Sociolinguistics Course - Sultan Moulay Slimane University

Sultan Moulay Slimane University Faculty of Letters and Humanities Department of English Beni Mellal SOCIOLINGUISTICS S5 Prof. Meriem Ouahidi Sociolinguistics L. Meriem Ouahidi English Studies Sociolinguistics...

Sultan Moulay Slimane University Faculty of Letters and Humanities Department of English Beni Mellal SOCIOLINGUISTICS S5 Prof. Meriem Ouahidi Sociolinguistics L. Meriem Ouahidi English Studies Sociolinguistics Semester 5 Module 31 Meriem Ouahidi 2 Sociolinguistics L. Meriem Ouahidi Syllabus Course Description The ‘Sociolinguistics’ course is divided into three broad chapters. By its end, you will acquire the key concepts that underlie the relationship between language and society. You will also develop a deep understanding of the influence of the social variables on linguistic variations. This course, additionally, enables you to distinguish between various sociolinguistic phenomena such as diglossia and code-switching, and the different language varieties: register, slang, taboos…etc. Course Objectives: On successful completion of this course, students will be able: - Explain and illustrate the relationship between language variation and social categorization - Explain the scientific study of language and discuss research on sociolinguistics - Differentiate between sociolinguistics and the sociology of language. - Apply criteria to differentiate between a language and a dialect - Identify regional, social and ethnic dialects. - Recognize the features and contexts of use of style, register, slang and taboos - Describe the phenomena of bilingualism, and multilingualism. - Differentiate between diaglossia, and code-switching. Course Outline: Introduction to sociolinguistics Language Variation. Language Varieties: Language, Dialects, Regional Dialects, Social Dialects Standardization. Language Varieties: Registers, Styles, Idiolects and Accents Languages in Contact: Diglossia, Bilingualism and Multilingualism Code-Choice, Code-Switching and Code-Mixing Speech Communities, Lingua Francas, Pidgin and Creole languages Language and Culture: The Whorfian Hypothesis, Taboo and Euphemism The Works of William Labov. Teaching Methodology: Lectures, presentations, discussions, debates… Textbooks: Ennaji, M. and F. Sadiqi. (1994). Applications of Modern Linguitics. Casablanca: Afrique Orient. Hudson, R. (1980). Sociolinguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Meyerhoff, M. 2006. Introducing Sociolinguistics. London and New York: Routledge. Trudgill, P. (1988). Sociolinguistics: An Introduction to Language and Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Wardhaugh, R. (1986). An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. New York: Basil Blackwell Ltd. Yule, G. 2017. The Study of Language. CUP. 3  Sociolinguistics L. Meriem Ouahidi Sociolinguistics: A General Overview What is Sociolinguistics? There are numerous definitions of sociolinguistics. However, each of these definitions does not fail to acknowledge that sociolinguistics has to do with language use and a society’s response to it. Let us examine them. 1. The study of the relationship between language and society, of language variation, and of attitudes about language. 2. A branch of anthropological linguistics that studies how language and culture are related, and how language is used in different social contexts. 3. A study of the relationship between language and social factors such as class, ethnicity, age and sex. 4. The study of language in social contexts. 5. The study of the sociological factors involved in the use of language, including gender, race, class, etc. 6. The study of stylistic and social variation of language (vernacular). 7. The study of language in relation to its socio-cultural context. 8. Sociolinguistics is the study of the effect of any and all aspects of society, including cultural norms, expectations, and context on the way language is used. 9. The study of social and cultural effects on language. In all these definitions, it is clear that sociolinguistics is a discipline that yokes sociology with linguistics. It is a branch of sociology, and, as a concept, it is concerned with how language use is a determinant linguistic requirement in a given society. Every society has linguistic codes acceptable for communication and interaction. Sociolinguistics show how groups in a given society are separated by certain social variables like ethnicity, religion, status, gender, level of education, age, etc. and how adherence to these variables is used to categorize individuals in social class or socio-economic classes. The social study of language is a modern linguistic paradigm because it was the modern linguists who first acknowledged and accepted that language by its nature is totally a social phenomenon. All the definitions here acknowledge that sociolinguistics has to do with language use and a society’s response to it. Sociolinguistics is the study of language in society. It is primarily concerned with the type of accents people use and - most importantly - the reason why they choose to use one rather than the other. Grammatical structures and types of vocabulary are also of interest here. By and large linguists assume that speakers use language as a means of conveying social attitudes just like 4 Sociolinguistics L. Meriem Ouahidi dress or leisure time activities, i.e. people use the accent of the social group they identify with or aspire to. Sociolinguistics a relatively recent discipline which investigates the possible reasons for language variation are and hence to understand more about the process of language change. Here we can distinguish two main types of change: (i) internal change which takes place for structural reasons in a language, e.g. regularisation in grammar as with plural forms in English or German and (ii) external change which is triggered ultimately by social motivation, i.e. speakers change their language to convey a social message as when they are showing their identity with a sector of the society they live in. The varieties of language examined by sociolinguists are usually urban and in particular take account of the factors class, age and gender. The central element in a sociolinguist study is the linguistic variable - some item of language (phonological, morphological, syntactic or semantic) - which is suspected of varying systematically in correlation with the factors such mentioned. Sociolinguists collect data directly from speakers and do not use descriptions in books as their primary source. Various methods have been developed in sociolinguistics for ensuring that one's data is random and objective. Speakers can be recorded (on tape, for instance) in which case they are aware of this or by memory (where the linguist later on writes down what was said). The latter type of investigation is used when speakers are not supposed to realise they are being observed. One central topic in sociolinguistics is linguistic variation. The language that speakers use in their everyday interactions is remarkably varied. Speakers may use different linguistic items to express the same meaning. For example, speakers may use different lexical items to denote the same object or concept or use different grammatical constructions to express the same idea or proposition. Speakers may also display noticeable differences in the way they pronounce words and utterances. So, variation involves the lexicon, the grammar (morphology and syntax) as well as the phonology of a language. Linguistic variation may occur across speakers, reflecting their social class, age, gender, region, or ethnic group. In every language, there are linguistic correlates to a whole range of parameters including social stratification, age grading, gender, region and ethnicity. Linguistic Variation Linguistic variation occurs also within the speech of a single speaker. A speaker does not speak the same all the time and her/his speech may vary according to the specific social context. People constantly exploit variation within the languages they speak for different 5 Sociolinguistics L. Meriem Ouahidi purposes in accordance with the social contexts they find themselves in. Thus, one claim that is strongly made in sociolinguistics is that language exhibits considerable internal variation. More importantly, the patterns exhibited in this variation carry social meanings, such as signaling the relative (in)formality of the situation, indexing various relations among people (like power and solidarity), or indicating a speaker’s social class, gender, age, ethnicity, occupation or geographical region. Sociolinguistics is all about linguistic variation and seeks socially relevant explanations for regular patterns of variation in language use. However, there is one important caveat: while linguistic variation is commonly observed in the speech of individuals, there are also limits to that variation. In other words, linguistic variation is governed by a set of norms. The sociolinguist’s task, therefore, is to attempt to specify the norms that govern linguistic behaviour. Another interesting aspect of linguistic variation is its relation to language change. Variation in language allows and may even cause changes to occur within a language over time. Sociolinguistics and Sociology of Language Some investigators draw a distinction between sociolinguistics or micro-sociolinguistics and the sociology of language or macro-sociolinguistics. Sociolinguistics is concerned with investigating the relationship between language and society with the goal being a better understanding of the structure of language and of how language functions in communication. The equivalent goal in the sociology of language is trying to discover how social structure can be better understood through the study of language. The difference between sociolinguistics and the sociology of language is very much one of emphasis, according to whether the investigator is more interested in language or society. There is a very large area of overlap between the two. There is no sharp dividing line between the two but a large area of common concern. Both micro-sociolinguistics and macro-sociolinguistics are needed to contribute to a better understanding of language as a necessary condition and product of social life. The development of sociolinguistics since the War is inextricably bound up with the activity of American linguists since the early sixties. William Labov, in a pioneering investigation of the