r i m a r y grades.", a n d t h i s c a n be seen b y a cise o b s e r v a t i o n o f t h e t\n
o f L 2 i n p u t a n d L 2 o u t p u t w i t h i n the c l a s s r o o m , t h e individuis involved
i n the i n t e r a c t i o n (either t e a c h e r - p u p i l o r peer-peer c o m m u n i c a t i o n ) , and
t h e purposes o f t h e i n f o r m a t i o n exchange. T h e m a i n difference between
t h i s k i n d o f diglossic speech c o m m u n i t y a n d a n y o t h e r o c e u r r i n g outside
t h i s c o n t e x t is t h a t i n s t e a d o f b e i n g s t a b l e , these ' s p e c i a l ' speec h
c o m m u n i t i e s i n c l a s s r o o m i m m e r s i o n c h a n g e o v e r t i m e d u e t o aspet i
s u c h as cognitive, social o r p e r s o n a l factors affecting t h i s p e c u l i a r speech
c o m m u n i t y , i.e. t h e y c h a n g e as t h e y b e c o m e g r o w n u p s a n d t h e i r social
a n d cognitive resources b e c o m e m a t u r e . T h i s s i t u a t i o n m a y be caused by
t h e fact t h a t t h e L 2 language t a u g h t b y t h e teachers a n d l e a r n e d b y the
students n o r m a l l y p e r f o r m s specific functions, s u c h as i n s t r u c t i o n a l public
discourse, b u t i t does n o t serve o t h e r i n t e r p e r s o n a l a n d t r i v i a l purposes
w h i c h s h o u l d also be p a r t o f t h e a c q u i r e d r e p e r t o i r e .
A n a d d i t i o n a l d i f f i c u l t y t h a t t h e l a n g u a g e l e a r n e r has t o face w h e n
l e a r n i n g a language largely spoken i n the w o r l d , for instance an
i n t e r n a t i o n a l language l i k e E n g l i s h o r S p a n i s h , is t h a t the s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c
rules m a y vary f r o m one place t o t h e o t h e r as these rules o f b e h a v i o u r are
n o r m a l l y specific t o a p a r t i c u l a r speech c o m m u n i t y a n d n o t necessarily
p a r t of a w h o l e c o u n t r y . T h i s changes w h e n a language is used as a lingua
franca o r L W C as t h e l a n g u a g e t h a t is b e i n g u s e d f o r i n t e r c u l t u r a l
c o m m u n i c a t i o n is n o t t h e n a t i v e l a n g u a g e f o r a n y o f t h e speakers a n d
therefore its use is n o t c u l t u r a l l y b o u n d . M o r e o f t e n these days E n g l i s h is
used i n t h i s w a y a n d speakers are therefore a w a r e o f i t a n d t h e y j u s t use
the language as a c o m m o n code f o r t h e t r a n s m i s s i o n o f m e a n i n g w i t h o u t
s h o w i n g o r e x p e c t i n g c u l t u r a l loads.
A n o t h e r a s p e c t o f l a n g u a g e l e a r n i n g t h a t is c l o s e l y r e l a t e d t o
s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s a n d is w o r t h t a k i n g i n t o a c c o u n t is t h a t o f d i a l e c t . I n
E n g l i s h , f o r instance, a w h o l e r a n g e o f dialects a n d varieties are s p o k e n
i n the w o r l d , b o t h w i t h i n a n E n g l i s h - s p e a k i n g c o u n t r y l i k e Great B r i t a i n
o r l l i e U n i t e d States, o r d i f f e r e n c e s r e g a r d i n g these v a r i e t i e s f r o m one
c o u n t r y t o the other, i.e. t h e ways i n w h i c h B r i t i s h E n g l i s h is d i f f e r e n t t o
A u s t r a l i a n E n g l i s h (see W o r l d E n g l i s h e s i n t h i s c h a p t e r ) . Needless t o say
some varieties have m o r e prestige o r social status t h a n others a n d , u n d e r
167
UNIT 6
lome c i r c u m s t a n c e s , t h i s c a n d e t e r m i n e t h e v a r i e t y o r v a r i e t i e s t h a t a
|iven i n s t i t u t i o n t r i e s t o t e a c h o r a l a n g u a g e l e a r n e r w a n t s t o l e a r n . So,
when E n g l i s h is learned as a foreign language some decisions are i m p l i c i t l y
o r c x p l i c i t l y made r e g a r d i n g the language variety o r varieties t o be learned.
1 These decisions are o f t e n n o t m a d e b y t h e l e a r n e r b u t b y t h e i n s t i t u t i o n
where t h a t language is b e i n g t a u g h t ( i n the case o f f o r m a l i n s t r u c t i o n ) o r
l i m p l y b y the chance of h a v i n g a teacher c o m i n g f r o m one c o u n t r y o r
the o t h e r ( i n t h e case o f n a t i v e teachers) o r w h o have a l r e a d y made t h e i r
choice ( i n t h e case o f n o n - n a t i v e teachers). Very f r e q u e n t l y learners make
t h e i r c h o i c e o f o n e v a r i e t y o r t h e o t h e r a f t e r a stay i n a g i v e n country/
regin.
5. A N A L Y S I S O F T H E E F L C L A S S R O O M LANGUAGE
C l a s s r o o m language is r e l a t i v e l y o r g a n i z e d a n d p u r p o s i v e i n c o n t r a s t
to casual c o n v e r s a t i o n i n a n o r d i n a r y social setting. T h i s c a n be seen, f o r
instance, i n t h e w a y t u r n - t a k i n g is o r g a n i z e d . I n c a s u a l i n t e r a c t i o n t h e
i n l e r l o c u t o r s express a g r e e m e n t a n d d i s a g r e e m e n t i n a n u m b e r o f ways
but they o f t e n i n t e r r u p t each o t h e r as p a r t o f the c o m m u n i c a t i o n process
and t h e i r resources t o s h o w t h e i r opinin. I n the c l a s s r o o m context, t u r n -
l a k i n g is f r e q u e n t l y d e t e r m i n e d b y t h e t y p e s o f i n t e r l o c u t o r s (teacher-
sludent or student-student) and, i f involved, d o m i n a t e d by the teacher
w h o is o f t e n m o r e c o n c e r n e d a b o u t h o w t h i n g s are said r a t h e r t h a n w h a t
is b e i n g s a i d . C l a s s r o o m l a n g u a g e is i n m a n y ways a n u n u s u a l f o r m o f
s p o k e n i n t e r a c t i o n t h a t o f t e n has n o t h i n g t o d o w i t h r e a l o r g e n e r a l
I m g l i s h , b o t h i n t e r m s o f discourse m a r k e r s a n d type o f i n t e r a c t i o n a n d
also i n t e r m s o f language s t r u c t u r e a n d choice. So, i d i o m a t i c language is
not always p a r t o f t h e c l a s s r o o m or are c o m p l e x s y n t a c t i c s t r u c t u r e s o r
specific v o c a b u l a r y s u c h as slang, a m o n g o t h e r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f n a t u r a l
a n d c o l l o q u i a l speech.
C l a s s r o o m language is also p a r t o f a n ' a s y m m e t r i c encounter'. One o l
llie p a r t i c i p a n t s is a c c e p t e d as c o n t r o l l i n g t h e d i r e c t i o n o f t h e d i a l o g u e
a n d s/he, t h e r e f o r e , m a k e s use o f a p a r t i c u l a r l a n g u a g e t h a t is k n o w n
a m o n g s p e c i a l i s t s as t e a c h e r t a l k . T e a c h e r t a l k c o n s t i t u t e s a v a r i e t y o f
l a n g u a g e s o m e t i m e s u s e d b y t e a c h e r s w h e n t h e y are i n t h e process o
l e a c h i n g , i.e., a c o n v e n t i o n a l i z e d w a y o f s p e a k i n g i n a p a r t i c u l a r r o l e , i n
i b i s case t h e r o l e o f t h e teacher, w h i c h does n o t d i f f e r at t h e level o l
l i n g u i s t i c s t r u c t u r e ( p r o n u n c i a t i o n , s y n t a x , speech acts, etc.) b u t does
d i f f e r i n s o m e o t h e r g e n e r a l features s u c h as h i g h e r p i t c h , m o r e c a r e f u l
i n l o n a t i o n a n d e n u n c i a t i o n , s h o r t e r sentences, m o r e f r e q u e n t r e p e t i l i o n s
 I f) AN I N I KODIK T I O N TO SOCIOI.INOI US INIT6
T - Right, so ... I asked you to finish the vocabulary section on page
5

and i n o r e q u e s t i o n s l l i a n usual i n ^ o l l o q u i a l speech. The teachei IN I

seven [...] at home so [...] page thirteen ... right... page thirteen, [...] the
addressee o f m o s t student utteranees a n d this is favored by the way i I.e
vocabulary [...] (I)
have t r a d i t i o n a l l y been c o n c e i v e d t h e t e a c h e r as a k n o w l n l
t r a n s m i t t e r a n d , enhanced b y t h e classroom's p h y s i c a l organiza in >n T- So, page t h i r t e e n let see ... r i g h t ... first w o r d real, germine
a l l desks f a c i n g t h e teacher. N o t e t h a t a t e a c h e r w h o w a n t s t o p r o n u anybody?, come on, anybody? (I)
student-student i n t e r a c t i o n a n d d i s c u s s i o n w i l l arrange desks d i f l e i e n l ' S Actual. ( R )
r

f o r instance, i n circles.
T- Actual, ( F ) that's i n paragraph one [...] number two, challenging
I n t h e a n a l y s i s o f c l a s s r o o m d i s c o u r s e , as o f a n y o t h e r type " I
ordifficult. (I)
i n t e r a c t i o n , language c a n n o t be p r o p e r l y u n d e r s t o o d w i t h o u t t a k i i u m i
5 - Demanding. ( R )
1
2

a c c o u n t its social c o n t e x t (i.e. t h e p a r t i c u l a r c i r c u m s t a n c e s u n d e r w h l i h

T- Demanding. ( F ) Is everybody w i t h me? ( F ) [...] please ... thank
s o m e t h i n g is b e i n g said, as w e l l as, t h e rest o f t h e s u r r o u n d i n g l a n g u n g t
you. Number three, a bedroom for many students ... (I)
e i t h e r i n t h e f o r m o f s p o k e n d i s c o u r s e o r w r i t t e n discourse). As a resiilj
5 - Dormitory. (R)
o f t h i s , a n u m b e r o f f a c t o r s n e e d t o be t a k e n i n t o a c c o u n t a b o u t llie
3

l e a r n i n g s i t u a t i o n a n d t h e c l a s s r o o m c o n t e x t . I n a n y case, w e s h o u l f l
3
T. Dormitory. ( F ) A bedroom or, remember, a place where the
r e m e m b e r that i n t r a d i t i o n a l classroom settings there are often asymmeti li students live. Dormitory. [...] That's right. N u m b e r four, to aid or to
encounters as the teacher tends to have 'the knowledge' a n d h o l d a posil encourage. (I)
o f p o w e r i n r e l a t i o n t o students. I n a d d i t i o n t o t h i s , language learners un 5 - To support. (R)
4

i n a way h i n d e r e d i n t h e i r speech abilities i n the sense that they are m a k i n | T- To support, ( F ) paragraph three, to support... M m , number five
use o f a l i n g u i s t i c s y s t e m t h a t t h e y d o n o t c o n t r o l c o m p l e t e l y a n d
to mix with and join a group of people ... (I)
4

therefore, t h e y c a n n o t always c o m m u n i c a t e f u l l y ( n o d o u b t this d e p e n d

5 - To intgrate. ( R )
5

o n the proficieney level o f learners, a n d the type o f t e a c h i n g methodology

T- To intgrate, ( F ) A h ... r i g h t ... six, a written or printed
t h a t is b e i n g used).
announcement giving information. (I)
Different moves are characteristic o f some speakers r a t h e r t h a n othem
5 - A notice. (R)
6

i n a n u n e q u a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n e n c o u n t e r s u c h as t e a c h e r - s t u d e n t . f i n HEA notice (F)... seven ... thorough and concentrated. (F)

three-part c h a i n of teacher i n i t i a t i o n , s t u d e n t response, a n d teachei
e v a l u a t i o n is p r o b a b l y the m o s t f r e q u e n t p a t t e r n o f c l a s s r o o m discourse 5 - Intensive.
7 (R)
at a l l grade levis. The analysis o f teacher-led classroom discourse generalh
T- Intensive, intensive, Ok? ( F ) M m ... eight ... to be present at a
finds examples o f t h i s p a t t e r n , a n d a n y o n e h e a r i n g i t recognizes i t as a n
i n s t a n c e o f c l a s s r o o m t a l k . So, teachers t e n d t o i n i t i a t e i n t e r a c t i o n and place. ( I )
students generally respond to these i n t u i t i o n s . Later, teachers often provide 5 - To attend. ( R ) 8

a f o l l o w u p r e s p o n s e t h a t c a n be i n t e r p r e t e d as a f e e d b a c k f o r t h l T- To attend, ... attend ... ( F ) Nine complete ... complete... (I)

students. These t h r e e c o m m o n moves c a n be s u m m a r i z e d as: ( I ) n i t i a t i o n 5 - Comprehensive. (R) 9

( b y t h e t e a c h e r ) ; ( R ) e s p o n s e , ( b y t h e s t u d e n t ) a n d ; ( F ) o l l o w u p (by t h l T- Comprehensive, ... comprehensive ... ( F ) Right ... ( F ) That is i n

t e a c h e r ) . S t u d y t h e f o l l o w i n g e x c e r p t w h i c h is a t y p e s c r i p t o f a r e a l paragraph four ... ten ... equipment... paragraph four again .... no? (I)
c l a s s r o o m d i a l o g u e a n d analyze t h e d i f f e r e n t moves m a d e b y the teachei
a n d the s t u d e n t . S - Facilities. ( R ) 10

T- Facilities. ( F ) That's right Jos Ignacio, ( F ) that was paragraph

four [...] where i t says a comprehensive language course with computer

' Anyone interested i n studying classroom discourse more deeply can read Sinclair and
< unllhaicl (1975). . , s s S j etc. stands for student one, student two, Student
4 Some specialists t h i n k that second language learning i n adulthood is, i n a way, like s T stands for teacher, and S !> , . eu.. 2 3

