Chapter 8: Sociolinguistics

by Markus Krabbe

Sociolinguistics is the study of variation in speaker groups and variation in language use. Social factors (variables) and their influence on language use are at the core of sociolinguistic research. When connecting the study of sociolinguistics to that of language change, an influence of social factors on languages' structures may also be traced.
Sociolinguistics accounts for the influence of these factors, such as age, social class or sex, on the way we speak or write, on the linguistic structures we use and on how individuals or groups deviate from what may be called the standard use of language.

Sociolinguistics thus accepts and evaluates the fact that language is part of speakers’ identities and how thus identity and in-group aspects influence language, just as specific contexts do.

Standard Language

Before looking at variation in language and varieties in more detail, an account of what actually is "a" or “the” standard that we commonly employ to compare varieties to needs to be presented. A standard must be understood as a variety of a language that is special with regard to a number of factors: it is (usually) encoded in grammars and dictionaries; it is used in what is called elaborate function, i.e. for teaching in schools, law-making, administration or (mostly) the media; it is accepted by the language users as "the" standard. Any of these factors may of course apply to specific non-standard varieties as well, but in most cases the standard will be “qualified” by a) fulfilling most criteria and b) fulfilling them more fully than other varieties of a language. What needs to be pointed out again and again, evident as it should be, is that the standard is - from a linguistic point of view - by no means a better language or a more advanced language compared to varieties. It is merely that variety chosen to be the one standard form of a language.

Types of Variation

Variation may, generally speaking, occur on all possible levels of language. It may also be causally attributed to a variant host of factors determining variation. Some have been named before, such as social factors like age, gender and class. Speakers’ regional or professional backgrounds do of course matter as well and may be just as influential as social factors.

Sociolinguists distinguish a set of types of variation that covers most factors for language variation. The most general distinction is that between variation in the individual, so-called idiolects, variation related to social factors, sociolects, regional variation, dialects and variation due to functional aspects, so-called registers or styles. The latter distinction is oftentimes evaluated according to degrees of formality; also the distinction between spoken and written code or register is common. There are however, alternative approaches to that pair and more often than not they are used synonymously.

One important pair of words belonging to types of variation is dialect and accent. This frequently leads to confusion: what then, is the difference between those two? Where accents are held to vary mainly or only on the level of pronunciation, dialects show variation on further structural levels.

One final issue to be mentioned here is the question when a dialect may be labeled a language of its own. This issue is neither to be answered easily nor unproblematic. This is not only due to the fact that a sharp-cut distinction is already difficult on a theoretical level, but becomes even more problematic on a level including factors such as politics and the relation of languages and national identities. A, not wholly serious but yet intriguing claim states that “a language is a dialect with its own parliament and army”, thus again indicating the importance of politics. Another tries to define the border between both by means of mutual intelligibility of speakers, which in turn fails when real-life politics are taken into consideration.

Modern (Sociological) Sociolinguistics

Modern, sociological, sociolinguistics began in the 1960s, initialized by a series of studies by William Labov, one of the leading names in the area of research. In contrast to prior, "classical" dialectology, which was focused on research of dialects in rural areas, modern sociolinguistics focuses on social factors mentioned above, such as age, gender, social class, and their influence on language use. One of Labov’s most famous studies and a ground-breaking one for the field was his so-called “New York department store” study. Labov investigated the connection between social classes and the specific linguistic variants (rhotic and non-rhotic pronunciation) of a linguistic variable (rhoticity) used by members of those classes, establishing empirical proof for the connection between the two.

One central problem in all sociolinguistic research is the oberserver's paradox. Whereas Labov could still rely on comparably natural data from unmarked interview situations, modern research is bound to certain rules, e.g. the obligation to inform participants and to ask them for permission to use their data. Thus it is more difficult and maybe even impossible to gather fully “natural” data, that is data that reflects language use as it would be in a natural setting. As soon as speakers know they are being watched, they are likely to make at least slight changes in their use of language, even if they may be unconscious, and subsequently researcher’s data are affected. The same phenomenon may be illustrated by reference to a person accidentally passing by a (TV) camera. That person is likely to change his or her behavior, the way they walk and their posture, as soon as they suspect being caught on camera.

Variation in English(es)

Another topic connected to sociolinguistics, if not as immediately as Labov’s study described above, is variation in English or in the Englishes of the world.

English has long since the beginnings of its spread around the globe (from roughly the 17th century on) become what we call a pluricentric language that is actually a number of languages sharing the same name. By now most researchers have accepted that indeed English as spoken in Singapore is not necessarily dependent on Australian or Scottish English. Apart from their common ancestors, these World Englishes have become rather independent from another.

As the focus in English linguistics is oftentimes on American and British English, the standard varieties of these two countries will be used to exemplify diversity in Englishes worldwide.

Before looking at the differences, a brief description of both standard variants will be helpful:

In England the standard variant is Received Pronunciation (RP), it is a regionless variety of British English commonly held to be of high prestige and thus a social variety. It is spoken only by a minority, but still labelled standard. Alternative labels are "Queen’s English" or "Oxford English". In the U.S. we have General American (GA), which is spoken in the central Atlantic states (NY; NJ, Wisconsin asf.) but not in: NYC, NE. GA-speakers are perceived as accentless by most Americans. GA is a regional variety and spoken by a comparably (relative to RP) large number of speakers.

For the illustration of the differences between both varieties of English, we shall focus on a few examples from important areas of variation. The first and likely most obvious is pronunciation. A commonly known difference is in rhoticity. Most American varieties show a retroflex [r] in word-final position in words such as car and near and also preceding a consonant as in card and beard, whereas many British varieties, including RP, do not. Another "classic" example is the so-called flap. When [t] occurs between a stressed and an unstressed vowel, Americans usually pronounce it as a flap [ɾ] and as a result, latter and ladder are pronounced the same. In grammar, some noun phrases that denote locations in time or space take an article in American English (AmE) but not in British English (BrE): "in the hospital" vs. "in hospital". Also, American English tends to regularize verb forms: learned versus learnt. Finally, there are differences in vocabulary and orthography; differences in the prior may be traced across the lexicon, so a couple of samples shall suffice: compare AmE "can" vs. BrE "tin" or "flashlight" and "torch". As for orthography, see differences in spelling between AmE "labor" and "curb" vs. BrE "labour" and "kerb".

It is thus evident that both Englishes have developed along their own paths and it is likely that this will go on. The same holds true for other Englishes, so that assuming that all World Englishes were mere varieties of a monocentric, British English would be insensible.

Reading

Finegan, Edward (2004). Language: Its Structure and Use. Fort Worth: Harcourt Brace College Publishers. Ch. 10 + 11.

Kortmann, Bernd (2005). English Linguistics: Essentials. Berlin: Cornelsen Verlag. Ch. 8.

Yule, George (2006). The Study of Language: An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ch. 20 + 21.

Advanced Reading

MacMahon, April (2002). Understanding Language Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.  

For samples of British Dialects in recording: http://www.bbc.co.uk/voices/

Copyright and License

Except where otherwise noted, content on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.