English of New York city, published in 1966, arrived at many new conclusions concerning language variety and language change. Labov stressed that 1) structural systems of the present and changes in languages of the past should be investigated in relation to each other, 2) that language change can be observed in progress in present-day language varieties and 3) the fact that so-called free variation was not in fact free at all but determined by deliberate, if not conscious, choice on the part of the speaker. Labov further stressed the need to collect data reliably. The linguist must be aware that 6 Sociolinguistics L. Meriem Ouahidi an informant will show the following features in his/her speech: 1) style shifting (during an interview), 2) varying degree of attention, i.e. some speakers pay great attention to their own speech (so-called 'audiomonitoring'); in excited speech and casual speech the attention paid by the speaker is correspondingly diminished, 3) degree of formality, determined by the nature of the interview; it can vary depending on the way the informant reacts to the interviewer and the situation he/she is placed in. 7 Sociolinguistics L. Meriem Ouahidi Language Varieties Linguistic theorists have mainly been interested in the standardized forms of languages. In so doing, they have inevitably neglected the other varieties of language. “A variety is a neutral term which simply means any particular ‘way of speaking’: it is applicable to linguistic phenomenon we want to treat as a single unit” (Downes 1998: 17). It is a general concept that refers to any form of language. It is labelled to any language usage of a particular region and social group. It, therefore, includes, among other linguistic forms, creoles, pidgins, registers, idiolects, accents, dialects, languages, diglossia and multilingualism. Languages and dialects are given more weight. Dialect Vs Language A dialect is a term that refers to any regional and social variety of language. Dialects are described by Hudson (1980) as “varieties which are not used in formal writing.” Linguists equally treat different language varieties. They consider each variety as a code with its own special set of rules. Haugen (1966: 100) gives the definition of dialects from a social point of view. He states that “as a social norm, [then,] a dialect is a language that is excluded from polite society.” A dialect is, therefore, considered as a subordinate variety of a language which lacks prestige. Actually, the claims that dialects are lacking prestige and inferior to language are social and political prejudices rather than linguistic facts. The term has been traditionally applied to a variety of language spoken in a certain geographical area. But currently, the term also includes social variation in language. Regional dialects are varieties of language spoken in distinct geographical areas. It indicates the region from which a person comes. Social dialects, which refer to non-regional differences, reflect the individual’s position in a community. It informs about the speaker’s ethnicity, gender, social class and age. A language is superordinate to a dialect. It includes different dialects which are mutually intelligible. It is also used without reference to them. However; a dialect is used in reference to the language to which it belongs. It is, thus, a subdivision of a language. A language can never become a dialect but a dialect can be promoted to become a language if it is favoured and supported socially and politically. People who speak different dialects of the same language use the standardized form of language for better communication. In this context, Haugen (1966: 102) postulates that “a ‘language’ is the medium of communication between speakers of different dialects.” 8 Sociolinguistics L. Meriem Ouahidi To make a distinction between a language and a dialect, linguists have proposed two criteria: Mutual intelligibility and possession of literature. If two varieties are mutually intelligible, they are dialects of the same language. If they are mutually unintelligible, the two varieties are different languages. The second criterion, the possession of literature, says that if a variety has literature, it is considered as a language, not a dialect. At first glance, to distinguish between a dialect and a language seems straightforward. Yet, a close inspection of these two varieties has proven that the distinction becomes blurry as the notions of mutual intelligibility and the possession of literature break down. Many studies have shown that there are some varieties which are mutually unintelligible but nonetheless are dialects of the same language. Possession of literature is not only restricted to languages but also to dialects as they have another kind of literature, an oral one. The question is: How can a dialect be differentiated from a language? There are several points of judgment or criteria that may be considered. First, in terms of their sheer size, a language is bigger than a dialect. This could mean that geographically speaking, a language is spoken over a larger area than a dialect. Alternatively, it could mean that more people speak a language in comparison to those who speak a dialect. So, in terms of population of native speakers, a language is spoken by a larger population of people than a dialect. Dialects are often considered subsets of a language. In other words, a language contains many dialects. This can also mean that a language contains more items than one dialect (more lexical items, grammatical constructions, phonological features). For example, English is spoken in various dialects. There is a difference of size, because a language is larger than a dialect. A language contains more items than any of its dialects. This is the sense in which English is considered a language. A language contains the sum total of all the terms in all its dialects. Therefore, we can say that in terms of size, a dialect is a subordinate variety of a language. Another way in which the requirement of subordination is met is through the criterion of prestige (a necessary property of languages). So, the other contrast between a language and a dialect is a question of prestige. A language has prestige which a dialect lacks. Whether some variety is called a language or a dialect depends on how much prestige one thinks it has, and for most people this is a clear-cut matter, which depends on whether it is used in formal writing. Accordingly, people refer to languages which are unwritten as dialects, or ‘mere dialects.’ A related idea is that a language is usually understood to be the standard form of a given language and a dialect is usually understood to be a nonstandard form or substandard form. 9 Sociolinguistics L. Meriem Ouahidi The various relationship among languages and dialects can be used to show how the concepts of ‘power’ and ‘solidarity’ help to understand what is happening. On the one hand, the term power entails some kind of asymmetrical relationship between entities; one has more of something that is important such as status or influence than the other. A language, then, has more power than any of its dialects. It is the powerful dialect because of non-linguistic factors (eg: Standard English/Parisian French). Solidarity, on the other hand, refers to a feeling of equality that people have with one another. This feeling can lead people to preserve a local dialect or an endangered language to resist power or to insist on independence (eg: the modernization of Hebrew/ the separation of Serbo-Croatian into Serbian and Croatian in Yugoslavia). A language would be some unitary system of linguistic communication which subsumes a number of mutually intelligible varieties. It would therefore be bigger than a single dialect/variety. Another frequently used criterion is that of Mutual intelligibility (a necessary property of dialects). It refers to the ability of people to understand one another. If two varieties of speech are mutually intelligible, they are strictly dialects of the same language; if they are mutually unintelligible, they are different languages. In other words, if one person can understand another, they must be speaking dialects of the same language while if one person does not understand the other person, they must be speaking different languages. Therefore, dialects are often regarded to have mutual intelligibility. The criterion seems simple, but there are many problem cases. In discussing the notion of mutual intelligibility, it is interesting to note, by way of contrast, cases that might be called one- way intelligibility, involving speakers of different, but historically related, languages. For example, speakers of Brazilian Portuguese who do not know Spanish can often understand the forms of Spanish spoken in neighboring countries. The analogous Spanish speakers, however, find Portuguese largely unintelligible. A similar situation holds between Danish and Swedish: speakers of Danish can (more or less) comprehend Swedish, but the reverse situation is much less common. Even if one group of speakers can understand another group, they cannot be said to speak the same language unless the second group also understands the first, and thus the notion of mutual intelligibility is crucial in specifying when two languages are the ‘‘same’’ language. Although the notion of mutual intelligibility seems like a reasonable criterion in defining dialects, the situation can be considerably complicated by social and political factors. In China, for example, a northern Chinese speaker of the Beijing dialect (also known as Mandarin) cannot 10 Sociolinguistics L. Meriem Ouahidi understand the speech of a southern Chinese speaker of Cantonese, and vice versa. For this reason, a linguist might well label Mandarin and Cantonese as two distinct ‘‘languages.’’ Nevertheless, in traditional studies of the Chinese language, both Mandarin and Cantonese are regarded as ‘‘dialects’’ of Chinese, given that they are historically related (i.e., they may have been offshoots of several closely related dialects that existed earlier in the history of the Chinese language). Moreover, both Mandarin and Cantonese are spoken in the same nation (they are not languages of two different countries with different governments), and speakers of both ‘‘dialects’’ can use the written language (in the form of Chinese characters) as a common language of communication. For such reasons, the tendency has persisted to use the term dialect to refer to various mutually unintelligible forms of the Chinese language Historical and political factors can also give rise to the opposite situation, where two mutually intelligible varieties are considered not dialects of the same language but two distinct languages. An example of this situation is provided by “Dutch” and “Flemish” forms. Speakers of ‘‘Dutch’’ understand speakers of ‘‘Flemish’’ and vice versa. However, there is an important political distinction between the two: ‘‘Dutch’’ is spoken in the Netherlands and ‘‘Flemish’’ is spoken in Belgium. They are, therefore, considered as separate languages. A final example is Serbo-Croatian. Serbian and Croatian are mutually intelligible dialects, but for historical reasons they use different writing systems. Croatian is written in a Roman-based alphabet, whereas Serbian is written in a Cyrillic-based alphabet. Thus, the criterion of mutual intelligibility is quite relative. What emerges from this discussion is that the distinction between a language and a dialect is mostly done in socio-cultural terms not in purely linguistic terms. In other words, a particular way of speaking (or variety) is considered a distinct language or a subordinated dialect because of socio-political ideologies, not because of linguistic differences between varieties. This point has long been made by the Russian sociolinguist Max Weinreich as follows: “a language is a dialect with an army and navy.” It means that every language is in fact a dialect; it is just that a language, but not a dialect, has the backing of political or economic power or nation-state power or quite figuratively an army and a navy. Dialect vs Accent Whether people think they speak a standard variety of English or not, they all speak with an accent. It is not accurate to say that some speakers have accents while others do not. We might feel that some speakers have very distinct or easily recognized types of accent while 11 Sociolinguistics L. Meriem Ouahidi others may have more subtle accents or less noticeable accents, but every language user speaks with an accent. Technically, the term “accent” is restricted to the description of aspects of pronunciation that identify where an individual speaker is from, regionally or socially. It is different from the term dialect, which is used to describe features of grammar and vocabulary as well as aspects of pronunciation. So, the term “dialect” should not be confused with the term “accent”. While “accent” refers to pronunciation only, “dialect” refers to every aspect of language including pronunciation. Standard English is spoken in a variety of accents, with clear regional associations. We may speak of the American accent as against the British accent, the Canadian accent, the Indian accent or the Irish accent. Within the UK, we may speak of the southern British accent as against the northern British accent, of the West Midlands accent or the Black Country accent. In the USA, there are accents associated with the Greater New York City, New England and North Central US, South-eastern US, and Western US. One aspect of pronunciation that sets these English accents apart is whether they are rhotic or non-rhotic or R-dropping. In Rhotic accents of English, /r/ is pronounced following a vowel, in such words as car, bird, early. A geographical area in which this sound is used (such as much of south-west England, Scotland and Ireland) is called a rhotic area to be distinguished from non-rhotic areas (most of England, Wales, Australia and New Zealand). American English is generally spoken with a rhotic accent, despite the fact that we can hear some non-rhotic accents in New England and north-central United States. Thus, we can say that many people who live in such places speak Standard English (because they show remarkable uniformity in vocabulary and grammar) and the differences are merely those of accent. So, they do not speak different dialects but one variety (Standard English) with different accents. Dialectology Dialectology (also known as dialect geography) is the systematic study of geographical dialects: e.g. in the preparation of a dialect atlas, or of dialect grammars or dialect dictionaries of specific varieties. Within dialectology, the existence of different regional dialects is widely recognized. Dialectologists have been involved in the serious investigation of regional dialects and have devoted a lot of survey research to the identification of consistent features of speech found in one geographical area compared to another. These dialect surveys often involve painstaking attention to detail and tend to operate with very specific criteria in identifying 12 Sociolinguistics L. Meriem Ouahidi acceptable informants. It is important to know if the person whose speech you are recording really is a typical representative of the region’s dialect. Consequently, the informants in the major dialect surveys of the twentieth century tended to be NORMS or “non-mobile, older, rural, male speakers.” Such speakers were selected because it was believed that they were less likely to have influences from outside the region in their speech. The detailed information obtained has provided the basis for a number of Linguistic Atlases of whole countries (e.g. England) and regions (e.g. the Upper Midwest area of the United States). NORM Acronym for ‘Non-mobile, Older, Rural, Male’, applied by J.K Chambers and P. J. Trudgill to the kind of informant traditionally selected in dialect surveys. Linguistic atlas (or Dialect atlas) A map (or series of maps) displaying dialect information within a geographical area. Isoglosses and dialect boundaries One of the aims of a dialect survey is to find a number of significant differences in the speech of those living in different areas and to be able to chart where the boundaries are, in dialect terms, between those areas. An isogloss is a line drawn on a dialect map, showing the boundary of an area in which a linguistic feature (e.g. a sound, word, or grammatical form) is used. For example, the isogloss marking those parts of England which pronounce the /r/ in such words as car – the rhotic areas from the non-rhotic areas where it is not pronounced. Another isogloss in England distinguishes the midlands and northern pronunciation of words like grass with an /æ/ from the southern one with an /a:/. A bundle of isoglosses in the same area indicates a firm dialect boundary. A note of caution is required with regard to dialect boundaries. The drawing of isoglosses and dialect boundaries is quite useful in establishing a broad view of regional dialects, but it tends to obscure the fact that, at most dialect boundary areas, one dialect or language variety merges into another. Keeping this in mind, we can view regional variation as existing along a dialect continuum rather than having sharp breaks from one region to the next. Received Pronunciation One English accent which has received a certain eminence is the accent known as Received Pronunciation (or RP). This accent is used by a small number of people in England. This accent is usually associated with a higher social or educational background, with the BBC, and is taught to students learning English as a second language. Other names for this accent are the Queen’s English, Oxford English, and BBC English. The small number of speakers who 13  Sociolinguistics L. Meriem Ouahidi use RP do not identify themselves as coming from any particular geographical region. RP is a non-localized accent. It is impossible to speak English without an accent. RP is an accent, a social rather than a regional one. Study questions 1. What is the difference between an idiolect and a dialect? 2. What is the difference between an accent and a dialect? 3. What does it mean to say that RP is a social accent rather than a regional one? 4. What does an isogloss represent in a linguistic atlas? 5. Consider the following statements about Standard English and try to decide whether you agree or disagree with them, providing a reason in each case for your decision. a. Standard English is not a language. b. Standard English is an accent. c. Standard English is a set of rules for correct usage. 14 Sociolinguistics L. Meriem Ouahidi Standardization When we speak of standard language, we speak also about received pronunciation. These are two concepts or two terms that are used generally to indicate a way of using language, which conforms to the natural or acquired habit of educated people, whose speech gives no idea about or indication of their regional origins. Standard language is believed to be an acceptable, correct and proper version of language. And here we say that though there are sorts of small individual variations in the use of the standard language, because every one of us uses language in a distinct way that distinguishes him from other people around him, we can say that when it comes to the use of standard language, there is a body of relatively homogeneous usage which marks the speech of a number of educated people as similar. A standard language is a dialect which has been given the status of an official language. Therefore, it is a variety that has undergone the process of standardization. The process of standardization includes selection, codification, elaboration of function and acceptance. 1.Selection: the variety to be standardized should be selected. And for it to be selected, there must be an agreement and a general consensus on it, and for there to be an agreement, there must be a general consultation. This selection is a political and social issue. Indeed, the strongest variety gets selected generally under the pressure of the strongest political movement in society and once a variety is selected, it gains a sort of prestige, especially for those who speak it. This prestige or association with the standard form of language makes of the process of standardization a social issue as well. So it is both social and political because we have the interference of different political parties and the strongest party has an influence on the choice of which variety is to be selected. Of course, the speakers of that variety feel that sort of prestige because their dialect has been chosen for the standardization process. 