i'oiii;' back lo childhood because adults cannot express everything they wanl in the 1.2.
hree, etc.
 I /u
AN IN I RODIICTION IO SOCIOI.IN(UIN
facilities ... eh ... computer facilities .... e q u i p m e n t . . . M m ... eleven <i ;
or talk. (I)
S - Lecture.
u (R)
T- A lecture. (F) A t B r i t i s h u n i v e r s i t i e s classes, w h a t w e c a l i CIM
h e r e are l e c t u r e s ... The humanities? (I)
S i r Arts. (R)
I f y o u p a y a t t e n t i o n t o t h i s d i a l o g u e , y o u w i l l see h o w t h e tea
c o n t r o l s b o t h t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e t o p i c ( i n t h i s case t h e c o r r c i i
a n exercise assigned as h o m e w o r k ) , a n d w h o gets o r gives a t u r n l o lu
W h a t is m o r e , s/he d o e s n o t a s k ' r e a l ' q u e s t i o n s b e c a u s e s/he airea
k n o w s t h e answers a n d , i n fact, a l l t h a t s/he does is t o check the studfl
answers.
A n o t h e r i m p o r t a n t aspect t o take i n t o account a b o u t this excerpl is i hu
a language c l a s s r o o m is special i n t h e sense t h a t language is used lo i.ill.
a b o u t l a n g u a g e ( m e t a l a n g u a g e ) r a t h e r t h a n o t h e r subjects (e.g. h i s l o i
m a t h , etc.) w h e r e t h e language is j u s t a vehicle t o t a l k a b o u t c o n t e n Is
(Please go t o t h e exercises s e c t i o n a n d d o exercises 4, 5 a n d 6)
6. I M P L I C A T I O N S F O R L A N G U A G E T E A C H I N G
T h e practice t h a t students generally get i n spoken i n t e r a c t i o n ma\l
f i t t h e m f o r t h e i r c o m m u n i c a t i o n needs a n d t h e i r r o l e i n t h e classn iom
b u t i t does n o t h i n g , o r at least n o t e n o u g h , t o h e l p t h e m w i t h t h e 11 ili
t h e y w i l l need t o p l a y i n E n g l i s h o u t s i d e t h e c l a s s r o o m .
T h i s is one o f t h e s h o r t c o m i n g s t h a t task-based i n s t r u c t i o n w h i c l i I
o r g a n i z e d a r o u n d tasks r a t h e r t h a n i n t e r m s o f g r a m m a r o r v o c a b u l . u |
t r i e s t o a v o i d o r m i n i m i z e . These tasks u s i n g t h e t e l e p h o n e t o o b i . u n
i n f o r m a t i o n , p e r f o r m i n g a c c o r d i n g to oral i n s t r u c t i o n s , giving a mi
r e c e i v i n g i n s t r u c t i o n s , etc. are t o be c a r r i e d o u t b y students i n o r d c i ii |
d e v e l o p t h e i r l i n g u i s t i c skills. I m m e r s i o n p r o g r a m s e n t a i l content-based
i n s t r u c t i o n a n d is, i n a way, s i m i l a r t o task-based i n s t r u c t i o n ( a t t e n i i o u
t o c o n t e n t i n s t e a d o f a t t e n t i o n t o f o r m ) . S t u d e n t s i n these p r o g r a m s a i e
e x p e c t e d t o l e a r n a s e c o n d l a n g u a g e t h r o u g h i t s use i n t e a c h i n g o t h e r
s u b j e c t s b u t r e c e n t r e s e a r c h has s h o w n t h a t t h i s s o r t o f r e s t r i c t e d
s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c c o n t e x t l i m i t s t h e p o s s i b i l i t i e s o f t h e learners t o i n t o aci
a n d they therefore largely develop receptive skills b u t t h e i r p r o d u c i i v c
s k i l l s are l i m i t e d as t h e e x p o s u r e t o a b u n d a n t c o m p r e h e n s i b l e i n p u t is
n o t a l l t h e y need. S w a i n ( 1 9 9 5 ) has p o i n t e d o u t t h a t f o r c e d o u t p u t also
plays a r o l e i n c o m p r e h e n s i v e language l e a r n i n g .
11 NI 11 o
All i n a l l the s o l u t i o n t o t h i s m e t h o d o l o g i c a l p r o b l e m is n o t a q u e s t i o n
ni i h a n g i n g t h e teachers' use o f language because t h e s t r u c t u r e o f f o r m a l
l l i s l i u c t i o n i n a c l a s s r o o m is socially as i t is, b u t a t t e m p t s s h o u l d be m a d e
|i p enhance a n d w i d e n t h e varieties o f i n p u t t h e l e a r n e r has access t o a n d ,
MISO, a n d m o r e i m p o r t a n t l y , t o forc s t u d e n t s ' o u t p u t .
One possible d i r e c t i o n t o h e l p b r e a k across t h e a u t h o r i t y s t r u c t u r e i n
llie r l a s s r o o m is greater use o f student-student i n t e r a c t i o n , i n c l u d i n g tasks,
mu p a i r a n d g r o u p w o r k . N o t o n l y as a p e d a g o g i c a l d e v i c e t o p r o m o t e
Ir.II uing, b u t as a w a y o f a v o i d i n g the language i m p l i c a t i o n s o f the teacher-
iiulent 'asymmetric encounter'.
7. P R A G M A T I C S I N L A N G U A G E T E A C H I N G
I n recent years, c u r r i c u l a a n d t e a c h i n g materials have began t o i n c l u d e
Itrong p r a g m a t i c c o m p o n e n t s o r t o a d o p t a p r a g m a t i c a p p r o a c h as t h e i r
D r g a n i z i n g p r i n c i p i e . M a n y p r o p o s a l s f o r i n s t r u c t i o n i n v a r i o u s aspects
DJ p r a g m a t i c c o m p e t e n c e are b a s e d o n t h e a n a l y s i s o f n a t i v e s p e a k e r
d i s c o u r s e o r o n t h e c o m p a r i s o n o f i n t e r l a n g u a g e d a t a , as w e l l as
c o n t r a s t i n g L l a n d L2 data. Nevertheless, most r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s for
i n s t r u c t i o n i n p r a g m a t i c s have n o t been e x a m i n e d i n a c t i o n i n the
i lassroom s e t t i n g a n d t h e r e f o r e w e d o n o t r e a l l y k n o w h o w effective they
are for s t u d e n t s ' l e a r n i n g o f the target p r a g m a t i c feature. M u c h research
is needed i n t h i s respect. I n t e r l a n g u a g e p r a g m a t i c s , i.e., the s t u d y a n d use
o f p r a g m a t i c f e a t u r e s b y l a n g u a g e l e a r n e r s t h a t m a k e use o f t h e i r
interlanguage ( a n a p p r o x i m a n t system t h a t is b e t w e e n t h e L l a n d the L 2 )
have n o t been studied i n d e p t h a n d f u r t h e r research is needed t o investgate
h o w t h e l e a r n i n g o f L 2 p r a g m a t i c s is shaped b y i n s t r u c t i o n a l c o n t e x t a n d
activities.
Kasper a n d Rose (2001) p u t f o r w a r d t h a t language learners c a n beneft
from p o s i t i v e t r a n s f e r o f c o m m u n i c a t i v e acts t h a t h a v e b e e n f o u n d
c o n s t a n t across e t h n o l i n g u i s t i c a l l y d i s t a n t speech c o m m u n i t i e s as i t is
ihe case o f the speech act set f o r apologies. T h i s speech a c t c o m p r i s e s as
its c h i e f s e m a n t i c f o r m u l a s a n e x p l i c i t apology, a n e x p l a n a t i o n a n d the
a d m i s s i o n o r d e n i a l o f r e s p o n s i b i l i t y . A m o n g its m i n o r strategies ( b o u n d
l o the c o n t e x t a n d t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s ) are the offer o f repair, a p r o m i s e o
l o r b e a r a n c e , a n d a n e x p r e s s i o n o f c o n c e r n f o r t h e h e a r e r , a n d these
strategies are r e p o r t e d t o have been f o u n d i n a n u m b e r o f languages l i k
E n g l i s h , F r e n c h , Germn, H e b r e w , T h a i a n d Japanese.
L e a r n e r s c a n also get p r a g m a l i n g u i s t i c k n o w l e d g e w i t h o u t any sort o
explicit i n s t r u c t i o n i f there is a analogous f o r m - f u n c t i o n m a p p i n g betwee
 AN INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOI.INOUISI ll
L l a n d L 2 . T h e E n g l i s h m o d a l pasl could a n d would has f o r m a l , functii ni.il
and d i s t r i b u t i o n a l equivalents i n o t h e r G e r m a n i c languages s u c h as Danl l>
(kunne/ville) a n d Germn (knntest/wrdest). A c c o r d i n g t o Faerch . i n d
Kasper (1989) D a n i s h a n d Germn learners o f E n g l i s h w i l l transfer a b i l l t )
q u e s t i o n s f r o m t h e i r L l ( G e r m n : Knntest/wrdest Du mir Deim
Aufzeichnungen leihen? ; D a n i s h : Kunne/wille du lae mig die noet '
E n g l i s h : Could/would you lend me your notes?). H o w e v e r e v i d e n t t h l l
transfer o f p r a g m a l i n g u i s t i c k n o w l e d g e m a y be, i t s h o u l d n o t be assi imi d
t h a t language l e a r n e r s w i l l i n fact m a k e the transfer. S o m e t i m e s the link
between the strategy i n the L l a n d the L 2 m a y n o t be so evident a n d , whftj
is m o r e , l a n g u a g e l e a r n i n g i n v o l v e s a c o m p l e x p s y c h o l i n g u i s t i c p n .
a n d positive t r a n s f e r does n o t always o c e u r i n t h e w a y t h a t was exped i l
T h e r e is t h e n a n e e d f o r d e s c r i p t i o n o f p r a g m a l i n g u i s t i c k n o w l e d g e and
its use i n t h e c l a s s r o o m . 6
8. L A N G U A G E I N T H E L A W
T h e s t u d y o f language i n t h e legal c o n t e x t is a r e l a t i v e l y n e w f i e l d i ij
s t u d y i n spite o f t h e fact t h a t l a w is a p r o f e s s i o n o f w o r d s t h a t has been
p a r t o f c i v i l i z a t i o n f r o m t h e e a r l y t i m e s . T h e i n t e r f a c e between
s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s a n d t h e l a w is a l s o k n o w n as f o r e n s i c l i n g u i s t i c s a n d
c e n t e r s o n t h e s t u d y o f d i s c o u r s e i n l e g a l s e t t i n g s a n d t e x t s , f r o m the
c o u r t r o o m t o plice o r l a w y e r i n t e r v i e w s . Language use i n legal cont\
is n o t e s s e n t i a l l y d i f f e r e n t f r o m a n y o t h e r c o m m u n i c a t i v e s i t u a t i o n ,
a l t h o u g h t h e w a y l a n g u a g e is u s e d i n legal s e t t i n g s c a n have enorme tus
repercussions f o r the w e l l b e i n g o f individuis a n d c o m m u n i t i e s . T h e use
o f language i n legal contexts reflects s i t u a t i o n a l characteristics t h a t shape
the f o r m o f legal discourse a n d i n so d o i n g shows specific characteristics
like a n y o t h e r l a n g u a g e variety.
E a r l y studies i n c o u r t r o o m discourse b y W . M . O ' B a r r a n d J o h n Conlc\
i n t h e l a t e 1970s e x a m i n e d t h e i n f l u e n c e o f l a n g u a g e f a c t o r s o n legal
d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g a n d f o u n d o u t t h a t witncsses g e n e r a l l y m a k e use o f o n e
o f t w o styles: a ' p o w e r l e s s ' s t y l e i n c o r p o r a t i n g a h i g h f r e q u e n e y o l
I n t e n s i f i e r s (e.g., really, great, much more, etc. ) a n d m a n y hedges (e.g.,
kind of, like, in a way, etc. ); o r a ' p o w e r f u l ' s t y l e t h a t l a c k s t h e
a l o r e m e n t i o n e d features a n d therefore sounds m o r e exact a n d c o n f i d e n t .
T h e results o f t h i s e a r l y research s h o w e d t h a t j u r o r s w e r e i n c l i n e d t o f i n d
uttofSSZSS^ K T " t e a c h n g w i " f i n d s o -terestln,
UNIT 6
wilnesses m a k i n g use o f a 'powerful' style m o r e c o n v i n c i n g a n d t r u s t w o r t h y
than those e m p l o y i n g a 'powerless' style. T h i s i n d i c a t e d t h a t the w a y the
i n f o r m a t i o n was presented a n d the witness expressed him/herself d i d have
n i effect o n t h e final o u t e o m e o f the case.
A n o t h e r f e a t u r e o f d i s c o u r s e i n t h e c o u r t r o o m is t h e c l e a r p o w e r
inibalance between the lawyer a n d the witness given the fact that the
f o r m e r d e f i n i t e l y c o n t r o l s the discourse b y l o n g - w i n d e d q u e s t i o n i n g t h a t
require m i n i m a l response, b e i n g coercive a n d c o n t r o l l i n g , o r s i m p l y n o t
letting t h e w i t n e s s tell his/her o w n s t o r y except i n t h e w a y t h e s/he w a n t s
il to be t o l d . A n e x a m p l e o f the w a y t h i s c a n be a t t a i n e d is b y u s i n g Yes-
N o q u e s t i o n s w i t h a t a g , w h i c h m a r k e d l y c o n t r o l t h e a n s w e r (e.g., You
rang her later on, didn't you?) i n o p p o s i t i o n t o b r o a d W H q u e s t i o n s t h a t
pave t h e w a y f o r personal i n t e r p r e t a t i o n (e.g., how, why, what, e t c . ) . Eades
(2001) p r o v i d e s a l i s t o f s o m e o t h e r l i n g u i s t i c strategies t h a t t h a t c a n be
used b y l a w y e r s t o exercise c o n t r o l over witnesses l i k e :
a) interruptions;
b) r e f o r m u l a t i o n o f witness's d e s c r i p t i o n s o f events o r p e o p l e (e.g.,
f r o m my friends t o a group of louts);
c) m a n i p u l a t i o n o f lawyer silence, f o r example, w i t h the use o f strategic
pauses;
d) n o n r e c o g n i t i o n o f s o m e w i t n e s s e s ' n e e d t o use s i l e n c e as p a r t o f
the answer, w h i c h c a n be p a r t i c u l a r l y i m p o r t a n t , f o r example, f o r
A u s t r a l i a n A b o r i g i n a l witnesses;
e) i n c o r p o r a t i o n o f d a m a g i n g p r e s u p p o s i t i o n s i n q u e s t i o n s (such Did
you all laugh while the car was being trashed?);
f) m e t a l i n g u i s t i c d i r e c t i v e s g i v e n t o t h e w i t n e s s ( s u c h as You must
answer this question); and
g) m a n a g e m e n t o f t o p i c s i n o r d e r t o c o n v e y a p a r t i c u l a r i m p r e s s i o n
to the jury.
(Eades, 2 0 0 1 : 232)
T h e a m o u n t o f w o r k o n forensic l i n g u i s t i c s is increasing a n d the effect
this b r a n c h o f l i n g u i s t i c s has o n people's lives is p a r a m o u n t . T h e s t u d y o l
speech b e h a v i o r i n l e g a l l a n g u a g e c o n s t i t u t e s a c l e a r e x a m p l e o f h o w
sociolinguistics c a n have a n o t h e r clear a p p l i c a t i o n f o r o u r lives. Therefore,
s t u d i e s i n a p p l i e d s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s r e g a r d i n g l e g a l l a n g u a g e have
u n d e r t a k e n t h r e e m a i n reas: (a) t h e c o m m u n i c a t i v e d i f f i c u l t i e s t h a l
t y p i c a l l y o c e u r f r o m t h e i n t e r f a c e b e t w e e n t h e legal-layperson as a r e s u l t
of the i n t e r a c t i o n between lawyers, judges, juries, v i c t i m s , witnesses,
 I /t
AN INTRODUCTION TO S(K l( )| IN( ,1 lis | ll
suspects, etc.; ( b ) t h e c o m p r e h e n s i o n o f legal texts are i n t h e m s c l w i and A m e r i c a n S t a n d a r d E n g l i s h i n t h e w a y B r i t i s h a n d A m e r i c a n v a i y
source o f c o m m u n i c a t i v e p r o b l e m s because o f t h e specific j a r g o n thal ll
used as w e l l as the i n t r i c a c y o f the syntax t h a t is generally used; a n d . (i
as a c o n s e q u e n c e o f g l o b a l i z a t i o n , c o l o n i z a t i o n a n d t h e migration
m o v e m e n t s , t h e r e is a n e m e r g i n g d e m a n d for studies r e l a t i n f
c o m m u n i c a t i o n p r o b l e m s faced b y non-native speakers witnesses, suspe< ll
a n d defendants i n the legal process. T h i s s i t u a t i o n r e q u i r e s t h e presen i
of well-trained interpreters that apart f r o m a comprehensive languagl
k n o w l e d g e , also need t o k n o w t h e subtleties o f p r a g m a t i c s . 7
9. S T A N D A R D E N G L I S H A N D W O R L D E N G L I S H E S
S t a n d a r d E n g l i s h is a t e r m t h a t refers t o t h e v a r i e t y o f E n g l i s h used
b y t h e social lite w h o are p a r t o f a socially, e c o n o m i c a l l y a n d p o l i t i c a l l \
d o m i n a n t g r o u p i n E n g l i s h - s p e a k i n g c o u n t r i e s . T h i s v a r i e t y is t h e one
u s u a l l y p r e f e r r e d i n t h e m e d i a a n d g e n e r a l l y t a u g h t i n s c h o o l s as i l |
c o n s i d e r e d t o be 'prestigious'. N o n - s t a n d a r d E n g l i s h , o n t h e o t h e r h a n d ,
refers t o those v a r i e t i e s t h a t d o n o t c o n f o r m t o t h e s t a n d a r d s p o k e n l>\
f o r m a l l y educated native speakers i n t e r m s o f p r o n u n c i a t i o n , g r a m m a t i c a l
structure, i d i o m a t i c usage, o r choice o f words. The existence o f a s t a n d a u l
is characteristic o f any language a r o u n d the w o r l d a n d i t is related to those
groups o f people t h a t can be said t o be literate, school-oriented a n d l o o k i n g
b e y o n d the p r i m a r y c o m m u n i t y n e t w o r k s f o r social a n d l i n g u i s t i c models.
T h e s t a n d a r d o f any language is usually associated n o t o n l y w i t h a socially,
c u l t u r a l l y a n d e c o n o m i c a l l y d o m i n a t i n g g r o u p b u t also w i t h geographic
v a r i a t i o n , i.e., i n t h e regions w h e r e i n s t i t u t i o n a l a n d e c o n o m i c p o w e r is
l o c a t e d o r m o r e d e v e l o p e d . D e f i n i n g a n d d e l i m i t i n g a s t a n d a r d is not
a l w a y s easy o r even p o s s i b l e as d i f f e r e n t v a r i e t i e s c a n be c o n s i d e r e d a
s t a n d a r d i n d i s t a n t c o u n t r i e s o r r e g i o n s . So, i t is n o t t o say t h a t t h e RP
(Received P r o n u n c i a t i o n ) w h i c h is g e n e r a l l y c o n s i d e r e d t h e s t a n d a r d i n
E n g l a n d is t h e s a m e as t h e E n g l i s h s t a n d a r d i n I r e l a n d , A u s t r a l i a o r the
USA, w h e r e t h e r e a r e a l s o a set o f f e a t u r e s i n c l u d i n g p r o n u n c i a t i o n ,
g r a m m a t i c a l s t r u c t u r e , i d i o m a t i c u s a g e a n d c h o i c e o f w o r d s t h a t is
c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f f o r m a l l y e d u c a t e d speakers, t h e l a n g u a g e o f f o r m a l
i n s t r u c t i o n , the i n s t i t u t i o n s a n d t h e m e d i a . There has also been a d e m a n d
for other local standards I n d i a n , South African, Nigerian, Jamaican,
etc. a n d whenever these varieties vary f r o m one another a n d f r o m B r i t i s h
rtUdfefKSSo1 )n t h C S e s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c issues will find some thorough empirieal
175
11 IM IT 6
Ii U N each other they c a n be counted as s t a n d a r d E n g l i s h , whereas varieties
With a h i g h e r degree o f v a r i a n c e are n o n s t a n d a r d . I t m u s t be a d d e d that
on s o m e o c c a s i o n s i t i s n o t c l e a r w h e t h e r a v a r i e t y o f E n g l i s h is t o be
i < m s i d e r e d as s t a n d a r d o r n o t (see c h a p t e r 3).
The dispersal, o r diaspora, o f E n g l i s h over the w o r l d c a n be divided i n t o
l w o phases. T h e first d i a s p o r a i n v o l v e d t h e m i g r a t i o n o f a r o u n d 25,000
people f r o m E n g l a n d , S c o t l a n d a n d I r e l a n d t o N o r t h A m e r i c a , A u s t r a l i a
and N e w Zealand. T h e varieties o f E n g l i s h used nowadays i n these places
are not i d e n t i c a l w i t h those spoken by t h e early colonizers b u t they can be
said t o share s o m e g e n e r a l f e a t u r e s a n d these v a r i e t i e s have developed
8
t h r o u g h h i s t o r y i n c o r p o r a t i n g v o c a b u l a r y f r o m the i n d i g e n o u s languages
they carne i n t o c o n t a c t w i t h . T h e s e c o n d d i a s p o r a o c e u r r e d at different
m o m e n t s d u r i n g t h e 1 8 t h a n d 19th c e n t u r i e s w i t h d i f f e r e n t results f r o m
the first dispersal. The spread o f E n g l i s h i n A f r i c a t o o k place differently f o r
West A f r i c a a n d East A f r i c a . E n g l i s h i n West A f r i c a is l i n k e d t o t h e slave
n a d e a n d the d e v e l o p m e n t o f p i d g i n a n d crele languages. Since t h e 15th
century, B r i t i s h t r a d e r s t r a v e l e d t o a n d f r o m the west coast o f A f r i c a b u t
t h e r e w a s n o s e t t l e m e n t i n t h e reas t o d a y c o m p r i s i n g G a m b i a , S i e r r a
Leone, G h a n a , N i g e r i a a n d C a m e r o o n . T h i s s i t u a t i o n f a v o r e d t h e use o f
E n g l i s h as a lingua franca a m o n g t h e h u n d r e d s o f i n d i g e n o u s languages
a n d t h e E n g l i s h - s p e a k i n g t r a d e r s . S o m e o f t h e p i d g i n s a n d creles t h a t
developed f r o m E n g l i s h c o n t a c t are n o w w i d e l y used, m o s t l y as a second
l a n g u a g e , as i t is t h e case o f K r i o ( S i e r r a L e o n e ) a n d C a m e r o o n P i d g i n
(Cameroon). I n East A f r i c a the s i t u a t i o n of E n g l i s h was very different
because E n g l i s h colonizers settled there f r o m 1850 o n i n places like Kenya
Uganda, Tanzania, M a l a w i , Z a m b i a a n d Z i m b a b w e . T h e r o l e o f E n g l i s h i n
these c o u n t r i e s was v e r y o b v i o u s a n d t h i s l a n g u a g e w a s u s e d i n t h e
government, education a n d the law. I n the second h a l f o f the 2 0 t h centuries
these c o u n t i e s g a i n e d i n d e p e n d e n c e a n d E n g l i s h was k e p t as a n o f f i c i a
language i n some o f t h e m (Uganda, Z a m b i a , Z i m b a b w e a n d M a l a w i ) , a n d
as a s e c o n d language i n o t h e r s . A n E n g l i s h - b a s e d crele, S w a h i l i is als
used as a lingua franca i n Uganda, K e n y a a n d Tanzania. D u r i n g the secon
half o f the 18th c. E n g l i s h was extensively i n t r o d u c e d i n S o u t h Asia ( I n d i a
8 I t should be mentioned that the different linguistic backgrounds of the early selI le
in many cases gave way to differences and variations in speech. For example, the early setlle
of Virginia carne mainly from the west part of England and rhotic M and voiced /s/ soun
were characteristic of their speech. However, early settlers i n New England mainly carn
from the east of England and d i d not share these pronunciation features. I n the case
Australia and New Zealand, there were different i m m i g r a t i o n waves of colonizers fro
different parts to the British Isles. This meant that different dialects got in touch resulti
in a situation of dialect mixing, further influenced by the indigenous aboriginal language
 i ( lOi./N ;i i/,s| |,
Bangladcsh, Pakistn, S r i L a n k a , Nepal, etc.) d u e l o B r i t i s h tradc inlcrcsi
i n t h e rea. Simultaneously, B r i t i s h influence extended t o South-Easl Aslfl
a n d t h e S o u t h Pacific d u e t o t h e seafaring e x p e d i t i o n s o f C o o k a n d othi i
e x p e d i t i o n s , e x p a n d i n g t o S i n g a p o r e , M a l a y s i a , H o n g K o n g a n d thl
P h i l i p p i n e s a n d t h e Pacific i s l a n d s l i k e P a p u a N e w G u i n e a w h e r e a new
p i d g i n was developed, T o k P i s i n . (See c h a p t e r 3)
Y. K a c h r u ( 1 9 9 2 ) d e v e l o p e d a m o d e l o f t h e s p r e a d o f E n g l i s h t h a t has
b e e n m o s t i n f l u e n t i a l i n t h e f i e l d o f s o c i o l i n g u s t i c s . H e d i v i d e s W o i l<l
Englishes i n t o three c o n c e n t r i c circles: the I n n e r Crele, t h e O u t e r C i r c l e
a n d the E x p a n d i n g C i r c l e . These three reas s t a n d f o r the types o f spreai I
t h e p a t t e r n s o f a c q u i s i t i o n , a n d t h e p o s i t i o n o f t h e E n g l i s h l a n g u a g e in
t h e d i f f e r e n t c u l t u r a l contexts as t h e language has t r a v e l e d f o r m B r i t a i n
to the US, A u s t r a l i a a n d N e w Z e a l a n d i n t h e first diaspora (the I n n c i
C i r c l e ) , t o c o u n t r i e s l i k e Z a m b i a , Pakistn, I n d i a , etc. i n t h e s e c o n d
d i a s p o r a (the O u t e r Circle), a n d , m o r e recently, t o counties w h e r e E n g l i s h
i s l e a r n e d a n d u s e d as a F o r e i g n L a n g u a g e , f o r i n s t a n c e , S p a i n , J a p a n ,
Germany, etc. ( t h e E x p a n d i n g C i r c l e ) . 9
W i t h r e f e r e n c e t o t h e s t a t u s o f these l a n g u a g e s i n r e l a t i o n t o t h e
s t a n d a r d , t h e E n g l i s h s p o k e n i n t h e I n n e r C i r c l e w o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d as
n o r m - p r o v i d i n g ' , i.e. i t represents a m o d e l a n d is u s e d as a native language;
t h e E n g l i s h s p o k e n i n t h e O u t e r C i r c l e c o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d ' n o r m -
d e v e l o p i n g ' , t h a t is, u s e d i n c o u n t r i e s w h e r e t h e v a r i e t y o f E n g l i s h is i n
the process o f b e i n g accepted ( o r has been recently adopted), a n d is spoken
as a S L a p a r t f r o m o t h e r i n d i g e n o u s languages; a n d , t h e E x p a n d i n g Circle
w o u l d be ' n o r m - d e p e n d e n t ' because i t is l e a r n e d as a F o r e i g n L a n g u a g e
a n d t h e s t a n d a r d i s t a k e n as i t is.
E n g l i s h spoken i n the I n n e r Circle shows clear patterns o f v a r i a t i o n
b o t h i n t e r m s o f g e o g r a p h i c a l a n d s o c i a l differences w h i c h have been l o n g
s t u d i e d b y dialectologists especially i n Great B r i t a i n a n d N o r t h A m e r i c a . 10
The varieties o f E n g l i s h spoken i n O u t e r Circle countries have been
called N e w Englishes. A l t h o u g h t h i s t e r m is controversial a n d n o t a l l
In the model provided by Kachru (1992), the Inner Circle includes: USA, UK, Canad,
9 at s p e c i a l i z e d levis, p u b l i c i t y a n d b u s i n e s s , a m o n g o t h e r f u n c t i o n s . I n
Australia and New Zealand. The Outer Circle contains: Bangladesh, Ghana, India, Kenya,
Malaysia, Nigeria, Pakistn, Philippines, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Tanzania, Zambia. And, the
Expanding Circle comprises: China, Egypt, Indonesia, Israel, Japan, Korea, Nepal, Saudi
Arabia, Taiwan, USSR, Zimbabwe. This divisin is not clear cut as South Africa, for instance,
is not included. Some authors would agree that it is part of the Inner Circle while others
would say that it is part of the Outer Circle, since English in South Africa is not predominantly
used byfrst-languagespeakers.
For a more
Norlh America,
10
youdetailed
can readanalysis of the
Melchers andvarieties of English spoken in Great Britain and
Shaw (2003).
177
i II i i.ilists agree w i t h i t , i t is c e r t a i n t h a t t h e Englishes o f I n d i a , N i g e r i a ,
ingapore, a n d Tanzania, together w i t h m a n y o t h e r outer-circle c o u n t r i e s
liare some s u p e r f i c i a l l i n g u i s t i c c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s t h a t m a k e i t c o n v e n i e n l
|u d e s c r i b e t h e m as a g r o u p d i f f e r e n t f r o m t h e v a r i e t i e s i n B r i t i s h ,
American, A u s t r a l i a n , N e w Z e a l a n d , etc. These o u t e r - c i r c l e varieties are
m a l l y s p o k e n as p a r t o f a m u l t i l i n g u a l r e p e r t o i r e t h a t m a y i n c l u d e a
n u m b e r o f o t h e r languages s p o k e n i n d i f f e r e n t c i r c u m s t a n c e s ( m o t h e r
tongue, f i r s t language, lingua franca, etc.). T h i s fact d e t e r m i n e s t h a t o n
.i une occasions t h e c o m m a n d over E n g l i s h is n o t c o m p r e h e n s i v e : there
i an be registers, d o m a i n s o r styles n o t c o v e r e d b y t h e speaker o f E n g l i s h
i .i SL i n the Outer Circle, o r even v a r i a t i o n i n terms o f proficieney a m o n g
11 ic speakers (see the example o f I n d i a i n chapter 5). I n t e r m s o f phonology,
Varieties i n t h e O u t e r C i r c l e t e n d t o be a s i m p l i f i e d system, f o r example,
i n Ihe case o f vowels w h e r e t h e q u a l i t y o f v o w e l s n o r m a l l y a p p r o x i m a t e s
lo that o f t h e o t h e r languages spoken b y t h e speakers. T h e same happens
w i l h some consonants as these o t h e r languages do n o t n o r m a l l y have t h e
d i s t i n c t i o n /G/ a n d //, w h i c h are r e p l a c e d w i t h s o m e d e n t a l o r a l v e o l a r
slop. I n t e r m s o f syntax s o m e features are also shared b y languages i n the
Outer C i r c l e b u t n o t i n t h e I n n e r Circle. T h i s is t h e case o f t a g questions
w h i c h is r a t h e r c o m p l e x i n B r E a n d A m E b u t largely s i m p l i f i e d i n o t h e r
varieties, b u t m a n y v a r i e t i e s o f t h e o u t e r - c i r c l e use a single p h r a s e o r a
lew v a r i a n t s f o r t h i s f u n c t i o n t h a t do n o t need t o pay a t t e n t i o n t o the type
of a u x i l i a r y used o r i f the t a g is attached t o a positive o r negative sentence.
For i n s t a n c e , i n I n d i a t h i s t a g c a n be s i m p l i f i e d as no? o r isn't it? o n a l l
o c c a s i o n s , o r not so? i n E a s t a n d W e s t A f r i c a . W i t h r e f e r e n c e t o l e x i s ,
s i n g u l a r w o r d s r e f e r r i n g t o p l u r a l c o n c e p t s t e n d t o be s i m p l i f i e d a n d
treated as o r d i n a r y s i n g u l a r s w i t h a general sense (e.g. luggage, furniture,
software, etc.).
I n t h e E x p a n d i n g C i r c l e E n g l i s h w i l l n o t be used f o r o f f i c i a l purposes
such as t h e language o f general f o r m a l e d u c a t i o n , religin, c o u r t s a n d the
law, n a t i o n a l p o l i t i c s o r a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , l i t e r a t u r e , etc. b u t i t c a n be used
i n i n t e r n a t i o n a l relations, i n t e r n a t i o n a l organizations, research, e d u c a t i o n
the E x p a n d i n g C i r c l e g o v e r n m e n t s o f t e n have p o l i c i e s t o s a f e g u a r d t h e
status o f t h e n a t i o n a l o r l o c a l languages r e g u l a t i n g t h e use o f E n g l i s h i n
e d u c a t i o n a n d t h e m e d i a . However, E n g l i s h is also p e r c e i v e d as a useful
language a n d the advantages o f b e i n g p r o f i c i e n t i n i t are clear. T h i s often
means t h a t p a r e n t s w a n t t h e i r c h i l d r e n t o l e a r n E n g l i s h a n d p u p i l s also
perceive t h e p o t e n t i a l benefits o f b e i n g p r o f i c i e n t i n t h a t language. T h i s
fact is especially m a n i f e s t i n eastern E u r o p e a n c o u n t r i e s t h a t w a n t t o j o i n
the d e v e l o p e d w e s t e r n e c o n o m i e s , a n d c o u n t r i e s w i t h i n t h e E U w h e r e
 178
A N J N T R O D U C T I O N TO SOCIOI.IN( . i ir. i
there is a clear need t o speak i n t e r n a t i o n a l languages that al l o w p r o
c o m m u n i c a t e a n d oprate i n t h i s w i d e j o b m a r k e t .
I n t e r m s o f t h e l i n g u i s t i c features o f E n g l i s h used i n t h e E x p a n d mu
C i r c l e , i t m u s t be a d d e d t h a t t h e r e is a m a r k e d t e n d e n e y l<> u
s t a n d a r d i z e d v a r i e t y l i k e B r E a n d A m E . H o w e v e r , t w o stages can
perceived, one i n w h i c h t h e clear i n f l u e n c e e x e r t e d b y one v a r i c i \o
t h e use o f t h a t v a r i e t y (for e x a m p l e w h e n f i l m s a n d T V p r o g r a m s an 111
d u b b e d ) , a n d a n o t h e r one w h e r e t h e i n t e r c h a n g e a b l e i n f l u e n c e ol du
t w o varieties gives w a y t o w h a t is o f t e n called ' m i d - A t l a n t i c ' E n g l i s h , i l . ..
is, w h e n f e a t u r e s f r o m B r i t i s h a n d A m e r i c a n usage are m i x e d becaii
learners are o v e r t l y exposed t o b o t h varieties (e.g., a t t h e w o r d level lili
f o l l o w i n g w o r d s c a n be used i n d i s t i n c t i v e l y : candy - sweets, trunk /
lift - elevator, autumn - fall, e t c . ) . S o m e o t h e r f e a t u r e s o f the un
p h e n o m e n o n c a n be f o u n d i n spelling, f o r instance, w h e r e learners d
follow one o f the varieties consistently (e.g., w h e n someone writes nciyjdn <>
a n d colour, o r analyze a n d analyse, etc). A n o t h e r p o s s i b i l i t y m a y be thal
o f students w h o receive the i n f l u e n c e o f B r E t h r o u g h t h e i r I
e d u c a t i o n b u t t h e influence o f A m E t h r o u g h t h e m u s i c a n d t h e media \
t h e p r o n u n c i a t i o n level, t h i s p o s s i b l e m i x t u r e o f A m e r i c a n a n d B r l l l h
p r o n u n c i a t i o n c a n be added t o features derived f r o m the speakers mol ti >
tongue, so t h a t s t a n d a r d i z a t i o n is r a t h e r d i f f i c u l t a n d u n l i k e l y . Finally, m
t e r m s o f lexis, u n d e r these c i r c u m s t a n c e s there is a clear r i s k o f all< >\)j
interference b e t w e e n E n g l i s h a n d t h e m o t h e r t o n g u e i n t h e case o l /.// II
friends, i.e., w o r d s i n b o t h l a n g u a g e s t h a t s h o w s o m e s o r t o l foi mal
s i m i l a r i t i e s b u t w h i c h v a r y greatly i n m e a n i n g . T h i s p h e n o m e n o n rc.sull
e i t h e r i n m i s c o m m u n i c a t i o n o r i n t h e use o f w o r d s t h a t a e q u i r e a ni
m e a n i n g i n 'local E n g l i s h ' (e.g., m o r e a n d m o r e f r e q u e n t l y i n Spanish lln
w o r d influenciar is h e a r d o n t h e n e w s i n s t e a d o f influir, o r t h e word
secretario i n s t e a d o f ministro w h e n r e f e r r i n g t o t h e N o r t h A m e r i c a n i <
B r i t i s h g o v e r n m e n t , i.e. B r i t i s h F o r e i g n Secretary). A n o t h e r i n t e r e s t I n i
p h e n o m e n o n is t h e i n c r e a s i n g presence o f b o r r o w i n g s f r o m E n g l i s h .md
li< iw they i n f l u e n c e o t h e r m o d e r n languages.
( Picase go to the exercises section a n d d o exercise 7 a n d 8.)
10. EXERCISES
1. T h i n k a b o u t y o u r l e a r n i n g o f E n g l i s h a n d a n s w e r t h e follow m,
quest.ons r e g a r d i n g some s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c aspects:
a) W h a t v a r i e t y o f E n g l i s h d o y o u speak?
179
UNIT 6
b) W h y d i d y o u d e c i d e t o l e a r n t h i s v a r i e t y , i f y o u d i d ? I f i t was n o t
y o u r o w n choice, w h a t m a d e y o u l e a r n t h i s variety?
c) H a v e y o u a l w a y s h a d c o n t a c t w i t h t h e same v a r i e t y ? W h y ? W h y
not? '
d) I f y o u h a v e h a d access t o m o r e t h a n o n e v a r i e t y / d i a l e c t , are y o u
c o n s i s t e n t i n it? W h y ? W h y not?
e) N o w t h a t y o u h a v e s t u d i e d E n g l i s h f o r y e a r s , w h a t d e c i s i o n s
r e g a r d i n g y o u r l e a r n i n g o f a language w o u l d y o u change?
2. Take any language l e a r n i n g b o o k a n d f i n d a dialogue i n i t . Y o u can
i ise a language course f o r secondary school, f o r example, b u t d o n o t b o t h e r
loo m u c h a b o u t t h e l a n g u a g e level. R e a d t h e d i a l o g u e a n d a n a l y z e t h e
| s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c i n f o r m a t i o n i t c o n t a i n s (e.g. t u r n t a k i n g , p o l i t e w o r d s o r
formulas, s i t u a t i o n , etc.). D o y o u t h i n k i t reflects a realistic situation? W h y
(not)?
| 3 . T h i n k a b o u t the w a y the speech event o f p a r t i n g s is s t r u c t u r e d i n
Spanish. Take t w o o r three different s i t u a t i o n s a n d describe b o t h , the
different stages a n d t h e language f o r m u l a s t h a t are e m p l o y e d . I n o r d e r t o
do t h i s exercise y o u c a n e i t h e r reflect o n a t y p i c a l s i t u a t i o n o r j u s t p a y
attention t o the way other people do i t .
4. A n a l y z e t h e f o l l o w i n g e x c e r p t a n d p l a c e a n y o f t h e t h r e e m o v e s
( I ) n i t i a t i o n , (R)esponse, a n d ( F ) o l l o w u p i n the dialogue next to the
relevant utterance. Take i n t o a c c o u n t t h a t m o r e t h a n one m o v e c a n oceur
w i t h i n a single u t t e r a n c e .
[...]
T- We can correct now question one and you can finish the rest at
home. Most of you have finished already, so let us correct until three,
and [...] Ok. First. It is an invitation to attend the opening ceremony of
the schoolyear. M m ... Juan What have you got for that?
S- M m , What is this invitation to ... or ... about.
T- What is this invitation for, ... Ok, that is a possibility, anything
else?
S- [...]
T- What is this letter... you have to mention the word invitation, What
is that letter you have, or you received, or you got... or anything similar
to that, Ok? ... Jos, What about you, n u m b e r two. The Industrial
Revolution will be our topic for next week.
s I have What is our topic for next week?
 A N , N r K O , , '"npNTpjoao
T- M m , ... Ycah, but it is possible you are not repeating tOO
new words ... Wha's our topic for next week? ... The Industrial / i oiu
will be our topic for next week ... Ok, It's not impossible ... Au\
option?
S- What will be the topic for the next week?
T- Next week, not the next week, next week, What will the ti >plt
next week? o r When will we study the Industrial Revoluta i '
S- What are we going to do the next week?
[...]
5. Read t h e previous excerpt again a n d w r i t e a p a r a g r a p h ( a r o u n d I
words) answering the following questions:
a) Is t h e teacher d o m i n a t i n g t o o m u c h ?
b) Is t h e language " n a t u r a l " a n d " r e a l " . W h y ( n o t ) ?
c) W h a t t y p e o f t e a c h i n g m e t h o d o l o g y d o y o u t h i n k is b e i n g uso
( i n n o v a t i v e , t r a d i t i o n a l , etc.)? E x p l a i n .
d) D o y o u t h i n k t h i s excerpt reflects a t y p i c a l teaching situation? W h y i*
e) D o y o u t h i n k s t u d e n t s h a v e e n o u g h c h a n c e s f o r " f u l l " a n d "real
interaction?
/) D o y o u t h i n g students l e a r n i n g E n g l i s h as a f o r e i g n language i n |
c l a s s r o o m s e t t i n g have access t o r e a l a n d i d i o m a t i c language?
6 . Can y o u suggest other situations i n w h i c h spoken language is organi/n I
a n d purposive i n the same way as i n the classroom? Describe t h e m .
7. W h y m i g h t I n d i a n E n g l i s h be c a l l e d a N e w E n g l i s h ? ( G i v e n that i l
p r o b a b l y dates b a c k t o 1800 a p p r o x i m a t e l y ) . Y o u m a y w a n t t o see chapter
5 also.
8. Take a n e m p t y w o r l d m a p w h e r e o n l y t h e p o l i t i c a l b o u n d a r i e s are
m a r k e d . Take t h r e e p e n c i l s a n d c o l o r i n t h e c o u n t r i e s b e l o n g i n g t o t h e
I n n e r C i r c l e , t h e O u t e r C i r c l e , a n d t h e E x p a n d i n g C i r c l e (use o n e c o l o r
for each set o f c o u n t r i e s ) . T h e n t r y t o get i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t t h e c u r r e n t
p o p u l a t i o n o f e a c h c o u n t r y , t h e language o r languages used, t h e n u m b e r
o l speakers o f e a c h language, a n d s o m e i m p o r t a n t fact a b o u t its h i s t o r y
( f o r i n s t a n c e , i n t h e case o f f o r m e r c o l o n i a l c o u n t r i e s t h e d a t e o f
i n d e p e n d e n c e , o r s o m e o t h e r fact t h a t y o u c o n s i d e r o f relevance). T h e
p u r p o s e o f t h i s a c t i v i t y is f o r y o u t o h a v e a g l o b a l p e r s p e c t i v e o f t h e
i n f l u e n c e o f E n g l i s h i n t h e w o r l d , a n d t h e c u r r e n t state o f t h e a r t . To
l < un pete t h i s a c t i v i t y y o u c a n use a n y u p d a t e d encyclopedia.
I I N 11 i 181
ii. KEFERENCES
lli I \ ir, Ch. 1995. 'People's choice and language rights' [videorecording]: EFL in
language policy. University of York, Audio-Visual Centre. Kent: IATEFL.
CHACN BELTRN, R. 2001. 'La enseanza del vocabulario en ingls como L2: el
electo del nfasis en la forma lingstica en el aprendizaje de cognados falsos'.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Seville.
i i m K, J . K. 1996. ' I n t e r c u l t u r a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n . ' I n S. L. M c K a y and N. H.
Hornberger, Sociolinguistics and Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
( n i TERILL, J. (ed.) 2002. Language in the Legal Process. Houndmills, UK: Palgaive
Macmillan.
IIRYSTAL, D. 2003. (2nd ed.). English as a Global Language. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
I \DI s, D. 2001. 'Discourse Analysis and the Law.' i n R. Mesthrie (ed.) Concise
Encyclopedia of Sociolinguistics. Oxford, UK: Pergamon.
F/ERCH, C. and G. KASPER. 1989. 'Internal and external m o d i f i c a t i o n of in
interlanguage request realization'. I n S. Blum-Kulka, J. House and G. Kasper
(eds.), Cross-culturalpragmatics: Requests and apologies. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
I'NEGAN, E. 1997. 'Sociolinguistics and the Law' i n F. Coulmas (ed.), The Handbook
of Sociolinguistics. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers.
(RADDOL, D. 1997. The Future of English?, London: The British Council.
JENKINS, J. 2003. World Englishes: A resource book for students. London, UK:
Routledge.
KACHRU, Y. 1992. 'Culture, style and discourse: expanding noetics of English', in
B. Kachru (ed.), The Other Tongue. English Across Cultures, 2nd edn, Urbana,
IL: University of Illinois Press.
KASPER, G. and K. R. ROSE. 2001. 'Pragmatics i n language teaching' i n K. R. Rose
and G. Kasper (eds.). Pragmatics in Language Teaching. Cambridge: CUP
MELCHERS, G. and P. SHAW. 2003. World Englishes. London, UK: Arnold.
NORRIS, J. 2001. 'Use of address terms on the Germn Speaking Test.' i n K.R. Rose
and G. Kasper (eds.). Pragmatics in Language Teaching. Cambridge: CUP.
ROSE, K. R. and G. KASPER (eds.). 2001. Pragmatics in Language Teaching.
Cambridge: CUP.
SINCLAIR, J. M. and R. M. COULTHARD. 1975. Towards an analysis of discourse. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
SPOLSKY, B. (ed.) 1999. Concise Encyclopedia of Educational Linguistics. Amsterdam:
Elsevier.
SWAIN, M. 1995. 'Three functions of output in second language learning'. In G. Cook
& B. Seidlhofer (eds.), Principie and practice in the study of applied linguistics:
Studies in honor of H.G. Widdowson. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
 I oz
AN INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOI,IN(
UNIT 6
TAROME, E. and M. SWAIN. 1995. 'A Sociolinguistic Perspective <>n Second I m
Use in Immersion Classrooms.' The Modern Language Journal, 79/2 161 I
WOLFSON, N. and J. MANES. 1978. 'Don't 'Dear' me.' Working /*<//>< i
Sociolinguistics. Austin, TX: SEDL. Reprinted i n Women and l.anguii
Literature and Society, eds. S. McConnell-Ginet, R. Borker, and N I i
1980, pp. 79-92. New York Praeger.
WOLFSON, N. 1989. Perspectives: Sociolinguistics and TESOL. Bostn: l l lilli
Heinle Publishers.
WOLFSON, N. 1983. 'An empirically based analysis of complimenting in Amei I ill
English' i n N. Wolfson and E. J u d d (eds.), Sociolinguistics and tan,
Acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
12. R E S O U R C E S O N T H E W E B
I s s u e s to c o n s i d e r :
N o w y o u c a n v i s i t the website f o r this subject w h e r e y o u w i l l find
f u r t h e r references a n d c o m p l e m e n t a r y readings.
13. F U R T H E R R E A D I N G S A N D QUESTIONS
13.1. T e x t 11
R e a d the f o l l o w i n g text c a r e f u l l y a n d c o m m e n t o n i t emphasizin," un
aspect y o u consider o f relevance. After the text y o u w i l l find some quesl lonl
that m a y be h e l p f u l . W r i t e a r o u n d 250-300 w o r d s i n t o t a l .
[]
A source of i n t e r c u l t u r a l m i s c o m m u n i c a t i o n highlighted by llie
findings of cross-cultural studies is sociolinguistic transfer. Sociolinguisti
transfer refers to the use of the rules of speaking of one's own spei i h
community or cultural group when interacting w i t h members of an< itht]
c o m m u n i t y or group. This can oceur i n interactions i n w h i c h one or
more of the interlocutors is using a foreign or second language bil
employing the rules of speaking of his or her native language. It can even
oceur i n interactions between individuis w h o have the same nativfl
language but belong to speech communities that have different rules , >l
speaking, as would be the case, for example, w i t h British and American
English speakers.
To illustrate how sociolinguistic transfer can be a source " I
intercultural miscommunication, we turn to some studies of compliment
giving and responding behavior. [...] Wolfson (1983) points out that
differences in the distribution of compliments i n different communilics
are potential sources of intercultural miscommunication; that is, t h e n
183
is frequently interactional trouble when members of one cultural group
compliment i n situations i n w h i c h compliments are inappropriate for
members of other groups. She cites the time when former President
Crter, during an official visit to France, complimented a French official
on the fine job he was doing. Editorial comment i n the French press the
next day revealed that Carter's remarks had been interpreted as
interference i n the i n t e r n a l politics of France. The frequeney of
c o m p l i m e n t i n g is also a potential source of m i s c o m m u n i c a t i o n ,
according to Wolfson. She points out that the high frequeney with which
Americans compliment leads to their being perceived by members of
other cultures as "effusive, insincere, and possibly motivated by ulterior
considerations" (1989, p. 23).
Chick(1996: 332)
a) D o y o u t h i n k t h a t t h e r e l a t i v e d i s t a n c e b e t w e e n t h e languages o r
c u l t u r e s i n v o l v e d i n cross c u l t u r a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n p l a y a r o l e i n
intercultural miscommunication?
b) H a v e y o u ever b e e n i n v o l v e d i n a s i t u a t i o n o f i n t e r c u l t u r a l
m i s c o m m u n i c a t i o n ? D o y o u t h i n k t h a t i t c o u l d have b e e n avoided?
I f y o u r answer is yes, h o w ?
c) To w h a t extent d o y o u t h i n k t h a t t h e f o r e i g n language l e a r n e r can
be t r a i n e d t o a v o i d i n t e r c u l t u r a l m i s c o m m u n i c a t i o n a n d take
advantage o f s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c t r a n s f e r f r o m his/her L 1 ?
13.2. Text 12
R e a d the f o l l o w i n g text carefully a n d c o m m e n t o n i t e m p h a s i z i n g a n y
aspect y o u consider o f relevance. After the text y o u w i l l find some questions
t h a t m a y be h e l p f u l . W r i t e a r o u n d 250-300 w o r d s i n t o t a l .
One question w h i c h arises i n any discussion of global English is
whether a single w o r l d standard English w i l l develop, f o r m i n g a
supranational variety w h i c h must be learned by global citizens of the
21st century. Like most questions raised i n this book, this demands a
more complicated answer than those who ask probably desire.
There are, for example, at least two dimensions to the question: the
first is whether English will fragment into many mutually unintelligible
local forms; the second is whether the current 'national' standards ol
English (particularly US and British) w i l l continu to compete as models
of correetness for w o r l d usage, or whether some new w o r l d standard
w i l l arise w h i c h supersedes national models for the purposes of
international communication and teaching.
 AN INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOI.INC place: that the native-speaking countries are experiencing an

