Li2Li2class-based class-based social variation Isocial variation I

Today’s topicsToday’s topics

Linguistic variation conditioned by socio-economic status (class)Stigmatization and prestige

varieties sources discrimination

Class and traditional dialectCorrelations of linguistic variables with class are

arbitrary

Socio-economic status/classSocio-economic status/class

Professions most likely to have local accent:policeman, fireman…

Correlation between class (socioeconomic status) and traditional dialectLower classes tend to have more regional variation and

preserve/use regional/non-standard variants (e.g. h-deletion in England)

Why? Upper class more likely to move, go away to school, etc. Regional pride (cf. later discussion of Martha’s Vineyard)

Class-based variation in NorwichClass-based variation in Norwich

% application of t-glottalization (t) and h-deletion (h)

from Trudgill 1974

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

LWC MWC UWC LMC MMC

t

h

Stratification can be the same across communitiesStratification can be the same across communities

01020304050607080

UMC LMC UWC LWC

Mean % r-deletion in the black community in Detroit (Wolfram 1969)

Mean % r-deletion in 3 New York department stores (Labov 1966)

Floorwalkers   Sales clerks   Stock clerks

         

8%some [r]

 

35%

   

     

46%all [r]

     

     

     

     

     

 

18%

   

   

14%    

   

Saks   Macy's   S. Klein

         

32%some [r]

       

       

 

31%

   

     

     

     

30%all [r]

     

     

 

20%

 

17%   

   

    4%

R-deletion in NYC and Detroit

•Many dialects of English delete non-prevocalic r.

•“non-prevocalic r” = any r-sound that isn’t followed by a vowel:

•car, party, sophomore, etc.

Language/class correlations are arbitraryLanguage/class correlations are arbitrary

010

20

3040

50

LWC UWC LMC UMC

NYC

NYC

Norwich

Percentage of non-prevocalic r’s pronounced

r-deletion in America vs. England

data from Labov (NYC) and Trudgill (Norwich)

Language/class correlations are arbitraryLanguage/class correlations are arbitraryRaising of long a to u before nasal consonants in two Persian dialects

Figure 1. Percent raising of (an) in the Farsi of Tehran and Ghazvin.

Yahya Modaressi-Tehrani (1978) A Sociolinguistic Analysis of Modern Persian. Doctoral dissertation, University of Kansas.

Stigmatization

150 respondents from SE Michigan (Preston 2000) Mean scores of rankings for “correct English”, 1-10 Least correct: South, NYC, NJ Most correct: Michigan (only state in the 8 range)

Some stigmatized features in American English: r-deletion double negation ain’t

N.B. stigmatized features sometimes have covert prestige, as we’ll see later

Linguistic variables often assigned to qualitative scale by speakers (unmarked, better, worse…)

Most prevalent with class-linked variables, because of independent social links between class and quality

A famous example:

PrestigePrestige

Labov 1962 linguistic variable: centralization of diphthongs

/, / → [, ] In the chart above, higher numbers = more centralization

began with fisherman (traditional inhabitants) spread to other islanders (presumably to distinguish them from tourists) Labov study of college-age Vineyarders found two groups:

one hated the island and intended to leave as soon as possible one intended to stay strong correlation between positive attitudes toward life on the island and degree of centralization.

  63                

    62              

                   

                   

                   

          42        

                   

        32          

                   

                   

                   

  (ay) (aw)         09 08  

                   

  positive   neutral   negative  

Linguistic prestige on Martha’s VineyardLinguistic prestige on Martha’s Vineyard

Types of linguistic prestigeTypes of linguistic prestige

overt covert crypto schizo none

Overt prestigeOvert prestige

double negation, ain’t changes toward forms with overt prestige

normally spearheaded by middle-class women (Trudgill 1978)

Covert prestigeCovert prestige

Overt prestige is about seeking prestige by assimilating to the standard.

Covert prestige is about not choosing to assimilate to the standard.

Each choice has a distinct set of costs and benefits… pull of ultra-masculinity: working-class male Particularly noticeable in teenage years Important force in maintaining non-standard varieties of

speech

CryptoprestigeCryptoprestige

when only one person knows the high prestige formwhat the yam really isbetween you and me (?)using hopefully and ironic “properly”

SchizoprestigeSchizoprestige

Agreement that there is a prestigious form and a stigmatized form, but no agreement on which is whichoften: [] vs. []coupon vs. cyoupon foreign words and local words

Des Plaines, Desmoines, Worcester, etc. regional splits:

r-deletion gymshoes/sneakers?

No prestigeNo prestige

spicket vs. spigotHarvard Dialect Survey, Q41: Do you use "spigot" or

"spicket" to refer to a faucet or tap that water comes out of? (10860 respondents)

spigot (66.89%) I say "spicket" but spell it "spigot" (12.64%) I don't use either version of this word (9.23%)      spicket (6.38%) I use both interchangeably (2.52%) I use both with different meanings (2.00%)

Doodlebug/pill bug/roly poly/etc.

Sources of linguistic prestigeSources of linguistic prestige

spelling?? (often cited in the literature)Oftenhors d’oeuvres r-deletionnight

change in progress: forms undergoing change are more stigmatized (Labov

2000)

DiscriminationDiscrimination Linguistic variables play a major role in discrimination

nonstandard dialect confused with stupidity Newcastle Ebonics

masked guise assessments of education, height, etc. based on speech Canada bilinguals recorded speaking French and English when speaking English, listeners judged them to be:

more intelligent more dependable taller better looking

same results for (Canadian) anglophone and francophone listeners

ConclusionsConclusions

Prestige combines linguistic and social elements Socioeconomic status is thereby closely linked to

language and attitudes about language Not everyone aspires to speak the prestige form There is no absolute good in language:

Correlations of linguistic variables with class are arbitrary

ReferencesReferencesLabov, William. 1962. The social history of a sound change on the island of Martha’s Vineyard,

Massachusetts. Master’s essay, Columbia University.

Labov, William. 1966. The Social Stratification of English in New York City.  Washington, D.C.:  Center for Applied Linguistics.

Labov, William. 2000. Principles of Linguistic change. Volume II: Social Factors. Oxford: Blackwell.

Modaressi-Tehrani, Yahya. 1978. A Sociolinguistic Analysis of Modern Persian. Doctoral dissertation, University of Kansas.

Preston, Dennis. 2000. Some plain facts about Americans and their language. American Speech 75.4:398-401.

Trudgill, Peter. 1974. The Social Differentiation of English in Norwich. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Trudgill, Peter. 1978. Sex,covert prestige, and linguistic change in the urban British English of Norwich. Language in Society 1:179-96.

Wolfram, Walt. 1969. A Linguistic Description of Detroit Negro Speech. Washington, D.C.: Center for Applied Linguistics.