2. Codification: once the selection has taken place, the conventional form is established to be maintained and to be used in all segments of life. For that, it needs a code, a dictionary and an academy. The role of the academy consists of laying down the rules for the language in question (grammars and dictionaries), which will serve as handbooks for speakers. The members of the academy must agree about the words and the lexical items to be used as entries in dictionaries. This is a very difficult and complicated process, because most of the time it is difficult to reach a general agreement or general consensus on the lexical items to be officially adopted. 15 Sociolinguistics L. Meriem Ouahidi 3. Elaboration of function: the variety to be chosen must be able to satisfy all the communicative needs of its speakers and must elaborate all the functions of society i.e. must have a multitude of functions, especially the most basic ones. These functions can be administrative, legal, educational, scientific, political, technological... Further than that, the variety to be standardized must be able to be written and spoken. 4. Acceptance. as already argued, people or members of a society should accept the variety before undertaking the process of standardization, because the variety to be standardized will acquire the status of a national official language of the society that has chosen to standardize it. In fact, standardization needs and relies on great work and especially on wisdom, because it involves many processes. The first process is efforts in selecting and adopting the variety to be standardized. The second process is knowledge (linguistic, legal, social, political, scientific, etc..). The third process is the need for experts to undertake all of these tasks. The fourth process is people's attitudes towards the variety that should be positive, otherwise standardization won't be able to take place or won't be a successful attempt. The fifth process is mastery of the linguistic structure of the language. The sixth one is knowledge about how to form or build and establish a language. For this, we need special experts. The seventh process is a good sense of evaluation to evaluate the variety before and after standardization and to assess the feasibility and applicability of the newly standardized form of the language. We give examples of such linguistic situations characterized by the contact between national standard forms of language and minority or indigenous languages. This is important to us because of the effect that these situations can have on the life of the people (social, socioeconomic, political and educational). The first example is that of the United States. We all know that the most commonly used language in the United States is English, precisely American English, which is de facto the national language. There are, of course, many other languages spoken in the United States: 430 languages, out of which, one hundred and seventy-six (176) indigenous to the area brought to the country by either colonists, immigrants or enslaved people. This implies that twenty-eight million people have an L-1 which is not English. But this is largely ignored by the American government: only Spanish speakers in the South and the West and American Indians can possibly be educated in their L-1, but only in primary schools. When it comes to higher levels of education, they have to switch to the use of English, which remains basic and only medium of schooling and education. They have to adapt themselves to this special linguistic situation and to face the problems associated with such a situation. 16 Sociolinguistics L. Meriem Ouahidi The second example is Wales. In Wales, Welsh people are allowed to choose either English or Welsh or both when they want to have a bilingual education in bilingual schools. This implies that the Welsh policy is based on freedom of choice. The government does not intervene in this choice and doesn't impose the language of people's schooling, which means that this is their own preference. The third example is the linguistic situation in Russia. 200 languages are spoken in the country in addition to the Russian language. But the Russian government exerts pressure on people who should use Russian as a basic means of communication and expression. Pressure is especially exerted on parents’ speakers of a non-Russian L1 to raise, educate and communicate with their children via the Russian language. Those who agree to do so are highly encouraged and praised by the government, and they can even receive rewards for that. In general, the linguistic rule adopted in Russia is that people, for their immediate communicative needs and to feel certain lexical gaps, are discouraged to switch to any other languages other than the Russian language instead of the foreign French or English L1s. South Africa is another example. In this country, we have eleven major languages with European and African origins. So apart from the Xhosa, Venda and Zoulou, there is Afrikaans and English, which are the two official language groups that, in fact, depict the tension that exists in the country between the ethnic Europeans and the black majority. In this country, people get educated in their L-1 and they are denied access to English and by the same token, they are denied access to governmental positions. So this means that those people who do not speak English, and do not get educated in English, and do not have access to governmental positions, are isolated and deprived from any social advancement. So the policy adopted in South Africa is decide and rule. Our last example is Malaysia. Five languages are used as means of communication and instruction. These are: Malay, English, Mandarin, Chinese and Arabic. But over a hundred dialects (exactly 137) are spoken on a daily basis by the Malaysian people for their everyday interactions. English, however, remains the dominant language there, especially in education, because most textbooks are in English. So if we consider the code-switching there and the process of borrowing, these are generally to and from English and not from any other language. To solve the problem of communication between the speakers of all of these dialects and different languages, they created the Esperanto language. The language was European based because it was a mixture of German, Polish, Russian, French and English. The project, however, failed in Malaysia because the Malaysian people did not take it seriously and they even consider 17 Sociolinguistics L. Meriem Ouahidi it to be an exotic amalgam of different ingredients taken from romance and Germanic languages and the Grammar from Slavic languages. They even ironically referred to it as a heady stew for the Malaysian linguistic palate. These are by no means the only examples that can be cited here as concrete examples of linguistic situations characterized by the contact between different language, especially between official standard forms of language and indigenous or minority languages. The students are invited to do further research in this connection and to study different linguistic situations in some parts of the world which have not been cited in the present lecture. And they are even encouraged to scrutinize the linguistic situation prevalent in the Moroccan context. 18 Sociolinguistics L. Meriem Ouahidi Language Varieties Variation between dialects and languages occurs at the regional as well as the social level. The study of language variation is an important part of sociolinguistics, to the extent that it requires reference to social factors. Languages vary from one place to another, from one social group to another, and from one situation to another, Regional Varieties In general, each area is characterized by its regional variety. This linguistic variation may be phonological, lexical or even syntactic. A geographical area is then generally associated with a certain accent, vocabulary and perhaps also grammar. The boundary between a regional variety and another is usually indicated by geographical distance and natural barriers like mountains, rivers and forests. Like technological innovation, linguistic innovation, which consists of certain new vocabulary, pronunciation or even syntactic usage, spreads quickly from one town or city to another before it reaches the rural areas. For example, if a linguistic motivation started in Fez, we would expect it to spread in the nearby city of Meknes before it reaches rabat or Marrakesh. This is due to the sociocultural and economic importance of large urban centres and to the socioeconomic and demographic dependence of small villages and countrysides. The socioeconomic factor is, then, more significant than the proximity factor. A linguistic innovation will often be transmitted to a large town or city before it reaches a small village even when the latter is geographically closer to the urban centre where the innovation started. As a case in point, a linguistic innovation which originated in Fez would probably reach Meknes before it reached the rural area of Moulay yacoub even though the latter is geographically closer. Thus, the economic factors often play a more important role in the spreading of linguistic innovation than the geographical distance factor. Regional dialects may be arranged in a dialect continuum, a range of dialects distributed geographically across a territory, such that adjacent varieties are mutually intelligible but those at the extremes are not. In other words, while dialects at either end of a country may not be mutually intelligible, those that are geographically contiguous will be, thus providing a continuum of mutual intelligibility across dialects of a language. The term dialect chain is used similarly. One such continuum is said to stretch from Amsterdam in the Netherlands through Germany to Vienna in Austria, and another from Paris in France to the south of Italy. 