The widespread use of English as a language of wider eomm ill 'destandardisation' of English.
will continu to exert pressure towards global uniformity as w e l l .\ <
rise to anxieties about 'declining' standards, language change and |||| Since ELT publishers from native-speaking countries are likely to
loss of geolinguistic diversity. But as English shifts from foreign l a i i p i i follow markets m o s t of the language publishers already provide
to second-language status for an increasing number o p e o p l e , \ materials in several standards it will be non-native speakers who decide
also expect to see English develop a larger number of local vanen. whether a US model, a British one, or one based on a second-language
variety w i l l be taught, learned a n d used. At the very least, English
These contradictory tensions arise because English has two ni ilfl
textbooks i n countries where English is spoken as a second language
functions i n the world: i t provides a vehicular language for intcn1. < i I
are likely to pay more attention to local varieties of English and to localise
communication and it forms the basis for constructing cultural idenlllli
their product by incorporating materials i n local varieties of English.
The former function requires m u t u a l i n t e l l i g i b i l i t y and u n n
standards. The latter encourages the development of local forms and
hybrid varieties. As English plays an ever more important role n lili Graddol(1997: 56-59)
first of these functions, it simultaneously finds itself acting as a langu
of identity for larger numbers of people around the world. There
need to fear, however, that trends towards fragmentation will necessai l h
threaten the role of English as a lingua franca. There have, since the l l i M Issues to consider:
records of the language, been major differences between variel ic ni a) D o y o u t h i n k t h a t the s i t u a t i o n described i n this article has changed
English. since i t was w r i t t e n ( i n 1997)?
The mechanisms w h i c h have helped m a i n t a i n standard usage Ifl b) H o w d o y o u see t h e f u t u r e o f the E n g l i s h language, b o t h as a nativ
the past may not, however, continu to serve this f u n c t i o n in thl
future. Two m a j o r technologies have helped develop n a t i o n . i l language a n d as a lingua franca?
standard-language forms. The first was p r i n t i n g , the i n v e n t i o n ol c) D o y o u t h i n k t h a t t h e r e is a ' n e t w o r k E n g l i s h ' , i.e. a special type o
which provided a 'fxity' i n communication b y means of printed b o o k .
A c c o r d i n g to scholars such as Anderson (1983), such f i x i t y was n variety of E n g l i s h used i n the internet? Why? W h y not? Provid
necessary requirement for the 'imagined c o m m u n i t i e s ' of model n s o m e examples.
nation states. B u t w i t h increasing use of electronic c o m m u n i c a l i o n
d) W h a t is the s i t u a t i o n o f Spanish as a global language a n d as a ling
m u c h of the social and c u l t u r a l effect of the s t a b i l i t y of p r i n t nal
already been lost, along w i t h central 'gatekeeping' agents such as franca? H o w d o y o u see i t i n r e l a t i o n t o E n g l i s h i n t h e f u t u r e ?
editors and publishers w h o m a i n t a i n consistent, standardised forms e) D o y o u agree w i t h Graddol's s t a t e m e n t ' [ . . . ] E n g l i s h t e x t b o o k s
of language. c o u n t r i e s w h e r e E n g l i s h is s p o k e n as a second language are l i k
t o p a y m o r e a t t e n t i o n t o l o c a l v a r i e t i e s o f E n g l i s h a n d t o loca
The second technology has been provided by broadeasting, w h i . Ii
t h e i r p r o d u c t b y i n c o r p o r a t i n g materials i n local varieties o f E n g l
lH many ways became more important than print i n the socially mobilfl
^ommunities of the 20th century. But trends i n global media suggesl
'Hat broadeasting w i l l not necessarily play an i m p o r t a n t role ll) []'?
^ t a b l i s h i n g and maintaining a global standard. Indeed, the patterns ol
j^agmentation and localisation, which are significant trends i n satellilc
- ^oadeasting, mean that televisin is no longer able to serve such .i
function. How can there be such thing as 'network English' i n a world
l f lwhich centralised networks have all but disappeared?
. Meanwhile, new forms of computer-mediated communication are
^sing the gap between spoken and w r i t t e n English w h i c h has been
^ h s t r u c t e d laboriously over centuries. And cultural trends encourage
use of informal and more conversational language, a greater tolerance
-p, diversity and individual style, and a lessening deference to authority.
^se trends, taken together, suggest that a weakening of the institutions
^ practices w h i c h maintained national standard languages is taking
186 AN INTRODUCTION TO S O C I O I I N I .