19 Sociolinguistics L. Meriem Ouahidi Speakers who move back and forth across border areas (such as between Holland, Germany and Austria or France and Italy), using different dialects with some ease, may be described as bidialectal (i.e. speaking two dialects). Most of us grow up with some form of bidialectalism, speaking one dialect “in the street” among family and friends, and having to learn another dialect “in school.” However, in some places, there are different languages used in the street and in school. When we talk about people knowing two distinct languages, we describe them as bilingual. Social Varieties Like regional varieties, social varieties involve characteristic differences in pronunciation, vocabulary and grammar. Each social variety reflects the speech of a given social class. Regional dialects and social dialects are not completely different varieties; rather they constitute a continuum. Here again socioeconomic factors play a crucial role since the variety one speaks reveals one’s social status. For instance, rural people and working class people speak a variety which is generally said to be corrupt or low. In working class English, speakers produce sentences which do not always obey the prescriptive rules of English grammar; as an illustration, they may drop the third person singular present tense –{s}: a. She go. for She goes. b. John sick. for John is sick. They may also use double negation, as in a. He can’t read nothing. for he can’t read anything. By contrast, the upper class people use a variety which is very similar to the standard variety. In England, for example, the upper class people use Standard English because they are educated, and their variety is meant to differentiate them from the working class group. In Morocco and in the Maghreb at large, the highest social class speakers and the educated use French in their vocabulary activities, or a variety closer to Standard Arabic refereed to as Educated Spoken Arabic. In the case of linguistic innovation, if a new word is, for example, invented in the upper class group, or it may reach it last. The opposite is also true: if an innovation originates in the lowest social class, then that innovation may not have any effect on the speech of the upper class people at all, or it may reach them late. To put it differently, the innovation follows the social hierarchy, as it were. 20 Sociolinguistics L. Meriem Ouahidi Language Varieties Register and Style A register (sometimes called a style) is a variety of language used in a particular social setting. Settings may be defined in terms of greater or lesser formality, or in terms of socially recognized events, such as baby talk, which is used in many western cultures when talking to small children, or a joking register used in teasing or playing the dozens. There are also registers associated with particular professions or interest groups; jargon refers specifically to the vocabulary associated with such registers. Unlike dialects, which are used by particular speech communities and associated with geographical settings or social groupings, registers are associated with particular situations, purposes, or levels of formality. Dialect and register may be thought of as different dimensions of variation. For example, Trudgill (1980) suggests the following sentence as an example of a nonstandard dialect used with the technical register of physical geography: There was two eskers what we saw in them U-shaped valleys. Most speakers command a range of registers, which they use in different situations. The choice of register is affected by the setting and topic of speech, as well as the relationship that exists between the speakers. The appropriate form of language may also change during the course of a communicative event as the relationship between speakers changes, or different social facts become relevant. Speakers may shift styles as their perception of an event in progress changes. Consider the following telephone call to the Cuban Interest Section in Washington, DC. Caller: ¿Es la embajada de Cuba? (Is this the Cuban embassy?) Receptionist: Sí. Dígame. (Yes, may I help you?) Caller: Es Rosa. (It's Rosa.) Receptionist: ¡Ah Rosa! ¿Cóma anda eso? (Oh, Rosa! How's it going?) At first, the receptionist uses a relatively formal register, as befits her professional role. After the caller identifies herself the receptionist recognizes that she is speaking to a friend, and shifts to an informal register of colloquial Cuban Spanish. This shift is similar to metaphorical code-switching, but since it involves styles or registers, is considered an example of style shifting. 21 Sociolinguistics L. Meriem Ouahidi Idiolect An idiolect is defined as the language use typical of an individual person. An individual's idiolect may be affected by contact with various regional or social dialects, professional registers, and in the case of multilinguals, various languages. For scholars who view language from the perspective of linguistic competence, essentially the knowledge of language and grammar that exists in the mind of an individual language user, the idiolect is a way of referring to this specific knowledge. For scholars who regard language as a shared social practice, idiolect is more like a dialect with a speech community of one individual. Accent In linguistics, an accent is a manner of pronunciation peculiar to a particular individual, location, or nation. An accent may identify the locality in which its speakers reside (a geographical or regional accent), the socio-economic status of its speakers, their ethnicity, their caste or social class, their first language (when the language in which the accent is heard is not their native language), and so on. Accents typically differ in quality of voice, pronunciation of vowels and consonants, stress, and prosody; although grammar, semantics, vocabulary, and other language characteristics often vary concurrently with accent, the word 'accent' refers specifically to the differences in pronunciation and the word 'dialect' encompasses the broader set of linguistic differences; often 'accent' is a subset of 'dialect'. Slang and Taboo Language It has been said that slang is something that everyone can recognize but no one can define. Speakers show enormous creativity in their use of slang (it is, indeed, one of the most creative areas of language use), and it is often the source of a good deal of humor. Although a precise definition of slang seems extremely difficult (if not impossible), there are, nevertheless, some salient features of this form of language. Slang is part of casual, informal styles of language use. Further, the term slang has traditionally carried a negative connotation: it is often perceived as a ‘‘low’’ or ‘‘vulgar’’ form of language and is deemed to be out of place in formal styles of language. Moreover, slang, like fashions in clothing and popular music, changes quite rapidly. Slang terms can enter a language rapidly, then fall out of fashion in a matter of a few years or even months. This rate of turnover is much greater than for other areas of the vocabulary of a language. Specific areas of slang are often associated with a particular social group, and hence one can speak of teenage slang, underworld 22 Sociolinguistics L. Meriem Ouahidi (criminal) slang, the slang of the drug culture, and so on. In this respect slang is a kind of jargon, and its use serves as a mark of membership and solidarity within a given social group. Slang is sometimes referred to as vernacular (especially when it is associated with a particular social group), and some forms of slang fall under the term colloquialism, referring to informal conversational styles of language. Slang vocabulary often consists of regular vocabulary used in specific ways. For example, the words “turkey” and “banana” are regular vocabulary items in English (and can be used in formal styles with their literal meaning), but in slang they can be used as insults (referring to stupid or foolish people). In addition to the use of regular vocabulary words, however, slang (like jargon) also makes use of regular word formation devices to create new words. For example, slang words can be coined, as was the case for forms such as diddleysquat (He doesn’t know diddleysquat, meaning ‘‘He doesn’t know anything’’). Taboo words are those that are to be avoided entirely, or at least avoided in ‘‘mixed company’’ or ‘‘polite company.’’ Typical examples involve common swear words such as Damn! or Shit! The latter is heard more and more in ‘‘polite company,’’ and both men and women use both words openly. Many, however, feel that the latter word is absolutely inappropriate in ‘‘polite’’ or formal contexts. In place of these words, certain euphemisms—that is, polite substitutes for taboo words—can be used, including words such as darn (a euphemism for damn), heck (a euphemism for hell ), gee or jeez (a euphemism for the exclamation Jesus!), and so on. An amusing example is the F-bomb, a euphemism for that notorious English word that many newspapers spell as f ---. Taboo language is not limited to obscenity—sacred language can also be taboo, that is, language to be avoided outside the context of sacred ritual. In many societies the language of religious or magical rites can only be used by certain members of the society (priests or shamans). What counts as taboo language is something defined by culture, and not by anything inherent in the language itself. There is nothing inherent in the sounds of the expression Shit! that makes it ‘‘obscene’’—it is simply that in our cultural history the word has come to be known and used as a ‘‘swear word.’’ Foreigners learning English as a second language will at first find nothing unusual about the word, and will not experience the ‘‘emotional charge’’ that often accompanies the use of a taboo word. For Americans learning French, there is nothing intrinsic in the expression Merde! (meaning ‘‘Shit!’’) that seems obscene. 23 Sociolinguistics L. Meriem Ouahidi Languages in Contact Diglossia In diglossia, a standard language is considered as the ‘high’ variety and its dialect as the ‘low’ variety without denying the fact that each of the varieties has a function within the society. Coined in the early thirties, the term ‘diglossia’ is used by Marçais to describe the Arabic language situation. Ferguson (1959) introduced the term to sociolinguistics of the English language. By this term, he refers to the linguistic situation where there are two varieties of the same language and each one of them fulfills a different function. Such functional differentiation is generally socially based and culturally valued, i.e. there is a consensus that one variety has a high status and another a low status. Ferguson (1959, 336) has defined diglossia as follows: Diglossia is a relatively stable language situation in which, in addition to the primary dialects of the language (which may include a standard or regional standards), there is a very divergent, highly codified (often grammatically more complex) superposed variety, the vehicle of a large and respected body of written literature, either of an earlier period or in another speech community, which is learned largely by formal education and is used for most written and formal spoken purposes but is not used by any sector of the community for ordinary conversation. Diglossic language situations “are usually described as consisting of two (or more) varieties that co-exist in a speech community, the domains of linguistic behaviour are parcelled out in a kind of complementary distribution” (Schiffman 1997: 205). Ferguson (1959) calls the standard variety the High (H) and the colloquial variety, the Low (L). Each variety is used in different situations. The H variety is usually associated with religion and written literature and is often acquired through formal education. For the L variety, it is used in casual occasions and is the mother tongue of many people. These different varieties are complementary in the sense that each variety has its own functions within the society. 1. Examples of diglossic speech communities: - The most common example of diglossia is Arabic diglossia. In all the countries of the Arabic- speaking world, dialectal Arabic is used for daily conversation, and Standard Arabic (derived from Classical Arabic) is used for formal purposes. In Morocco, Moroccan Arabic (Darija, ʕa:mmiyya) is the low variety, and Standard Arabic is the high variety. - In Haiti, Standard French is the high variety, and Haitian creole ( a creole based on the French language) is the low variety. 24 Sociolinguistics L. Meriem Ouahidi - In Greece, Katharevousa, which is heavily influenced by Classical Greek, is the high variety, and Demotic, which is used in everyday communication, is the low variety. - In Switzeland, Standard German is the high variety, and Swiss German is the low variety. 2. Characteristics of Diglossia Function - One of the most important features of diglossia is the specialization of function for H and L. Every variety has its fixed and distinct functions. Wardhaugh and Fuller (2015:91) stated that “a key defining characteristic of diglossia is that the two varieties are kept quite separate in their functions.” In one set of situations only H is appropriate, and in another only L is appropriate. A situation in which a speaker uses Standard Arabic, the high variety, for ordinary conversation at home instead of Moroccan Arabic, the low variety, will be considered socially and linguistically inappropriate. If a person says, when having a meal at home, ‘ha:ða s-samaku laði:dun’ ‘This fish is delicious’, this will trigger marked reactions such as surprise, fun, or others. Prestige -In diglossic speech communities, the high variety is always perceived as superior to the low variety. Speakers in diglossic speech communities sometimes even consider the low variety as a corrupt form of the high variety. H is also considered as more beautiful, more logical, and purer than the low variety even for speakers who do not master it. Literary heritage In diglossic speech communities, the high variety is always perceived as superior to the low variety because there is a sizable body of written literature in H which is held in high esteem by the speech community, and contemporary literary production in H by members of the community is felt to be part of this otherwise existing literature (Ferguson, 1959-1972:238). Acquisition In diglossic speech communities, the low variety is acquired spontaneously as a first language. The high variety is learned at school, and it is no one’s first language. Standardization As opposed to the low variety, the high variety is highly standardized. There are grammars, dictionaries, treatises on pronunciation, style, and so on. There is an established norm for pronunciation, grammar, and vocabulary which allows variation only within certain limits. The orthography is well established and has little variation. (Ferguson, 1959-1972:239). 25 Sociolinguistics L. Meriem Ouahidi Stability - Wardhaugh and Fuller (2015: 91) stated that “ the phenomenon of diglossia is not ephemeral in nature; in fact, the opposite is true: it appears to be a persistent social and linguistic phenomenon.” Diglossia has existed for long periods of time. Arabic diglossia has, for instance, existed for centuries, and it is still present today in all the Arabic-speaking countries (Moroccan Arabic and Standard Arabic, Iraqi Arabic and Standard Arabic, Lebanese Arabic and Standard Arabic……..). Grammar - The high variety is grammatically more complex. It has more inflectional morphemes. In Moroccan Arabic, for instance, we have only the singular and the plural whereas in Standard Arabic we have the dual also. - Verb inflections are also reduced in low varieties. For example, compare how verbs are conjugated in Moroccan Arabic and in Standard Arabic. Lexicon - The lexicon is largely shared, but there are terms in the high variety that have no equivalents in the low one, and vice versa. Technical terms, for instance, are in H, and they have, in the majority of cases, no equivalents in L. - Some terms are close in form, and others are not: MoroccanArabic StandardArabic Gloss təffaħ tuffa:ħun ‘apples’ Compare to: ʕafya na:ṛun ‘fire’ Phonology - The phonemes present in the high variety may be close or divergent from those of the low variety. In Arabic diglossia, there is a moderate difference between the two. 3. Diaglossia as conceived by Fishman Initially, the term diaglossia was coined by Ferguson (1959) to refer to those situations where we have clear division of functions between two varieties of the same language, one being considered as low and the other as high. Ferguson exemplified this by such apparently diverse speech communities as Arabic, English and French Creole, modern Greek and Swiss German. This is Ferguson's classical definition of diglossia. Fishman (1970), on the basis of investigations done on diaglossic communities, redefined the term diglossia and revised its recognition. For him, diaglossia exists even in the situation of two 26 Sociolinguistics L. Meriem Ouahidi different languages existing side by side, i.e. there is no restriction for the existence of varieties of the same language. From Fishman's perspective, diglossia exists when there are two distinct languages (not two varieties of the same language) that fulfill two distinct functions. 4. Multiglossia/ Triglossia The Arab world is one of the examples cited by Ferguson (1959) to be a diglossic language situation. He describes classical Arabic as the H variety and dialectal Arabic as the L variety. Nevertheless, Ennaji (2001: 49) calls into question the validity of Ferguson’s claim. He indicates that the situation in the Arab world in general and in Morocco in particular is not diglossic but ‘Multiglossic’. He talks about Classical Arabic, Standard Arabic, Modern Moroccan Arabic and Dialectal Arabic as varieties that have different functions in the Moroccan society. In fact, linguistic diversity does not only occur where varieties are within a single language but also in multilingual settings. One of the basic developments of Ferguson’s classic concept of diglossia is the notion of continuum. The notion of the continuum presupposes the existence of in between spaces and hence the existence of mixed Arabic. There are Arabic words which mix features from both Standard Arabic (H) and Moroccan Arabic (L). - An example of mixed words: Standard Arabic MixedArabic Gloss ɪndaθaṛa ndatəṛ ‘to disappear’ The word ‘ɪndaθaṛa’ is a Standard Arabic word, but the word ‘ndatəṛ’ is a mixed word. It mixes features from both Standard Arabic and Moroccan colloquial Arabic. The term belongs to the vocabulary of the high variety, but the phonological make-up and the morphological make-up are those of Moroccan Arabic, the low variety. 27 Sociolinguistics L. Meriem Ouahidi Bilingualism/Multilingualism Bilingualism and multilingualism are used interchangeably to refer to the mastery and use of more than one language in a community. While bilingualism is the ability to master the use of two languages, multilingualism is the ability to master the use of more than two languages. Multilingualism is defined by Downes (1998: 46) as “a situation in which two or more distinct languages form the repertoire of a community.” This definition views multilingualism as a societal phenomenon. It is concerned with issues such as the number of varieties spoken in a given society, their status and roles. Clyne (1997: 301) gives a broader definition of this term noting that “[T]he term multilingualism can refer to either the language use or the competence of an individual or to the language situation in an entire nation or society.” In addition to the perception of multilingualism as a societal phenomenon, this quotation encompasses another phenomenon of multilingualism, which is individual. It is related to issues such as how many languages an individual speaks and how he/she acquires them. Societal multilingualism, which is the task of sociolinguists par excellence, is created by contextual factors namely, migration, cultural contact, colonialism and the spread of international languages. When a speaker of one language settles in an area where another language is used, the speaker inevitably maintains and masters another language which is different from his/her mother tongue. Cultural contact occurs when a society adopts a cultural institution of another society. Religion and literature are good examples to this factor. Colonialism results when a colonial language becomes part of the colonized culture and continues to play a significant role in a society even after its independence. Other reasons include the spread of international languages and the scientific and technological dependence of the speakers of one language on the speakers of another. While diglossia occurs with varieties which are “mutually intelligible”, multilingualism includes languages which are often “mutually unintelligible”. There are some situations which include both multilingualism and diglossia or “quadriglossia” as it is the case in Morocco. These different varieties, being the result of the constant changes that languages undergo, enhance the linguistic diversity which inevitably enriches the culture of a particular society. Language Dominance Researchers suggest that native-like proficiency in both languages, referred to as “true” bilingualism, is rare (Cutler, Mehler, Norris, & Segui, 1992; Grosjean, 1982). An additional consideration in the definition of bilingualism includes the concept of language dominance. 