14. K E Y W O R D S

The f o l l o w i n g list o f key w o r d s c o n t a i n s s o m e i m p o r t a n ! le

are presented i n t h i s u n i t . A d e f i n i t i o n f o r each t e r m can be I n t u i d ||
e n d o f t h i s b o o k , i n the glossary.

Communicative competence
Discourse analysis
Discourse marker
Ethnography of communication
Ethnography of speaking
Ethnomethodology
Informant
Interference
Lingua franca
Linguistic competence
Language functions
LWC
Micro-sociolinguistics
New Englishes
Pragmatic competence
Proficieney
Sociolinguistic competence
Sociolinguistic relativity
Speech act
Turn-taking
 In iliis section, a m o d e l e x a m is p r o v i d e d so t h a t students c a n have a
(HIM.I idea o f w h a t t h e y w i l l be r e q u e s t e d t o d o i n t h e f o r m a l
ftmiimations t h a t take place at t h e e n d o f t h e t e r m a n d t h a t p r o v i d e t h e
H | | N for e v a l u a t i n g t h e i r level o f achievement.

I llirslions

I . Choose t w o o f t h e f o l l o w i n g issues a n d e x p l a i n t h e m i n y o u r o w n
w o r d s . W r i t e a r o u n d 100 w o r d s f o r each o f t h e t w o questions.

a) 'Style' as a v a r i a b l e i n s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s .

h) E x p l a i n w h a t is a diglossic s i t u a t i o n .

c) C a n a d i a n i m m e r s i o n p r o g r a m s .

) I )efine t h e f o l l o w i n g five t e r m s t a k e n f r o m t h e glossary. P r o v i d e

brief d e f i n i t i o n s o f n o m o r e t h a n 60 w o r d s each.

a) Acrolect

b) L a n g u a g e a t t r i t i o n

c) Lingua franca

(I) M i n o r i t y language

c) Variety

C C o m m e n t , f r o m a s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c p o i n t o f view, o n t h e f o l l o w i n g
excerpt. Y o u are expected t o relate t h i s e x t r a c t t o t h e c o n t e n t s o f
i he subject i n n o m o r e t h a n 300 w o r d s .
The child growing up i n the province, say, i n some mountain village,
learns to speak i n the local dialect. I n time, to be sure, this local dialect
will take i n more and more forms from the standard languages... The
child, then, does not speak the standard language as his native tongue.
 190
MODliL E X A M
AN I N T R O D U C T I O N T O SOCIOI.1NOUI.M I

tongue. Many instances of language a t t r i t i o n can be found when a

It is only after he reaches school, long after his speech-habits a r e lormi i I
that he is taught the standard language. No language is like the n a l l v i
language that one learned at ones mothers knee; no-one is ever pe le i l \
sure in a language afterwards acquired. 'Mistakes' in language a r e simplj
dialect forms carried into the standard language.
Excerpt form L. Bloomfiled (1970) 'Literate and illiterate spei i Ii
American Speech, 2: 432-9.
K e y to the m o d e l e x a m
Exercise 1 true of a non-native speaker. English may be someone's second or third
I n t h e f i r s t exercise t h e s t u d e n t is p r o v i d e d w i t h t h r e e t o p i c s w h l i Ii
have been discussed i n t h e Unidades Didcticas. S t u d e n t s s h o u l d selei i
only two o f the t h r e e issues l i s t e d a n d e x p l a i n t h e m i n t h e i r o w n w o r d l
C o n c i s e n e s s is h i g h l y v a l u e d i n t h i s e x a m a n d , t h e r e f o r e s t u d e n t l
c o m p l e t i n g t h e test s h o u l d be v e r y p r e c i s e a n d p r o v i d e b r i e f answei |
s t a t i n g t h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t p o i n t s (100 w o r d s f o r each q u e s t i o n ) .
Exercise 2
speaker, for instance i n the case of an immigrant who goes into another
speech community and develops a second language at the expense of
the first.
This extract also raises the Chomskian conception of the native spea-
ker as an idealized speaker whose linguistic intuitions represent the only
reliable source for descriptive adequacy. Chomsky's description of the
native speaker seems detached f o r m reality and f r o m the social
dimensions of languages relying on native speakers' intuitions and setting
aside social and cultural factors. There is a problem i n using the native
speaker as a model of language proficieney because s/he may have limited
vocabulary and low grammatical competence while the reverse may be
language, yet that does not imply that his/her competence is lower than
that of a native speaker.
The references i n this fragment can be further extended to the issue
of crele languages that although not being considered, o n many
occasions, as standard languages, are i n fact the mother tongue of
millions of speakers that do not have contact w i t h a standard language
until they get into the educational system and receive formal education.
Nevertheless, they are considered, and indeed consider themselves, crele
native speakers.

I n the second exercise five key w o r d s f r o m the glossary are given and
the s t u d e n t is expected t o define t h e n i n his/her o w n w o r d s . A g a i n , li i n l
c o n v o l u t e d answers s h o u l d be a v o i d e d a n d each o f t h e five t e r m s s h o u l d
be e x p l a i n e d i n a r o u n d 60 w o r d s .

Exercise 3

T h e t h i r d p a r t o f t h e test c o n s i s t s o f t h e c o m m e n t a r y o f a r e a d i n g
passage. T h e s t u d e n t is n o t e x p e c t e d t o s u m m a r i z e t h e e x c e r p t b u l l o
c o m m e n t o n i t m a k i n g reference to the contents o f the subject. T h l
purpose of this exercise is to see to w h a t extent the student has understoi >i I
t h e c o n t e n t s o f t h e s u b j e c t a n d has d e v e l o p e d a c r i t i c a l v i e w o l
s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c p r i n c i p i e s . N o s i n g l e a n s w e r c a n be p r o v i d e d f o r i l i i s
exercise b u t here is a m o d e l one:

I n this excerpt Bloomfield refers to the 'native language' as l l i e

language, or variety of language that is first acquired i n terms of < >i d e i
of acquisition and he states that no other language w i l l ever rival l l i i s
first one. This argument is to some extent arguable because at time!
education can compnsate and even surpass the knowledge of the m o l h e i
Key to the exercises
 T h i s s e c t i o n p r o v i d e s s o m e m o d e l a n s w e r s f o r t h e exercises a n d
a c t i v i t i e s p r e s e n t e d at t h e e n d o f each u n i t . O n m o s t o c c a s i o n s , these
exercises have a n o p e n a n s w e r a n d no single response c a n be p r o v i d e d .
Active p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the w e b d i s c u s s i o n f o r u m w i l l a l l o w t h e students
peer-exchange o f answers a n d debate.

Unitl

Exercise 5

(This passage is t a k e n f r o m the f a m o u s n o v e l Three Men in a Boat b y

J e r o m e K. J e r o m e p u b l i s h e d i n 1889.)

T h e w o r d deuce i n i t s m e a n i n g i n t h i s passage is, a c c o r d i n g t o T h e

L o n g m a n Dictionary of E n g l i s h Language a n d Culture, old-fashioned.
The w o r d aren 't is never nowadays w r i t t e n ar'n 't (and indeed is u n d e r l i n e d
i n r e d b y the spell checker i n t h e w o r d pr o cessi ng package o n w h i c h t h i s
b o o k is b e i n g i n p r e p a r e d ) .

T h e r e are a n u m b e r o f o t h e r e x p r e s s i o n s w h i c h n a t i v e speaker
i n f o r m a n t s suggest m a y be od f a s h i o n e d : f o r example, you silly cuckoo,
rather an amusing thing ( i n s t e a d o f a rather amusing thing, a n d / was
laughing so ( i nstead o f / was laughing so much). H o w e v e r n a t i v e speaker
i n t u i t i o n is n o t o r i o u s l y u n r e l i a b l e i n such matter s. To s u p p o r t such claims
one w o u l d need t o m a k e c a r e f u l s t u d y o f a large c o r p u s o f c o n t e m p o r a r y
E n g l i s h a n d o f a large c o r p u s o f E n g l i s h w r i t t e n i n t h e l a t e n i n e t e e n t h
century.

I t is w o r t h n o t i n g t h a t t h e e x p r e s s i o n gimme ( f o r give me) has a

d i s t i n c t l y m o d e r n flavour.
 197
KEY TOTITE^XERCTSES_
196 AN INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOI .1 N( i l US T U S

A n d t h e n , it's n o t o n l y one l i n e ,
Exercise 6 T h e y get several m o r e o t h e r l i n e s ,
T h e y get s o m e m o r e cars, t o o , eh?
A b r u p t : I t m e a n s 'repentino, brusco, inesperado' ( ' s u d d e n , hasty, A n d , t h e teamsters i s ,
preciptate') a n d n o t 'abrupto' w h i c h i n E n g l i s h is steep, a l t h o u g h we A l w a y s b r i n g i n g cars, a n d ,
c a n find the w o r d abrupt r e f e r r i n g t o someone's character. T h e w o r d
A l w a y s t a k i n g o u t , see.
abrupt comes f r o m L a t i n abruptus ' p r e c i p i t o u s , d i s c o n n e c t e d ' . I n the
16th c. ( S h a k e s p e a r e ) i t m e a n t ' b r o k e n a w a y ' o r ' m a r k e d b y suelden B. Myjob
change', a n d i n 17th c. i t c h a n g e d its m e a n i n g t o 'steep'. So, m y j o b is t o see
Disgrace: I t means 'deshonra, vergenza'. I t doesn't m e a n 'desgracia' w h i c h That no more, n o more, no t r o u b l e i n the field
i n E n g l i s h is misfortune, f o r e x a m p l e , I had the misfortune to lose IIIY T h e y g r a b t h e i r car.
ticket. I n the 16th c. i t m e a n t 'disfavor'; ' d i s h o n o r ' , 'shame, o r cause ol T h e n , s o m e o f t h e m , they t e l l ,
t h i s ' j u s l i k e F r e n c h 'disgace a n d S p a n i s h 'desgracia . Ey, I t h i n k
E d i t : I t s m e a n s 'corregir, preparar la edicin de, dirigir un peridico . ll M y c o m p a n y n o m o r e , t h o u g h , yeah.
doesn't m e a n 'editar w h i c h i n E n g l i s h is to publish. F o r m e r l y t h i s w o r d Y o u see, i f n o m o r e , n o m o r e c o m p a n y
m e a n t 'to p u b l i s h ' (rare) o r 'to p r e p a r e a n e d i t i o n o f ( i n the 18th c.), W e l l , I go f i n d ,
a n d 'be the e d i t o r o f ( i n t h e 1 9 t h c ) . See, that's m y j o b , see
J o u r n a l : I t m e a n s 'revista especializada, diario' a n d n o t 'jornal' w h i c h i n
E n g l i s h is day's wage ( o r pay). I n P d E t h i s w o r d m e a n s 'peridicaI,
m a g a z i n e ' . . I n t h e 1 4 t h c. i t w a s 'a b o o k ' o r ' r e c o r d ' , 'a service-book Exercise 5
c o n t a i n i n g d a y - h o u r s ' i n the ecclesiastical field. I n the 16th c. i t m e a n l
English
' p e r f o r m e d , h a p p e n i n g o r r e c u r r i n g every day, daily', b u t i t also m e a n t A.U.SII tilla.
F l e m i s h D u t c h , F r e n c h , (Germn)
'a b o o k c o n t a i n i n g n o t i c e s c o n c e r n i n g t h e d a i l y stages o r r o u t e s o r D / ^ l Gfii i m
Portuguese
o t h e r i n f o r m a t i o n f o r travelers'. I n r e l a t i o n to t r a d e i t m e a n t 'a d a i l y T3r*o 7\ r

English, French
r e c o r d o f c o m m e r c i a l t r a n s a c t i o n s ' ( 1 6 t h a ) . I n the 18th c. i t a c q u i r e d n r> O n O.

Spanish
t h e m e a n i n g o f 'a day's t r a v e l , a j o u r n e y ' . L/OIOIIIL' " 1
Finnish, Swedish
S y m p a t h y : I t means 'compasin, comprensin, solidaridad' ('compassion, C l n 1 oni
rinid-iiu French
p i t y concern, agreement, h a r m o n y ' ) a n d n o t 'simpata w h i c h i n E n g l i s h r i diiv-c French
is friendliness, liking, affection. A c c o r d i n g t o The Oxford English XJoit
riaiu H i n d i , E n g l i s h , 14 r e g i o n a l languages
Dictionary t h i s w o r d means ' a f f i n i t y b e t w e e n c e r t a i n t h i n g s , b y v i r t u e India Swahili, English
o f w h i c h they are s i m i l a r l y o r c o r r e s p o n d i n g l y affected b y t h e same TC p r i v a
Maori, English
i n f l u e n c e , affect o r i n f l u e n c e one a n o t h e r ' . T h i s w o r d was a d o p t e d i n ]\CW jCdldiiu N o r w e g i a n (Nynorsk, Bokml)
the 16th c. f r o m t h e L a t i n w o r d sympathia. Mr^r*\x/nV English, Tok Pisin, H f r i M o t u
P a r n i n M PW Guinea
I t i L) LlCl v" 1 1 *" Guaran, S p a n i s h
P o O TI 1 S-l \
Unil 3 r a T *dgua^y Pilipino, English
PV i 1 i rvni n es Malay, Mandarn, T a m d , E n g l i s h
QinrrnOTP
Swahili, English
Exercise 3 TV n v o n i l
anzciiiict Spanish
Tu lI n ui Pg iu ieai vj Zaire
A. Cars Zaire
N o , the c a r get i n one l o n g l i n e .
Sometime i n one long line.
Maybe, get a b o u t fifty, s i x t y cars, yeah.
198 AN INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLINGUISTICS

Unit 6

Exercise 1

T- We c a n c o r r e c t n o w q u e s t i o n one a n d y o u c a n f i n i s h t h e r e s t at
h o m e . M o s t o f y o u have finished already, so let us correct u n t i l three, a n d
[...] Ok. First. It is an invitation to attend the opening ceremony of the school
year. M m ... J u a n W h a t have y o u g o t for t h a t ? (I)

S- M m , W h a t is t h i s i n v i t a t i o n t o ... o r ... a b o u t (R)

T- W h a t is t h i s i n v i t a t i o n for, ... (F) Ok, t h a t is a p o s s i b i l i t y , a n y t h i n g

else? (I)

S- [...]
T- What is this letter ... (F) y o u have t o m e n t i o n t h e w o r d i n v i t a t i o n ,
What is that letter you have, o r y o u received, o r y o u g o t ... o r a n y t h i n g
s i m i l a r t o t h a t , Ok? (F) ... Jos, W h a t a b o u t y o u , n u m b e r t w o . The
Industrial Revolution will he our topic for next week.

S - 1 have What is our topic for next week? (R)

T- M m , ... Yeah, b u t i t is possible y o u are n o t r e p e a t i n g t o o m a n y n e w

w o r d s (F) ... What's our topic for next week? ... The Industrial Revolution
will be our topic for next week ... (F) Ok, It's n o t i m p o s s i b l e ... A n y o t h e r
o p t i o n ? (I)

S- What will be the topic for the next week? (R)

T- Next week, n o t the next week, next week, What will the topic be next
week? o r When will we study the Industrial Revolution? (F)

S- What are we going to do the next week? (R)

Exercise 6
Y o u can describe, for example, the l i n g u i s t i c e n c o u n t e r i n any o f these
siluations:
Doctor o patient

Shop-assistant o customer
Aboriginal languages:
T h e languages s p o k e n b y A b o r i g i n a l A u s t r a l i a n s before t h e a r r i v a l o f
E n g l i s h c o l o n i z e r s . A b o r i g i n a l E n g l i s h is t h e t e c h n i c a l ame g i v e n t o a
c o n t i n u u m of varieties of E n g l i s h r a n g i n g between standard A u s t r a l i a n
E n g l i s h a n d creles used b y A b o r i g i n a l A u s t r a l i a n s .

Acrolect:
W h e n d e c r e o l i z a t i o n takes place, i.e. a crele language coexists w i t h
a s t a n d a r d language a n d t h e l a t t e r exerts s o m e i n f l u e n c e o n t h e f o r m e r ,
a range o f varieties develop. I n s u c h a s i t u a t i o n a c o n t i n u u m appears i n
die l a n g u a g e a n d speakers i n t h a t speech c o m m u n i t y s h o w a r a n g e o f
c I i Iferent p r o n u n c i a t i o n features, w h i c h are u s u a l l y associated w i t h social
s l r a t i f i c a t i o n . T h e acrolect is t h e t o p a n d e d u c a t e d v a r i e t y w h i c h is closer
10 the s t a n d a r d a n d f u r t h e r a w a y f r o m the crele. T h e acrolect c a n evolve
uto a N e w E n g l i s h .

African A m e r i c a n V e r n a c u l a r E n g l i s h ( A A V E ) :
(see B l a c k E n g l i s h V e r n a c u l a r )
Sometimes called B l a c k E n g l i s h Vernacular, B l a c k E n g l i s h , o r Ebonics,
11 i rfers to the language spoken i n b l a c k c o m m u n i t i e s i n the U n i t e d States.
Si ime l i n g u i s t s c o n s i d e r i t a s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t l i n g u i s t i c system f r o m
the s t a n d a r d d i a l e c t s i n c e i t d o e s n o t c o n f o r m t o i t s p r o n u n c i a t i o n ,
i i u i i m a t i c a l s t r u c t u r e , i d i o m a t i c usage, vocabulary, etc. I n the 1960 s the
lusue o f A A V E b e c a m e a source o f c o n c e r n i n t h e e d u c a t i o n s y s t e m as i t
(VAS perceived t h a t B l a c k s t u d e n t s p e r f o r m e d b e l o w average i n s c h o o l s
t i n d llie reason was t h o u g h t to lie i n their language skills. I t was considered
i l i . i l l i l a c k E n g l i s h speakers h a d t o face the d o u b l e l o a d o f h a v i n g t o deal
u i i l i linguistic differences i n the classroom as w e l l as i n the course content.
l l i i s issue has b e e n a source o f c o n c e r n ever since.

Au.ilylic l a n g u a g e :
I anguages c a n be classified i n t o t y p o l o g i c a l categories based o n h o w
\i d s are f o r m e d . A n a n a l y t i c l a n g u a g e is o n e i n w h i c h w o r d s t e n d t o
 uz
AN I N I KODIK l'ION TO SOCIOI,INOUIS'I ll ,
be one syHable I o n ; . ' \l Ii no aixcs, a s in Chnese o r V i c t n a m e s e M i .
f u n c t i o n o f w o r d s i n a s e n t e n c e is s h o w n p r i m a r i l y b y w o r d ordei
A n a l y t i c languages are also k n o w n as isolating languages. (See s y n l h e i n
language.)
Auxiliary language:
I t is a l a n g u a g e t h a t is u s e d f o r a s p e c i a l p u r p o s e a n d has, a m o n g
others, a specific f u n c t i o n a l goal. Pidgins are a u x i l i a r y languages b u t diere
are also i n s t a n c e s o f a r t i f i c i a l a u x i l i a r y l a n g u a g e s s u c h as E s p e r a n l o .
Business E n g l i s h , M a r i t i m e E n g l i s h a n d Air-Traffic C o n t r o l E n g l i s h . T h e s e
languages s o m e t i m e s have a specialized j a r g o n a n d t h a t tends t o be t h l
m o s t d i f f i c u l t p a r t as t h e y are n o t very c o m p l e x f r o m a s y n t a c t i c p o i n t i >l
view.
Basilect:
W h e n d e c r e o l i z a t i o n takes place, i.e. a crele language coexists w i t h
a s t a n d a r d language a n d t h e l a t t e r exerts s o m e i n f l u e n c e o n t h e former,
a range o f varieties develop. I n s u c h a s i t u a t i o n a c o n t i n u u m appears i n
t h e l a n g u a g e a n d speakers i n t h a t speech c o m m u n i t y s h o w a r a n g e o f
different p r o n u n c i a t i o n features, w h i c h are u s u a l l y associated w i t h social
s t r a t i f i c a t i o n . T h e basilect is t h e b o t t o m v a r i e t y w h i c h is c l o s e r t o t h e
crele a n d f u r t h e r a w a y f r o m t h e s t a n d a r d .
Bidialectal:
T h i s t e r m is c l o s e l y r e l a t e d t o b i l i n g u a l i s m . I n t h e s a m e w a y t h a t
someone speaking t w o languages w o u l d be considered b i l i n g u a l , someone
w h o c a n use t w o dialects c a n be considered b i d i a l e c t a l (see Dialect). I t a l l
d e p e n d s , o f c o u r s e , o n w h a t is c o n s i d e r e d a d i a l e c t , b u t t h e g r o u n d
d e f i n i t i o n w o u l d be a variant of a language due t o geographical differences.
Nevertheless, b e i n g b i d i a l e c t a l i m p l i e s t h a t the differences b e t w e e n the
c o n c e r n e d codes is n o t so great as t o p r e v e n t m u t u a l i n t e l l i g i b i l i t y .
Black English Vernacular:
(also A f r i c a n A m e r i c a n V e r n a c u l a r E n g l i s h )
T h i s t e r m refers t o t h e n o n - s t a n d a r d E n g l i s h s p o k e n b y lower-class
A f r i c a n Americans i n US u r b a n c o m m u n i t i e s . T h i s t e r m s u b s t i t u t e d 'Black
E n g l i s h ' w h i c h assumed that a l l b l a c k people used t h e same variety. I t has
b e e n d e m o n s t r a t e d t h a t t h e differences t h a t d i s t i n g u i s h B l a c k E n g l i s h
f r o m standard E n g l i s h are paralleled i n varieties of B l a c k language spoken
i n o t h e r p a r t s o f t h e w o r l d s u c h as t h e C a r i b b e a n a n d West A f r i c a .
I n t h e U K , B l a c k E n g l i s h is t h e r e s u l t o f t h e l i n g u i s t i c c h a n g e f o r m
crele l a n g u a g e s s p o k e n b y A f r o - C a r i b b e a n i m m i g r a n t s w h i c h w e r e
i n f l u e n c e d by English a s a d o m i n a n t language i n the U K . T h i s langUfl
has also become i n o r e t m g l i s h - l i k e for the U K - b o r n descendants o l l n
former immigrants.
Borrowing:
T h i s t e r m is used i n c o m p a r a t i v e a n d h i s t o r i c a l l i n g u i s t i c s to refer
w o r d s o r phrases w h i c h have spread f r o m one language o r dialect and a
used i n another. A l t h o u g h less e v i d e n t l y a n d less frequently, b o r r o w i n
c a n also o c e u r a t a d i f f e r e n t l i n g u i s t i c level s u c h as s y n t a c t i c . T
b o r r o w i n g language m a y have v a r i o u s ways o f i n c o r p o r a t i n g the forci
f o r m i n t o t h e r e c i p i e n t l a n g u a g e s p h o n o l o g y , m o r p h o l o g y a n d synta
B o r r o w i n g can be o r i g i n a t e d by a w i d e range of different causes i n c l i u l i i
a) Cise c o n t a c t b e t w e e n t w o o r m o r e language codes i n multilingU
s i t u a t i o n s w h i c h favors t h e t r a n s f e r o f elements.
b) T h e d o m i n a t i o n o f s o m e l a n g u a g e s b y o t h e r s d u e t o c u l t u r
e c o n o m i c , p o l i t i c a l , r e l i g i o u s o r o t h e r reasons.
c) A sense o f n e e d b e c a u s e t e c h n o l o g y o r c u l t u r e a d v a n c e s m
r a p i d l y i n c o u n t r i e s speaking c e r t a i n languages.
d) A sense o f prestige associated w i t h w o r d s o r expressions c o r n i
f r o m o t h e r languages.
T h e difference b e t w e e n c o d e - s w i t c h i n g a n d b o r r o w i n g is n o t a l w a
clear. There is n o d o u b t i n the case o f h i s t o r i c a l l y transferred f o r m s w h
h a v e s e t t l e d i n t h e t a r g e t l a n g u a g e (e.g.: w o r d s l i k e castle, fnrest a
tempest, c o m e f r o m F r e n c h ; a n d , w o r d s l i k e cali, egg, a n d law, c o m e f r
N o r s e ) . C o d e - s w i t c h i n g , h o w e v e r , is s p o n t a n e o u s , affeets a l l levis
l i n g u i s t i c s t r u c t u r e s i m u l t a n e o u s l y a n d is u n s t a b l e as i t depends o n
context a n d the r e l a t i o n s h i p between t h e speakers (e.g.: t h e Spanglish t
is o f t e n h e a r d i n p l a c e s s u c h as G i b r a l t a r o r Texas). O n s o m e o l
occasions, b o r r o w i n g s m a y resemble code-switches because they m a i n l
a f o r e i g n status a n d r e t a i n a n o t h e r languages' syntax (e.g.: Fixed phra
f r o m L a t i n : ad hoc, sine qua non, etc.).
Co-ordinate bilingual:
T h i s t e r m applies t o someone w h o has l e a r n t t w o languages a n d b
languages have been l e a r n t i n different contexts, a n d they are kept d i s t i
I t p r o b a b l y entails t h e existence o f t w o m e a n i n g systems w i t h t w o d i f i e
w o r d s . T h i s raises the q u e s t i o n w h e t h e r b o t h languages develop toget
o r separately i n t h e b r a i n . N e u r o l i n g u i s i t i c f i n d i n g s suggest t h a t wo
are s t o r e d together i n the case o f early b i l i n g u a l i s m , f r o m c h i l d h o o d ,
k e p t i n seprate places i f b i l i n g u a l i s m was developed later.
 11 v i i v . , i > i\n IU.-IUI l l M I [\ i l ll."M l(
Communicative competence:
This t e r m was first introduced by the American anthropological linguisi
Dell Hymes i n o p p o s i t i o n to the c h o m s k i a n c o n c e p t i o n o f native speakers
linguistic competence w h i c h referred to the l i n g u i s t i c i n t u i t i o n s of an
i d e a l i z e d n a t i v e speaker. D e l l H y m e s c o n s i d e r e d t h a t t h e l i n g u i s t i c
k n o w l e d g e o f g r a m m a r , p r o n u n c i a t i o n a n d lexicn is n o t e n o u g h as
speakers also have o t h e r types o f l i n g u i s t i c k n o w l e d g e a b o u t h o w t o use
t h a t l a n g u a g e p r o p e r l y i n society. T h i s a d d i t i o n a l k n o w l e d g e a l l o w s
speakers to be sensitive t o some d e t e r m i n i n g factors s u c h as the context,
t h e type o f i n t e r l o c u t o r , a n d t h e register, f o r e x a m p l e . C o m m u n i c a t i v e
c o m p e t e n c e is a c q u i r e d b y n a t i v e speakers o f t h e l a n g u a g e b u t i t also
needs t o be a c q u i r e d b y n o n - n a t i v e speakers, t o g e t h e r w i t h l i n g u i s t i c
c o m p e t e n c e . T h e e t h n o g r a p h y o f s p e a k i n g studies w h a t is necessary t o
be c o m m u n i c a t i v e l y c o m p e t e n t i n d i f f e r e n t speech c o m m u n i t i e s .
C o m p o u n d bilingual:
T h i s t e r m describes a s i t u a t i o n i n w h i c h one language has been l e a r n t
after t h e o t h e r a n d , therefore, t h r o u g h t h e f i r s t one. B o t h languages are
closely c o n n e c t e d as t h e y are c o m p o s e d o f a single m e a n i n g system w i t h
t w o w o r d s o r labels for a single m e a n i n g . This raises t h e question w h e t h e r
b o t h languages develop together o r separately i n the b r a i n . N e u r o l i n g u i s i t i c
f i n d i n g s suggest t h a t w o r d s a r e s t o r e d t o g e t h e r i n t h e case o f e a r l y
b i l i n g u a l i s m , f r o m c h i l d h o o d , b u t k e p t i n seprate places i f b i l i n g u a l i s m
was developed later.
Corpus planning:
T h i s t e r m refers t o the actions u n d e r t a k e n i n o r d e r t o p a r t i a l l y m o d i f y
t h e n a t u r e o r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f a l a n g u a g e i n s o m e way, f o r i n s t a n c e ,
d e c i s i o n s r e g a r d i n g w h a t p r o n u n c i a t i o n t o a d o p t f r o m those a v a i l a b l e ;
decisions r e g a r d i n g w h a t s y n t a c t i c o r m o r p h o l o g i c a l p a t t e r n s t o use; or,
even w h a t r e g i o n a l f o r m s a d o p t as t h e s t a n d a r d . CP m a y also c o n t r o l t h e
i n c o r p o r a t i o n o f n e w vocabulary. CP is closely r e l a t e d t o status p l a n n i n g
w h i c h refers t o w h e t h e r the status o f a language c o u l d o r s h o u l d be raised
or lowered.
Dialect:
G e o g r a p h i c a l v a r i a t i o n affects languages i n the f o r m o f dialects. T h i s
refers t o h o w l o c a l i t y correlates w i t h differences i n t h e w a y people speak
t h e l a n g u a g e . P e o p l e w h o speak a d i a l e c t o f t e n use d i f f e r e n t w o r d s o r
p r o n u n c i a t i o n s f o r t h e same w o r d . T h i s type o f v a r i a t i o n m a y also affect
s y n t a c t i c a n d i n t o n a t i o n p a t t e r n s . N o w a d a y s , d i a l e c t v a r i a t i o n tends t o
d i m i n i s h d u e t o t h e fact t h a t t h e m e d i a a n d t h e c o m m u n i c a t i o n
S. l i l i J.VSAKY VJ3
i n f r a s t r u c l u i v s have .1 h o m o g e n i z i n g effect o n languages. Sometimes lhe
d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n d i a l e c t s a n d l a n g u a g e s is n o t q u i t e clear a s
s o c i o p o l i t i c a l factors m a y play a n i m p o r t a n t role i n the decisin. It mus
be added that n o t even dialectologists agree o n a single definition of 'dialect',
Dialectology:
I t is t h e s t u d y a n d search f o r i d i o s y n c r a t i c features i n language use
w i t h i n a g e o g r a p h i c a l rea. D i a l e c t o l o g i s t s u s u a l l y a n a l y z e t h e t y p i c a l
vocabulary, p r o n u n c i a t i o n , i n t o n a t i o n patterns, a n d o t h e r characteristics,
a n d t r y t o m a t c h these w i t h specific geographic reas.
Discourse analysis:
T h i s f i e l d o f r e s e a r c h refers t o t h e analysis o f l i n g u i s t i c u n i t s above
t h e sentence level, i.e., texts o r c o n v e r s a t i o n s . B y a n a l y z i n g w r i t t e n 01
a u r a l texts, discourse analysts explore t h e different f u n c t i o n s o f language
i n social i n t e r a c t i o n .
Discourse marker:
These are w o r d s , phrases o r sounds t h a t have n o c o n t e n t m e a n i n g b u t ,
however, play an i m p o r t a n t role i n m a r k i n g conversational s t r u c t u r e ,
s i g n a l i n g c o n v e r s a t i o n a l i n t e n t i o n s a n d a s s u r i n g c o o p e r a t i o n o n the p a r t
o f listeners. S o m e d i s c o u r s e m a r k e r s i n E n g l i s h are: actually, really, Oh,
Yeah, etc. N o t i c e t h a t t h e t y p e s o f d i s c o u r s e m a r k e r s a n d t h e i r uses
f r e q u e n t l y change across languages.
Domain:
T h i s t e r m refers t o t h e c o m b i n a t i o n o f social a n d s i t u a t i o n a l factors
t h a t g e n e r a l l y i n f l u e n c e t h e c h o i c e o f c o d e b y speakers: code, d i a l e c t
l o c a t i o n , register, style, t o p i c , etc. F o r example, the language of h o m e w i l l
d e f i n i t e l y be d i f f e r e n t t o t h e language used at a f o r m a l m e e t i n g at w o r k
The same speaker w i l l use different styles, a n i n f o r m a l one f o r the f o r m e r
s i t u a t i o n a n d a f o r m a l one f o r t h e latter. T h i s concept is f r e q u e n t l y used
i n studies of code-switching i n m u l t i l i n g u a l contexts where various
languages, dialects o r styles are e m p l o y e d i n d i f f e r e n t social settings.
Dormnt b i l i n g u a l :
B i l i n g u a l s w h o d o n o l o n g e r use t h e i r languages b u t w h o a c q u i r e d
t h e m i n the past a n d reached a comprehensive k n o w l e d g e a n d c o m m a n d
E n d a n g e r e d language:
Languages n o r m a l l y develop, m e r g e o r die, a n d w h e n e v e r a language
is at r i s k because t h e n u m b e r o f speakers decreases w e c a n say t h a t that
 206
AN INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOI.INCJISTI
language is e n d a n g e r e d . T h i s c a n be the r e s u l t o f m a n y factors hu l>.nl
o r a d v e r s e l a n g u a g e p l a n n i n g is g e n e r a l l y b e h i n d t h e p r o g r e s s l v i
disappearance o f a language. E c o n o m i c s , o r r a t h e r the lack o f i m p o r t a n i I
o f a language for business, can cause its death. M a n y A m e r i n d i a n language*
are i n t h i s s i t u a t i o n at t h e m o m e n t .
E n g l i s h - l e x i f i e r crele:
(see L e x i f i e r )
T h i s t e r m refers t o a n y crele w h i c h is E n g l i s h - b a s e d a n d therefoi i
has received b o r r o w i n g s f r o m E n g l i s h . Due t o the post-creole c o n t i n u u m ,
t h a t language m a y s t i l l be r e c e i v i n g w o r d s f r o m E n g l i s h .
Ethnography of communication:
A t e r m that i n a d d i t i o n t o the d e f i n i t i o n o f the ethnography o f speaking
i n c l u d e s n o n v e r b a l aspects o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n , f o r i n s t a n c e , d i s t a n . .
b e t w e e n speaker a n d hearer, eye c o n t a c t , etc.
Ethnography of speaking:
T h i s b r a n c h o f s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s studies t h e n o r m s a n d rules f o r using
language i n social s i t u a t i o n s i n d i f f e r e n t c u l t u r e s . T h i s is the reason whj
i t is so i m p o r t a n t f o r cross-cultural c o m m u n i c a t i o n a n d t h a t also accountl
f o r i t s r e l a t i o n t o c o m m u n i c a t i v e c o m p e t e n c e . T h e e t h n o g r a p l n ol
s p e a k i n g deals w i t h aspects s u c h as t h e d i f f e r e n t types o f language to bf
u s e d u n d e r d i f f e r e n t c i r c u m s t a n c e s ; h o w t o m a k e r e q u e s t s , gran!
p e r m i s s i o n , o r ask a favor; t h e degree o f i n d i r e c t n e s s desired i n certain
s i t u a t i o n s ; h o w t o express y o u r opinin o r i n t e r r u p t y o u r i n t e r l o c u l o i ,
h o w a n d w h e n t o use f o r m u l a i c language (greetings, t h a n k i n g , etc. ), etl
Ethnomethodology:
T h i s b r a n c h o f sociology deals w i t h t h e c o n t e n t o f w h a t is b e i n g said
r a t h e r t h a n t h e w a y i t is b e i n g s a i d . E t h n o m e t h o d o l o g i s t s d o n o t s l u d v
speech o r language b u t the content o f w h a t is being said and, w h a t is more,
w h a t is n o t b e i n g s a i d because o f s h a r e d k n o w l e d g e o r c o m m o n - s c n s e
knowledge.
Heritage Language:
T h i s is a l a n g u a g e s p o k e n b y a n i m m i g r a n t g r o u p o r i n d i v i d u a l in
a n o t h e r c o u n t r y . F o r example, i n Canad, a c o u n t r y largely c o m p o s e d < >!
i m m i g r a n t s , t h e r e a r e cise t o 2 0 0 languages s p o k e n b y these types o l
groups. T h i s t e r m is t o be d i s t i n g u i s h e d f o r m I n d i g e n o u s Language w h i c h
also refers t o a m i n o r i t y language b u t i n t h i s case a l l u d e s t o t h e natives
ol that l a n d . I n Canad, f o r instance, a b o u t 50 i n d i g e n o u s languages are
207
GLOSSARY
spoken some o f w h i c h are o n l y spoken i n t h a t country, a n d none o f w h i c h
is c o n s i d e r e d a n o f f i c i a l language o f Canad.
Hypercorrection:
A m a n i f e s t a t i o n o f l i n g u i s t i c insecurity, f o r instance, i n a social g r o u p .
I t can manifest itself b y the overuse o f the socially desired f o r m s i n carelul
speech o r reading, especially i n an a t t e m p t to speak o r w r i t e i n a n educated
manner. F o r instance, a speaker o f a n o n - s t a n d a r d v a r i e t y o f E n g l i s h m a y
p r a c t i c e m o r e s e l f - c o r r e c t i o n w h e n s p e a k i n g f o r m a l l y a n d m a k e use o f
m o r e s o p h i s t i c a t e d v o c a b u l a r y o r a m o r e clear p r o n u n c i a t i o n .
Informant:
I n e m p i r i c a l research this t e r m refers to any person w h o provides
i n f o r m a t i o n t o be a n a l y z e d a n d is c o n s e q u e n t l y a source o f d a t a f o r t h e
researcher. A native speaker p r o v i d i n g i n s i g h t s of his/her use o f language
is a n i n f o r m a n t , b u t also a s t u d e n t w h o a t t e n d s a class t h a t is b e i n g
observed t o g a t h e r i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t t h e students' progress.
Interference:
I n l a n g u a g e t e a c h i n g a n d l e a r n i n g t h i s t e r m is u s e d t o r e f e r t o a n y
n e g a t i v e i n f l u e n c e (e.g.: l e x i c a l , s y n t a c t i c , p h o n o l o g i c a l , etc.) t h a t one
l a n g u a g e exerts o v e r t h e o t h e r , e i t h e r t h e L l o n t h e L 2 o r v i c e versa
I n t e r f e r e n c e u s u a l l y h i n d e r s t h e l e a r n i n g process a n d causes a p r o b l e m
t o t h e language l e a r n e r whereas positive i n t e r l i n g u i s t i c influence helps or
favors t h e language learner.
Language Academy:
I n some countries like Spain (The Royal Academy), France (The French
A c a d e m y ) , I r e l a n d (The I r i s h L a n g u a g e C o m m i s s i o n ) , N o r w a y (The
N o r w e g i a n Language Council), etc., there are i n s t i t u t i o n s w h i c h play a role
i n safeguarding standards, so they try to reglate the evolution of the language
b y means of protecting the language f r o m foreign u n w a n t e d influences and
i n a way, by t r y i n g t o c o n t r o l the e v o l u t i o n of language. This sort of contro
is m o r e l i k e l y t o be successful i n w r i t t e n language t h a n i n spoken languag
a n d the task is rather difficult these days w h e n the media exerts considerabl
i n f l u e n c e o n languages a l l over the w o r l d a n d g l o b a l i z a t i o n threatens th
preservation of m i n o r i t y languages a n d the i n t e g r i t y of others.
Language attrition:
G r a d u a l l a n g u a g e loss. T h i s t e r m c a n r e f e r t o t h e loss o f a m o l he
t o n g u e that has been a c q u i r e d a n d d u e t o lack o f use p r o b a b l y becaus
i l is not the lanr/.uage- o the c o m m u n i t y i t is g r a d u a l l y f o r g o t t e n . T h h
 208 AN INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLINi .I ISTIl
happens q u i t e f r e q u e n t l y a m o n g t h e second a n d t h e t h i r d general i o n ol
i m m i g r a n t s . I n s e c o n d l a n g u a g e l e a r n i n g , i t c a n r e f e r t o t h e loss ol a
language t h a t was learnt t h r o u g h f o r m a l i n s t r u c t i o n b u t gradually
f o r g o t t e n after a p e r i o d o f disuse.
Language conflict:
I n m u l t i l i n g u a l s i t u a t i o n s l a n g u a g e s are f r e q u e n t l y i n s o m e s o r l o l
conflict caused by ideological, p o l i t i c a l o r e c o n o m i c a l reasons. Some issufl
t y p i c a l l y genrate p r o b l e m s i n m u l t i l i n g u a l s e t t i n g s s u c h as decisin
r e g a r d i n g t h e e l e c t i o n o f a n o f f i c i a l l a n g u a g e , t h e c h o i c e o f a given
language f o r f o r m a l e d u c a t i o n , o r t h e selection o f a language t o be u s e d
i n courts, a m o n g others. A n o t h e r t y p i c a l s i t u a t i o n o f language c o n I I i d
o c c u r s w h e n t w o o r m o r e languages c o m p e t e f o r status i n society. M a n v
c u r r e n t l a n g u a g e c o n f l i c t s r e s u l t f o r m d i f f e r e n t s o c i a l s t a t u s and
government's p r e f e r e n t i a l t r e a t m e n t o f t h e d o m a i n language.
Language election/selection:
S o m e d e v e l o p i n g c o u n t r i e s , a t s o m e p o i n t , n e e d t o m a k e decisin',
w i t h regards to t h e i r sociopolitical e v o l u t i o n a n d t h e i r i n t e r n a t i o n . i l
r e c o g n i t i o n . F o r instance, M o z a m b i q u e a d o p t e d Portuguese, the forma
c o l o n i a l language, as i t s o f f i c i a l language. S o m e t h i n g s i m i l a r h a p p e n e d
t o I n d i a , w h i c h i n s p i t e o f a n i n i t i a l desire t o d e t a c h f r o m t h e i r f o r m e r
colony, l a t e r a s s u m e d E n g l i s h as a n a d d i t i o n a l o f f i c i a l language. These
d e c i s i o n s are n o r m a l l y m a d e f o r p r a c t i c a l p u r p o s e s e i t h e r because the
nation-state needs a a g g l u t i n a t i v e language t o overeme a w i d e l i n g u i s t i c
v a r i e t y and/or b e c a u s e s o m e a d v a n t a g e s are seen i n t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f
h a v i n g a L W C as a n o f f i c i a l language.
L a n g u a g e f u n c t i o n s : (or f u n c t i o n s o f language)
L a n g u a g e is f r e q u e n t l y d e s c r i b e d as h a v i n g t h r e e m a i n f u n c t i o n s :
d e s c r i p t i v e , expressive, a n d social. T h e d e s c r i p t i v e f u n c t i o n o f language
is t o c a r r y f a c t u a l i n f o r m a t i o n . T h e expressive f u n c t i o n o f language is t o
p r o v i d e i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t t h e s p e a k e r s p e r s o n a l feelings, preferences,
etc. A n d the social f u n c t i o n o f language serves the p u r p o s e o f m a i n t a i n i n g
social r e l a t i o n s b e t w e e n people.
Language loss:
T h i s t e r m refers t o a s i t u a t i o n w h e r e l a n g u a g e s h i f t i n a speech
c< >i n m u n i t y ends i n the total shift to another language. F o r instance, imagine
a g r o u p o f i m m i g r a n t s t h a t go to a n e w c o u n t r y a n d , gradually, i n one o r
l w o generations h l c n d i n t o the new speech c o m m u n i t y as t h e i r language
becomes eventually extinel (e.g.: the language loss ol D u t c h immigrants i n
GLOSSARY
200
A u s t r a l i a ) . T h i s p h e n o m e n o n w o u l d be r e f e r r e d as l a n g u a g e d e a t h i f a
language shift ends w i t h the t o t a l loss o f a language f r o m the w o r l d , i.e. all
speakers shift to a d i f f e r e n t one (e.g.: M a n x o n the Isle o f M a n ) .
L a n g u a g e P o l i c y Divisin:
T h i s d e p a r t m e n t o f t h e E U is l o c a t e d i n S t r a s b u r g a n d has
r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r a c t i o n s c o n c e r n i n g t h e progress o f language e d u c a t i o n
p o l i c i e s w i t h i n t h e E U m e m b e r states. T h i s Divisin is i n charge o f the
elaboration of guidelines and policies related to language learning a n d
t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f p o l i c y p l a n n i n g r e g a r d i n g l i n g u i s t i c diversity. A m o n g
o t h e r responsibilities, they (a) assist m e m b e r states w i t h p o l i c y evaluation
a n d d e p i c t i o n (at n a t i o n a l a n d l o c a l levis); (b) elabrate i n s t r u m e n t s f o r
p o l i c y a n a l y s i s ; (c) p r o v i d e a s s i s t a n c e r e g a r d i n g l i n g u i s t i c m i n o r i t i e s
language e d u c a t i o n ; etc.
L a n g u a g e r e v i t a l i z a t i o n : (or L a n g u a g e revival)
L a n g u a g e p l a n n i n g efforts made i n o r d e r to revive a language t h a t
b e c a u s e o f s o c i a l o r e c o n o m i c r e a s o n s has d e c r e a s e d i n n u m b e r o f
speakers o r w h i c h w a s even lost (see L a n g u a g e d e a t h ) . A language s h i f t
can lead t o the spread o f a d o m i n a n t language a n d the loss o f the m i n o r i t y
language. T h e reasons u n d e r l y i n g L R c a n v a r y b u t t h e y are o f t e n caused
b y a g r o u p s search f o r c u l t u r a l and/or e t h n i c i d e n t i t y o f a g r o u p . The best
e x a m p l e o f a s u c c e s s f u l L R is H e b r e w w h i c h w a s a c l a s s i c a l l i t u r g i c a l
l a n g u a g e f o r c e n t u r i e s a n d is n o w a l i v i n g language. A n i n s t a n c e o f a not
so successful p r o g r a m t o r e v i t a l i z e a l a n g u a g e is I r i s h i n I r e l a n d w h e r e
g o v e r n m e n t a l efforts a n d p r o g r a m s have t r i e d t o r e i n t r o d u c e t h e use o f
I r i s h i n schools w i t h o u t m u c h success.
Language spread:
I t consists o f a n increase i n the use o f a language o r language v a r i e t y
f o r a g i v e n c o m m u n i c a t i v e f u n c t i o n b y a specific social o r e t h n i c g r o u p .
L S c a n e i t h e r refer t o a t r a d i t i o n a l language w i t h i n a speech c o m m u n i t y
o r a language t h a t is adopted as lingua franca or LWC, as has been the case
o f E n g l i s h d u r i n g the 2 0 t h century. Languages also spread w i t h i n a n a t i o n
as a n e w m o t h e r t o n g u e i n s t e a d o f as a n a d d i t i o n a l language a n d i n that
case w e w o u l d r a t h e r t a l k a b o u t language s h i f t . E x t r e m e cases c a n even
lead t o language d e a t h as has h a p p e n e d w i t h t h e s p r e a d o f S p a n i s h a n d
E n g l i s h i n A m e r i c a r e s u l t i n g i n t h e loss o f m a n y A m e r i n d i a n languages.
Lexifier:
(see E n g l i s h - l e x i f i e r crele)
T h i s t e r m refers t o t h e language f r o m w h i c h m o s t o f t h e v o c a b u l a r y
has b e e n t a k e n t o f o r m a p i d g i n o r crele. E n g l i s h , F r e n c h , S p a n i s h anc
 Z I w
AN INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOI,INGUISTK
Portugucsc luivc been lexifier languages as a eonsequenee o l l i e < >i m c i
c o l o n i a l p a s t o f c o u n t r i e s s p e a k i n g n a t i v e l a n g u a g e s . T h e contal |
between one o r m o r e o f these E u r o p e a n languages a n d a native language
f a v o r e d t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f p i d g i n s a n d creles i n d i f f e r e n t p a r t s o l ih
world.
Lingua franca:
I t is a language w h i c h is u s u a l l y used b y speakers w h o have differenl
m o t h e r tongues a n d , therefore, need a c o m m o n language t o c o m m u n i c a t l
a m o n g t h e m . Lingua francas have existed since a n c i e n t t i m e s (e.g. Greek
koin Arabic, Mandarn, etc.) b u t the m o s t r e m a r k a b l e example nowad.i\
is E n g l i s h , w h i c h is s p o k e n b y s o m e p e o p l e as a m o t h e r t o n g u e , man)
o t h e r s use i t as a s e c o n d language, a n d s t i l l o t h e r s as a f o r e i g n languagi
but, as a rule, i t serves as a lingua franca for i n t e r n a t i o n a l a n d i n t e r c u l t m il
c o m m u n i c a t i o n . I n spite o f b e i n g w i d e l y used, the k n o w l e d g e o f differenl
speakers m a y v a r y c o n s i d e r a b l y d e p e n d i n g , q u i t e o f t e n , o n the domainl
w h e r e t h e l a n g u a g e is t o be u s e d a n d t h e f u n c t i o n s i t is m e a n l t d
accomplish.
Linguistic competence:
I t refers t o lexical, p h o n o l o g i c a l , s y n t a c t i c a l k n o w l e d g e a n d skills a m i
o t h e r d i m e n s i o n s o f l a n g u a g e as s y s t e m , i n d e p e n d e n t l y o f l l i e
s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c valu o f its v a r i a t i o n s a n d the p r a g m a t i c f u n c t i o n s ol I t l
realizations. This c o m p o n e n t relates to the range a n d q u a l i t y o f knowledge
(e.g. i n t e r m s o f p h o n e t i c d i s t i n c t i o n s m a d e o r t h e e x t e n t a n d p r e c i s i i >n
o f v o c a b u l a r y ) b u t also to c o g n i t i v e o r g a n i z a t i o n a n d the w a y this
k n o w l e d g e is s t o r e d ( a c t i v a t i o n , r e c a l l , etc.).
LWC: (Language of Wider C o m m u n i c a t i o n )
T h i s t e r m is e q u i v a l e n t to lingua franca. Two instances o f L W C i n the
t i m e s o f the Romn E m p i r e are L a t i n i n the west a n d koin Greek i n the
east. After W o r l d W a r I I , E n g l i s h became a LWC. (See lingua franca), l l is
a language used b y speakers o f d i f f e r e n t languages t o c o m m u n i c a t e w i l h
each other.
Macro-sociolinguistics:
T h i s t e r m refers t o the s t u d y o f s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c aspects i n large g r o u p s
o f speakers as opposed t o m i c r o - s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s t h a t studies reas related
i< > small groups. Macro-sociolinguistics deals w i t h the r e l a t i o n s h i p between
s o c i o l o g i c a l f a c t o r s a n d l a n g u a g e as, f o r e x a m p l e , l a n g u a g e p l a n n i n g ,
language s h i f t a n d m u l t i l i n g u a l m a t t e r s .
Mesolect:
W h e n d e c r e o l i z a t i o n takes place, i.e. a crele language coexists w i t h
a s t a n d a r d language a n d the l a t t e r exerts s o m e i n f l u e n c e o n the f o r m e r ,
a range o f varieties develop. I n s u c h a s i t u a t i o n a c o n t i n u u m appcars i n
t h e l a n g u a g e a n d s p e a k e r s i n t h a t s p e e c h c o m m u n i t y s h o w a range o f
different p r o n u n c i a t i o n features, w h i c h are u s u a l l y associated w i t h social
s t r a t i f i c a t i o n . The mesolect is the i n t e r m e d i a t e variety, o r varieties, w h i c h
is b e t w e e n the crele a n d t h e s t a n d a r d .
Micro-sociolinguistics:
T h e s t u d y o f s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s i n r e l a t i o n t o s m a l l g r o u p s o f speakers,
speech c o m m u n i t i e s o r t h e speech o f individuis. T h i s b r a n c h o f
s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s deals, f o r example, w i t h t h e analysis o f face-to-face
i n t e r a c t i o n a n d d i s c o u r s e a n a l y s i s . T h i s t e r m is u s e d i n o p p o s i t i o n t o
m a c r o - s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s w h i c h r e f e r s t o l a r g e r scale s t u d y o f l a n g u a g e
i n society.
Minority language:
These are languages t h a t live i n t h e s h a d o w o f a c u l t u r a l l y d o m i n a n t
language w h i c h p u t s the m i n o r i t y language at risk. As a r e s u l t o f p o l i t i c a l
o r s o c i a l f a c t o r s , these languages are v e r y o f t e n n o t t h e languages o f a l l
reas o f a c t i v i t y b y n a t i v e speakers as t h e y c a n be e x c l u d e d f r o m c e r t a i n
spheres as a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , e d u c a t i o n , o r mass m e d i a (e.g. S c o t t i s h Gaelic
is w i d e l y used i n c h u r c h b u t m a r g i n a l l y i n o t h e r social gatherings). These
f a c t o r s o f t e n r e q u i r e speakers o f m i n o r i t y l a n g u a g e s t o be b i l i n g u a l as
t h e y w i l l n e e d t o oprate i n a t least t w o languages. M i n o r i t y languages
m a y be o r m a y have been at some p o i n t i n t h e i r h i s t o r y at r i s k e i t h e r
by p o l i t i c a l decisions affecting t h e i r maintenance or by the lack of
v o c a b u l a r y t o c o v e r c e r t a i n t o p i c s . S o m e a c t i o n s c a n be u n d e r t a k e n t o
p r o m o t e m i n o r i t y languages (see chapter 5) b y means o f language p l a n n i n g
a n d l a n g u a g e p o l i c i e s . S o m e instances o f m i n o r i t y l a n g u a g e s are I r i s h ,
Welsh a n d Scottish Gaelic w h i c h exist i n the shadow o f E n g l i s h , o r Bretn
i n the shadow of French.
Native speaker:
A p e r s o n w h o has s p o k e n a language since early c h i l d h o o d . T h i s t e r m
is r a t h e r c o n t r o v e r s i a l i n l i n g u i s t i c s because i t assumes t h e existence o f
a speaker t h a t can be appealed i n q u e s t i o n s o f c o r r e c t usage because s/he
is r e p o r t e d t o represent the a u t h o r i t y t h a t c a n d e t e r m i n e correct o r deviant
usage. N a t i v e a n d n o n - n a t i v e are n o t clear c u t h o m o g e n e o u s categories
as v a r i a t i o n d e p e n d i n g o n i n d i v i d u a l f a c t o r s ( o r i g i n , e d u c a t i o n , etc.) is
e n o r m o u s a n d all speakers are, i n t u r n , native speakers o f a given language

o r dialect. I n second language l e a r n i n g they have I r a d i t i o n a l l y rep
t h e m o d e l t o f o l l o w i n t h e process o f l e a r n i n g b u t t h i s has p r o v e n Id
a n i n e f f i c i e n t a p p r o a c h as t h e processes o f f i r s t a n d s e c o n d l a i i g u i|
l e a r n i n g are n a t u r a l l y a n d necessarily different. Moreover, rece s l u d l
have s h o w n t h a t , c o n t r a r y t o p o p u l a r belief, 'native speaker inti< >sp< lliid
is a n u n r e l i a b l e g u i d e to a c t u a l usage.
New Englishes:
T h i s t e r m refers t o a n y o f t h e varieties o f E n g l i s h t h a t have cniei i
as a consequence o f the ampie spread o f this language d u r i n g the coloui .1
period. Examples o f N e w Englishes are the English spoken i n India, Kenya
Singapore o r Jamaica, a m o n g others. Also k n o w as W o r l d E n g l i s h , n < Ii 11
n o t e m p h a s i z e t h e d i c h o t o m y b e t w e e n n a t i v e a n d n o n - n a t i v e us< bul
e m b o d i e s t h e r e c o g n i t i o n o f E n g l i s h as a n i n t e r n a t i o n a l language lluil
shows f o r m a l a n d f u n c t i o n a l v a r i a t i o n i n different contexts, as a resull 1 >l
its use i n m u l t i l i n g u a l a n d m u l t i c u l t u r a l contexts.
Observer's paradox:
A t e r m d e v e l o p e d b y W i l l i a m L a b o v t o r e f e r t o a p h e n o m e n o n thal
takes place w h e n d o i n g s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c research. T h e issue raises when
t h e s o c i o l i n g u i s t needs t o g a t h e r d a t a f r o m a single speaker o r a g r o u p 1 >l
speakers i n a s p e e c h c o m m u n i t y . T h e p r o b l e m is t h a t o b s e r v i n g a n d
g a t h e r i n g (for instance, r e c o r d i n g ) t h a t speech is d i f f i c u l t because as s< K>n
as t h e i n f o r m a n t s r e a l i z e t h a t t h e y are b e i n g o b s e r v e d t h e y c a n a n d
c o n s c i o u s l y o r u n c o n s c i o u s l y t h e y g e n e r a l l y d o c h a n g e t h e i r speech
a n d m a k e use o f a less n a t u r a l t a l k (e.g.: m o r e c a r e f u l p r o n u n c i a t i o n , less
i d i o m a t i c expressions, a v a r i e t y f u r t h e r away f r o m t h e vernacular, etc.).
W h a t really interests sociolinguists is the w a y people speak w h e n t h e y d o
n o t k n o w t h a t t h e y are b e i n g observed.
Pragmatic competence:
T h i s t e r m is c o n c e r n e d w i t h t h e f u n c t i o n a l use o f l i n g u i s t i c resources
( p r o d u c t i o n o f l a n g u a g e f u n c t i o n s , speech acts, etc.) u s e d o n a u r a l
c o m m u n i c a t i o n o r scripts o f i n t e r a c t i o n a l exchanges. I t also concerns the
m a s t e r y o f discourse, cohesin a n d coherence, t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f text
types a n d f o r m s , i r o n y , parody, etc.
Pragmatics:
I t is a b r a n c h o f l i n g u i s t i c s t h a t s t u d i e s t h e use o f l a n g u a g e i n
c o m m u n i c a t i o n , i.e., the relationships between utterances a n d the contexts
a n d s i t u a t i o n s i n w h i c h they are used. W i t h i n p r a g m a t i c s , discourse
analysis studies language i n discourse.
(I.OSSARY
Proficieney:
I t is someone's skill i n using a language, generally as a second language.
T h i s t e r m d e s c r i b e s t h e d e g r e e o f s k i l l t h a t s o m e o n e has a t t a i n e d i n a
language a n d his/her a b i l i t y over t h e f o u r basic skills: s p e a k i n g , r e a d i n g ,
writing and listening.
(Proto)-Indo-European:
L a n g u a g e s c a n be c l a s s i f i e d g e n e t i c a l l y . T h i s c l a s s i f i c a t i o n involves
c o m p a r i n g t h e s t r u c t u r e o f different languages i n o r d e r t o s h o w c o m m o n
parentage. I n d o - E u r o p e a n is t h e b e s t - k n o w n language f a m i l y . T h e m a j o r
I n d o - E u r o p e a n s u b g r o u p s are: I n d o - I r a n i a n , A r m e n i a n , A l b a n i a n ,
A n a t o l i a n , H e l l e n i c , I t a l i c , Celtic, B a l t i c , Slavic, a n d G e r m a n i c . E n g l i s h
belongs t o t h e A n g l o - F r i s i a n g r o u p o f t h e West G e r m a n i c b r a n c h o f the
G e r m a n i c subfamily. A n u n a t t e s t e d (reconstructed) language is i n d i c a t e d
b y t h e t e r m proto-.
Sabir:
T h i s w a s a lingua franca u s e d i n t h e M e d i t e r r a n e a n rea f r o m t h e
M i d d l e Ages t o t h e t w e n t i e t h century. I t is i n t e r e s t i n g t o k n o w t h a t t h i s
language has been k e p t stable f o r c e n t u r i e s i n spite o f n o t h a v i n g native
speakers a n d b e i n g j u s t a c o n t a c t language used b y speakers t h a t do n o t
share a c o m m o n language. The o r i g i n o f p i d g i n s is n o t clear a n d there is
a n o n g o i n g debate a b o u t i t , b u t s o m e specialists, t h e m o n o g e n e t i c i s t s ,
suggest t h a t a l l p i d g i n s based o n a n E u r o p e a n language derive f r o m t h i s
lingua franca.
Sociolinguistic competence:
T h i s t e r m refers t o t h e s o c i o c u l t u r a l c o n d i t i o n s o f l a n g u a g e use.
T h r o u g h i t s s e n s i t i v i t y t o social c o n v e n t i o n s (rules o f politeness, n o r m s
g o v e r n i n g relations b e t w e e n generations, sexes, classes a n d social groups,
l i n g u i s t i c c o d i f i c a t i o n o f c e r t a i n f u n d a m e n t a l r i t u a l s , etc.), t h e
s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c c o m p o n e n t s t r i c t l y affeets a l l l a n g u a g e c o m m u n i c a t i o n
b e t w e e n r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f d i f f e r e n t c u l t u r e s , even t h o u g h p a r t i c i p a n t s
m a y o f t e n be u n a w a r e o f i t s i n f l u e n c e .
Sociolinguistic interview:
I t is a t e c h n i q u e t o collect speech samples t o gather i n f o r m a t i o n about
a g i v e n speaker, o r g r o u p o f speakers, i n a s p e e c h c o m m u n i t y . T h i s
qualitative m e t h o d o f research is o f p r i m e i m p o r t a n c e f o r t h e sociolinguist
as i t provides face-to-face i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h t h e i n f o r m a n t w i t h a technique
t h a t a l l o w s r e c o r d i n g f o r l a t e r analysis.
 215
GLOSSARY
S o c i o l i n g u i s t i c relativity:
W h e n people c o m i n g f r o m different social a n d l i n g u i s t i c b a c k " | express a n u m b e r o f different g r a m m a t i c a l concepts, as i n L a t i n . Synthetic
interact, q u i t e n a t u r a l l y they t e n d to analyze a n d j u d g e each othei Ii languages are also k n o w n as i n f l e c t i o n a l . (See a n a l y t i c language)
a n d t a k i n g t h e i r o w n s y s t e m as a reference. T h e m o r e i n t e r a i t i o n w i l l
different c u l t u r e s , dialects, registers, etc. the m o r e referents speakci lli
Turn-taking:
have and, therefore, the m o r e capable they w i l l be o f perceiving theii < nlllllt
I n conversation analysis this t e r m describes the f u n d a m e n t a
a n d way o f t h i n k i n g as j u s t one o f many. This way, speakers may lie ihli i
m e c h a n i s m s o n w h i c h c o n v e r s a t i o n i s b a s e d , t h a t i s , t h e r i g h t and/o
u n d e r s t a n d a n d shape t h e i r o w n p e r c e p t i o n o f c u l t u r a l a n d soc i o I i n g 111
1

o b l i g a t i o n t o speak w i t h the i n t e r l o c u t o r . General c o n v e r s a t i o n a l pattern

identities. Sociolinguistic relativity entails the acknowlcdgeiiu n
s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c diversity.
Sociology of language:
T h i s t e r m refers t o a b r a n c h o f s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s t h a t studies largi lli
processes o f i n t e r a c t i o n b e t w e e n l a n g u a g e a n d i t s use i n societ\
referred to as macro-sociolinguistics, i t deals w i t h the relationship bclw ron
s o c i o l o g i c a l f a c t o r s a n d l a n g u a g e , especially l a n g u a g e c h o i c e . S (l|
t h e issues s t u d i e d b y t h e s o c i o l o g y o f l a n g u a g e are l a n g u a g e p l a n n h i
m u l t i l i n g u a l i s m , a n d language s h i f t .
S p e e c h act:
I t is a n u t t e r a n c e t h a t r e p r e s e n t s a f u n c t i o n a l u n i t i n i n t e r a i i
Utterances c a n have a l o c u t i o n a r y m e a n i n g o r a n i l l o c u t i o n a r y m c a n i n y
T h e f o r m e r refers t o t h e basic l i t e r a l m e a n i n g o f t h e u t t e r a n c e w l m h i
conveyed b y t h e p a r t i c u l a r w o r d s a n d s t r u c t u r e s used. The l a t t e r refera ta
t h e effect the u t t e r a n c e has o n t h e listener, o r t h e text o n t h e reader.
are a r r a n g e d i n a w a y t h a t o n l y o n e speaker speaks at a t i m e b u t the wa
t u r n - t a k i n g is o r g a n i z e d depends o n c u l t u r a l specific factors. Conversal i<
needs t o be t w o - w a y o t h e r w i s e i t t u r n s i n t o a m o n o l o g u e .
Variety:
T h i s t e r m is u s e d t o refer t o a s o r t o f language t h a t is considered a s
seprate e n t i t y f o r s o m e r e a s o n b u t w h i c h g e n e r a l l y shares a great de
o f c o m m o n features w i t h a s t a n d a r d o r o t h e r varieties. Therefore, it is n<
c o n s i d e r e d a d i f f e r e n t language. A g i v e n dialect, accent, style o r regist
c a n be c o n s i d e r e d a variety, w h i c h is a t e r m p r e f e r r e d b y l i n g u i s t s as i t
less l o a d e d . Language varieties c a n be very w i d e spread a n d s t a n d a r d i z
such as A u s t r a l i a n E n g l i s h o r A m e r i c a n E n g l i s h b u t t h e y c a n also be ve
l o c a l i z e d s u c h as C o c k n e y ( i n L o n d o n ) a n d Scouse ( i n L i v e r p o o l ) .

Status planning:
T h i s t e r m refers to actions a i m i n g at r a i s i n g o r l o w e r i n g the s k i he. Bjj
a language o r dialect a n d w h i c h basically refers t o decisions r e g a r d i n g lln-
selection o f p a r t i c u l a r varieties f o r p a r t i c u l a r purposes o r c o m m u n i c a t i v f
f u n c t i o n s . SP is closely r e l a t e d t o c o r p u s p l a n n i n g as language p l a n m u y
policies c a n never be solely c o r p u s - o r i e n t e d o r s t a t u s - o r i e n t e d .

Synchronic variation:
This t e r m refers t o the instances a n d characteristics o f v a r i a t i o n w h i c h
o c e u r at t h e p r e s e n t t i m e i n l a n g u a g e . T h a t is, t h e w a y v a r i a t i o n a l i e < i
language at a g i v e n t i m e i n history, f o r instance: gender, register, style, cu
D i a c h r o n i c v a r i a t i o n , however, l o o k s at language f r o m a h i s t o r i c a l poinl
o f v i e w a n d c o n s i d e r s l i n g u i s t i c change t h r o u g h t i m e .

Synthetic language:
I n i n f l e c t i o n a l languages w o r d s have a n u m b e r o f suffixes w h i c h val J
t h e i r shape a c c o r d i n g t o t h e w o r d t h e y are a d d e d t o . A single sufix c a n
Conceptual i n d e x
aboriginal languages, 122, 127-8, 133,
136, 140-1, 173, 201
Aboriginal English, 83, 173
acculturated bilingual, 99
acrolect, 79, 80-1, 108, 201
address behavior, 162-4
Afrikaans, 87, 128
African American Vernacular English
(AAVE), 81, 201, 202
age, 15, 33, 35, 36, 38, 44, 51, 94, 98,
116,139, 141, 161
Amerindian languages, 127, 206, 209
analytic language, 30, 201, 214
applied sociolinguistics, 26, 173
Arabic, 34, 100, 108, 129, 210
artificial language, 71, 111, 133
auxiliary language, 202
basilect, 80-1, 202
Basque, 34, 111, 122, 148
bicultural, 46, 99, 123, 141
bidialectal speaker, 83, 100, 118, 202
bilingual
-children, 104, 153
-education, 17, 104, 116-7, 121-5,
141, 148,151-2, 166
bilingualism
additive-, 83, 99, 142
adolescent-, 98
adult-, 98
balanced-, 93, 98-100
childhood-, 98
dominant-, 98
individual-, 96
social-, 96
sublrai live , ')')
Black English Vernacular, 28, 201, 202
borrowing, 32, 77, 103, 131, 132, 146,
148, 178, 203
Cataln, 34, 125-6, 127, 148
circle
inner-, 176-8
expanding-, 176-8
outer-, 176-8
classroom
-discourse, 17, 168
-language, 159, 167-170
choice
code-, 17, 100-1, 104
word-, 24, 28, 36, 41, 51, 54, 59
Chomsky, 23-4, 191
code
-choice, 17, 100-1, 104
-mixing, 103-4, 113-4
codification, 129, 132, 213
competence
communicative-, 24, 46, 98, 117, 159,
161-2, 204, 206
linguistic-, 24, 117, 161-2, 204, 210
pragmatic-, 161-2, 171, 212
sociolinguistic-, 161-2, 213
compound bilingual, 97, 204
Common European Framework of
Reference for Languages, 145
communicative
-competence, 24, 46, 98, 117, 159,
161-2, 204, 206
-functions, 70, 145, 214
corpus planning, 153-4, 204, 214
creolization, 69-72, 107
decreolization, 80 1, 201, 2(12, 2 I I

dialect, 24, 32-4, 43, 58, 63, 81-3, 100,
107, 109, 111, 114,134, 136, 143,
166, 179, 202,203, 204
dialectology, 26, 205
diaspora, 175-6
diglossia, 16, 17, 34, 105-9, 114, 165
discourse analysis, 17, 26, 58, 205, 211,
212
discourse marker, 162, 167, 205
domain, 28, 32, 35, 53, 63, 93-5, 98,
112, 114, 132, 145, 177, 205, 208,
210
dormant bilingual, 205
dual-linguistic system, 123
endangered language, 205-6
English-lexifier crele, 206, 209
Esperanto, 71, 83, 133, 202
ethnographic approach, 26, 38
ethnography of communication, 206
ethnography of speaking, 204, 206
ethnomethodology, 206
forensic linguistics, 172-4
Galician, 34, 100
gender, 15, 17, 26, 27, 33, 36, 44-5, 56-
60, 72, 74, 214
geographic variation, 27, 41, 51, 174
globalization, 29, 32, 123, 132, 146,
174, 207
Haitian Crele, 70, 73, 106, 107
Hawaiian Crele English, 17, 70, 73-5,
83
heritage language, 121, 206
Hind, 25, 43-4, 109
historical linguistics, 26, 203
Hymes, 24, 70, 204
hypercorrection, 207
immersion programs, 121, 141-3, 148,
165, 170
India, 17, 25, 33-4, 43, 45, 71, 80, 85,
109, 128-9, 130, 137-8, 153, 174-6,
180, 208, 212
informant, 36-7, 207, 212, 213
interference, 36, 82, 104, 126, 178, 182,
207
interlingual communication, 133
Jamaican Patwa, 17, 75-7, 106
jargon
bastardized-, 70
221
AN INTRODUCCION TO SOCIOLINGUISTICS CONCEPTUAL INDEX
speech community, 17, 23-4, 27, 32-5,
language micro-sociolinguistics, 25, 210, 211
4 1 , 45, 46, 51, 58, 81, 96, 99, 106,
-academy, 130-1, 207 minority language, 83, 123, 124, 126,
108-9, 114, 118, 122, 128-9, 130-1,
-attrition, 25, 207-8 135-7, 141, 144, 147, 148, 153,
-conflict, 111, 208 159-160, 161, 165-6, 182, 201, 202,
206, 207, 209, 211
-contact, 15, 16, 110-2 208, 209, 211, 212
mode, 54, 149 bilingual-, 34
-election/selection, 208
modernization, 130, 131, 132, 134 diglossic-, 166
-functions, 162, 208, 212
multilingualism, 17, 34, 96, 109-111,
-learning, 94, 125, 144, 149, 159, 160- monolingual-, 34
138, 146, 214
1, 162, 166, 170, 172, 180, 208, multilingual-, 34,114
native speaker, 23-4, 51, 113, 126, 144,
209, 212 speech repertoire, 33
159-160, 162, 171, 174, 185, 204,
-loss, 135, 207, 208 standard
207, 211-2, 213
-maintenance, 25, 123, 127, 133, 135, English, 73, 75-6, 81, 84, 174-8, 183,
natural language, 111
136 202
neurophysiological differences, 59
-planning, 17, 25, 26, 73, 85, 121-3, New Englishes, 176, 212 status planning, 153, 204, 214
125, 126-135, 137, 141, 143-5, 148, observer's paradox, 36, 212 stylistic simplification, 123-3
153-4, 205, 209, 210, 211, 214 Od English, 29-32 style, 17, 28, 34, 37, 45, 51-3, 56, 60,
-policy, 16, 25, 121, 123, 125-6, 130, pidginiazation, 69-71 63, 64, 100, 107, 133, 162, 172-3,
135, 137, 144, 149, 154 pragmatic competence, 162, 171, 212 177, 184, 205, 214
-Policy Divisin, 209 pragmatics, 17, 26, 58, 83, 171-2, 212 switch
-purication, 130-1, 134 proficieney, 93, 96, 99, 112-3, 141-3, intersentential-, 102
-reform, 131 144, 146, 149, 152, 164, 165, 168, intrasentential-, 102
-revival, 131, 209 177,213 synthetic language, 201, 214
-revitalization, 209 (proto)-Indo-European, 29-30, 213 Tok Pisin, 17, 72, 73, 77-80, 87, 106,
-shift, 131, 135, 136-7, 208, 209, 210, register, 17, 33, 40, 45-6, 53-6, 6 1 , 62, 128,176
214 tenor, 54, 61
95, 100, 101, 107, 109, 113, 125,
-spread, 131-2, 209 162-3, 178, 204, 205, 214, 215 terminology unification, 132, 133
-standardization, 131-2 rules of speaking, 160, 162-5, 182 turn-taking, 24, 27, 59, 167, 215
-teaching, 16, 24, 37, 113, 144, 159-
Sabir, 213 Universal Declaration of Linguistic
162, 170-2, 207 Rights, 146-7
second language, 24, 27, 77, 82, 93, 98,
Labov, 28, 36, 37, 38, 63, 113, 212 variation
99, 113, 141-2, 159-160, 161, 165,
legal language, 54-5, 61, 173 diachronic-, 29-32
170, 175, 183, 185, 207-8, 210,
level of education, 36, 116 stylistic-, 35, 51-3, 56
211, 213
lexifier, 74, 75, 79, 206, 209-210 synchronic, 214
semantic change, 31,41
lingua franca, 69, 71, 77, 86, 88, 129, variety
sociolect, 54
133, 166, 175, 177, 184, 185, 209, high-, 34, 105
sociolinguistic competence, 161-2, 213
210,213 low-, 34, 105
sociolinguistic interview, 37, 213
linguistic vernacularization, 127, 128
sociolinguistic relativity, 214
-assimilation, 127 World Englishes, 17, 146, 167, 174-8,
sociology of language, 17, 24-5, 214
-competence, 24, 117, 161-2, 204, 212
speech act, 162, 167, 171, 212, 214
209, 210
-pluralism, 128
loanwords, 32
LWC, 133, 159, 166, 208, 209
macro-sociolinguistics, 25, 210, 211,
214
Maori, 139-140
Melanesian Pidgin English, 69
mesolect, 80, 211