28 Sociolinguistics L. Meriem Ouahidi Most bilinguals have stronger skills in one language, their dominant language. However, their dominant language need not be their L1. In addition, it is possible to show language dominance in one language for one domain (e.g. L1 for home) and dominance in the other language for another domain (e.g. L2 for work). Types of Bilingualism/ Multilingualism Different types of bilingualism can be seen. Societal bilingualism refers to a particular society or nation in which more than one language is used. In this connection we can further distinguish between official multilingualism (de jure bilingualism) and de facto multilingualism. Two languages are ‘sometimes’ given official recognition by the community’s law and government (de jure bilingualism), and sometimes, two languages exist in a society but with no official status (de facto bilingualism). At a micro level, bilingualism can be studied within an individual who possesses a certain competence over two languages (individual bilingualism). Categories of bilinguals are classified according to a number of criteria including: cognitive functioning (mental representation and structuring of the two languages), social and psychological mechanisms (feelings towards the use of the two languages), time and age of acquisition (early or advanced learning of the new language), context and circumstance of learning (forced or by self-will of learning the two languages), and finally language proficiency (active or passive bilinguals). One factor to consider in defining types of bilingualism is when the two languages are acquired in relation to each other. Simultaneous bilingualism is considered to occur when two languages are acquired from birth or prior to one year of age (De Houwer, 2005). Cases of pure, simultaneous bilingualism with neither language being dominant are also rare. For sequential bilingualism, when one language is acquired following another, the age of L2 acquisition is important (Flege, 1992). Researchers are discovering that sensitive periods for native-like L2 acquisition occur at younger ages than previously believed. For example, brain organization is different for L2 acquisition after 5 years of age in contrast to before age 5, when native-like organization for language is possible (DeHouwer, 2005; Weber-Fox & Neville, 1996). Therefore, children who acquire the L2 at school would not be considered native speakers, even if they have high levels of L2 proficiency. Concerning older language learners (preadolescents and older), age of acquisition is related to the learner’s ability to perceive and produce speech sounds in their second language (Flege, 1992). Another factor related to L2 pronunciation is the frequency and continued use of the L1. 29 Sociolinguistics L. Meriem Ouahidi In addition to classifying when languages are acquired in relation to each other, Lambert (1975, 1977) drew attention to the relative social status of each of the bilingual person's languages, and the person's perception of the difference in status has an important function in the development of bilingualism. Lambert distinguishes two types of bilingualism additive bilingualism and subtractive bilingualism. Subtractive bilingualism: A process whereby introducing a second language into a community, often as a language of instruction in schools, leads to a decline in the use of the original community language. Subtractive bilingualism refers the perception that the acquisition of L2 would be detrimental to an individual’s L1. Additive bilingualism develops when both languages and the culture associated with them bring complementary positive elements to the child's overall development. Landry and Allard (1993) found that additive bilingualism usually occurs when one’s L1 is of a higher status in the community as compared to the L2. As the L1 is of high status, the community would continue using it in daily activities and thus, it is less likely for one to lose their L1 as well as its culture while acquiring the L2 Co-ordinate bilingualism is a type of individual bilingualism in which a person learns two languages in separate environments and uses them independently of each other, suggesting that their meaning systems exist separately in the brain. A co-ordinate bilingual keeps the words of each language separate. Synonyms from each language are not treated as if they were exactly equivalent. Thus a co-ordinate bilingual in Arabic and English would not use kitab (Arabic word for `book') and book in exactly the same ways, but would pay heed to the different nuances these words have in each language. Compound bilingualism is another type of individual bilingualism in which a person learns two languages in the same context and uses them in an interdependent way, suggesting that their meaning systems exist in one fused form in the brain. A compound bilingual therefore uses synonyms from each language as if they were exactly equivalent. Thus a compound bilingual in Arabic and English would use both kitab (Arabic for `book') and book in the appropriate language, but have one common meaning for them (even though there are subtle differences in their use in the two languages, as spoken by monolinguals). For Haugen (1973) a balanced bilingual is an individual who has native-like competence in both languages. More frequently, however, the term is used to refer to an individual who has roughly equal ability in both languages. This would mean that someone whose performance was imperfect in both languages would still be a balanced bilingual if his/her skills in each language were about the same. Grosjean believes that: “balanced 30 Sociolinguistics L. Meriem Ouahidi bilinguals, those who are equally fluent in both languages, are probably the exception and not the norm” (1982: 235). Language transfer refers to how speakers or writers apply their knowledge of one language to another language. This effect can be bi-directional, that is, 1) the individual may apply knowledge from their native language (L1) in the acquisition of their second language (forward transfer), or 2) the second language (L2) can bring effect onto the first language (backward transfer). Questions for reflection 1. According to you, is bilingualism to be measured according to native-like fluency in the two languages, equal competence in the two languages, full or partial mastery of the two languages? 2. Which criterion is of primary importance for assessing bilingualism: language proficiency or the use of two languages? Most people would define a bilingual as a person who can speak two languages. What about a person who can understand a second language perfectly but cannot speak it? What about a person who can speak a language but is not literate in it? What about an individual who cannot speak or understand speech in a second language but can read and write it? Should these categories of people be considered bilingual? 31  Sociolinguistics L. Meriem Ouahidi Code-switching Code-switching is a common linguistic behaviour among bilinguals. It is the shifting from one language system or code to another. This switching from one type of code to another may take place in a single discourse, often involving stretches of more than one sentence, or within the same sentence. For example, two Moroccan businessmen generally code-switch from French to Arabic or vice-versa when they discuss a business topic. If the latter changes to home matters or personal problems, then they may switch, for example to Moroccan Arabic or to Berber, if they happen to be Berberophones. It is common to hear French sentences dominated by Moroccan Arabic syntax, as in 1- Le Dirham a été dévalué hadi juj d lmarrat wlla tlata. ‘The Dirham has been devalued twice or three times.’ In other cases, code-witching involves lexical items only; these are called sandwich words or switch words. For instance, a French word may be inserted in the middle of an Arabic sentence, as in: 2- sir ldarkum ja had l kriminel d lwill. ‘Go home you criminal of misery.’ In 2, the French term criminel is introduced to the sentence. It is also possible that, in a French discourse, a switch word in Arabic provokes a complete switch, for example, from French to Arabic: 3- …c’était la faute d lmudir, huwalli qal blli.. …It was the director’s mistake; it was he who said that… Here the switch-word is lmudir which triggers the switching from French to Moroccan Arabic. Scholars use different names for various types of switching. We will show examples using English and Igbo languages:  Inter-sentential switching is switching outside the sentence or clause level, for example at sentence or clause boundaries.  Intra-sentential switching is switching within a sentence or clause.  Tag-switching is switching a tag phrase or word from language B into language A. (This is a common intra-sentential switch.)  Intra-word switching is switching within a word itself, such as at a morpheme boundary. 32 Sociolinguistics L. Meriem Ouahidi There is another distinction of the types of code switching, namely; situational and metaphorical code switching. Situational code-switching occurs when the languages used change according to the situations in which the speakers find themselves: they speak one language in one situation and another in a different one. What we observe is that one variety is used in a certain set of situations and another variety in an entirely different situation. For example, the code switch may be related to the arrival of a new person. Code switching may also occur to signal group membership or shared ethnicity with an addressee, or to create a distance between the speaker and the hearer. As the term itself suggests, metaphorical codeswitching or (code-mixing) the phenomenon closely related to code-switching. It usually occurs when a conversant uses both languages together, switches between two language to the extent that they change from one tongue to the other in the course Referential code-switching (Topic): People may switch code within a speech event to discuss a particular topic. Bilinguals often find it easier to discuss particular topics in one code rather than another. E.g. Chinese students from Guangzhou in an English-speaking country tend to use Cantonese with each other, except to discuss their studies and technical topics when they switch to English. This is partly because they have learned the vocabulary of economics or linguistics or physics in English, so they do not always know the words for ‘capital formation’ or ‘morpheme’ or ‘electron’ in Cantonese. They often switch to English for considerable stretches of speech. Code-switching is not a uniform phenomenon; i.e., the norms vary from group to group, even within what might be regarded as a single community. Gumperz says that “each communicating subgroup tends to establish its own conventions with respect to both borrowing and codeswitching,” and that factors such as region of origin, local residence, social class, and occupational niche are involved in defining the norms. Moreover, bilinguals in such communities are aware not only of the norms that apply within their own sub-groups but also of some of the norms that other bilinguals observe. Code-switching is a common characteristic of Arabic-French bilinguals’ speech in Morocco and the rest of the Maghreb. It is used in informal situations, but rarely in formal conversations. When a bilingual speaker is in a situation where only French or Arabic must be used, he or she usually avoids code-switching. This is because code-switching is stigmatized and considered impolite in formal contexts. But linguistically, it is a rule-governed code, as there are syntactic patterns which help the bilingual speaker to introduce only grammatical 33 Sociolinguistics L. Meriem Ouahidi sentences involving code-switching. Generally, the French lexical items used in code-switching obey the basic morphosyntactic rules of Moroccan or (Dialectal) Arabic syntax. The process of lexical borrowing occurs when one or several individuals are bilingual or when a country is itself bilingual. According to Hudson (1980:50), there is borrowing “when an item is taken over lock, stock and barrel from one variety into another’. For example, there are a lot of French words that have infiltrated Moroccan Arabic, keeping their French pronunciation: 4- shrit les billet. ‘I bought the tickets’ 5- klina des brochettes. ‘We had some shish kabab.’ Here the words les billets and des brochettes are phonetically pronounced in the French way, but they are fully integrated in the Moroccan lexicon and morphosyntax, as they fit in the right slots where their equivalents in Arabic would normally fit. Moroccan speakers know consciously that these are French loan words. This is different from code-switching where there is a switch from one variety to another. These ‘switches’ are triggered by lack of vocabulary. People may also borrow words from another language to express a concept or describe an object for which there is no obvious word available in the language they are using. Borrowing of this kind generally involves single words – mainly nouns – and it is motivated by lexical need. It is very different from switching where speakers have a genuine choice about which words or phrases they will use in which language. By and large, there is a relationship between code-switching and word-borrowing. However, distinguishing code-switching and borrowing is not an easy matter. It is claimed in the literature that borrowed words are more integrated into the L1 phonology than switched words; nonetheless, there are many recognizable borrowing which exhibit little phonological integration. For Poplack and Sakoff (1984), there are two essential criteria for characterizing loan words: (i) frequency of use and (ii) morphophonologial assimilation. According to Scotton (1988:159), the distinction between code-switching and word-borrowing ca be clarified “if it is approached in terms of social content, not structure”. In other terms, a borrowed word which is highly frequent and shows a great degree of social integration, or acceptably can be interpreted as an instance of a loan word whereas one that exhibits little social integration can be called code-switching. 34 Sociolinguistics L. Meriem Ouahidi Speech Communities A speech community can be defined as a community in which the same language is used by the people belonging to this community. In this connection, Hymes (1977:51) writes: A speech community is defined […] tautologically but radically, as a community sharing knowledge of rules for the conduct and interpretation of speech. Such sharing comprises knowledge of at least one form of speech, and knowledge also of its patterns of use. The phrase speech community or language community is, however, vague and should be interpreted with some flexibility. Gumpers (1982) employs the expression of linguistic community to refer to a small group of people that is distinguished by a specific form of speech. For instance, the Moroccan language community is part of the Maghrebi language community which is itself part of the Arab language community. It is important to note in this respect that every large language community is characterized by striking differences of dialect and accent. The Arab language community which covers the Arab world is a good instance of this sort of language variation. It comprises many different dialects of Arabic e.g., Palestinian Arabic, Egyptian Arabic, Iraqi Arabic, Saudi Arabic, Algerian Arabic and Moroccan Arabic. It also involves a wide array of accents; for example, the word /žama:l/(beauty) is pronounced as/džama:/ in lraqi Arabic and /gama:l/ in Egyptian Arabic. In Moroccan and Algerian Arabic, we have the word /çlaš/ or /çlah/ (why) pronounced as /lih/ or /liš/ in Egyptian Arabic and in Gulf Arabic, respectively. Similarly, in the English language community, there exist many accent and dialect distinctions. Thus, important differences occur so far as accent and dialect are concerned when there is a large language community. 35 Sociolinguistics L. Meriem Ouahidi Pidgin and Creole Languages Pidgins Pidgins are generally said to be simplified varieties used for the purposes of trade and business; however, this does not mean that all pidgins are trade languages, nor that all trade languages are pidgins. Pidginization may be defined as the process whereby a new language or variety is created out of two already available languages or varieties. Pidgins, which have practical functions, such as usage in trade or exchange services, serve to establish communication and maintain relationships between people or groups belonging to different communities. Additionally, pidgins are not spoken by members of the same community; hence they cannot be considered as vernaculars, nor can they be associated with the identity or cultural authenticity of any single group. Pidgins have the following properties which differentiate them from other languages and varieties. First, they are not native tongues of anyone, and therefore they are bound to die if they are not developed into independent languages through the process of creolization. Second, they have no inflectional morphology in the sense that they often lack inflectional morphemes like the third present tense {-s}, and the copula to be. At times, independent words are used instead of inflectional morphemes. For example, consider this sentence from an English pidgin spoken in western islands of the South Seas called Beach-la- Mar: “What for you wipe hands belonga you on clothes belonga essepoon?” “Why did you wipe your hands on the napkin?” (Source: Bloomfield 1933: 472) Notice the distortion of English syntax, the lack of inflectional morphology in this example and the dominance of English vocabulary. Third, pidgins are based on specific languages, generally languages which are spoken worldwide or reputed to be trade or colonial languages. Most of the available pidgins are related to English, French, Portuguese, German and Dutch; for example, Tok Pisin, spoken in New Guinea, is a pidgin based on English. The different African communities of immigrants in France have developed a pidgin the vocabulary of which is based on French; it is used for communicative purposes, the aim being to reduce the gap between the different African groups or immigrants, on the one hand, and the French natives, on the other hand. Similarly, in Morocco, during the French colonization, Moroccans spoke a piginized variety of French in 36 Sociolinguistics L. Meriem Ouahidi order to communicate with the French administrators and military officers. This pidgin has practically disappeared with the advent of Independence in 1956, and with the departure of the French and European communities from the country. Thus, pidgins are simplified varieties of ‘powerful’ languages; their lack of inflectional morphology, and their simplified phonology and syntax made them quite easy to learn by the ‘dominant’ and the ‘dominated’ communities. Bloomfield (1933) treats pidgins as similar to child language and compares them to the languages used by adults to talk to babies, or by natives to talk to foreigners, or by masters to communicate with their servants. Atkinson et al. (1982) compare the development of pidgins to second language learning, with the input being the different languages spoken by different communities available, and the output being a simplified variety called the pidgin. Pidgins may also turn into native languages through the creolization process, as explained in the following section. Creoles Creoles are different from pidgins in that (a) they have native speakers and, (b) linguistically, they have a richer vocabulary and syntax. They are usually considered normal languages, although they have special origins, namely pidgins. A creole is born when children begin learning a pidgin as their native language. According to estimates, there exist at least 10 million people who speak creole languages, most of whom are found in the Caribbean islands. French-based creoles alone account for nearly 5 million speakers found in Mauritus, Haiti, Martinique and other places in the Caribbean. Maltese (in Malta) is an Arabic-based creole; other creoles are related to other languages in Africa and Asia. Scholars have noted that there are similarities particularly in the vocabulary and grammar of many French-based creoles around the world. Others, such as Hymes (1971), have noticed similarities between all the creoles that are based on the European languages. According to Whinnom (1971), cited in Atkinson et al (1982), these creoles are historically derived from a Portuguese pidgin which has been in use since the 16th century in West Africa. This hypothesis stipulates that the vocabulary of this pidgin has been enriched over he centuries, but its syntax has not undergone any substantial changes. However, one might ask the question why there are linguistic correspondences even between creoles which are not genetically related. One theory states that these similarities are accounted for by the common African origin of most of the slaves and immigrants using these different creoles. 37 Sociolinguistics L. Meriem Ouahidi When the official language of the state is a language on which the creole is based, the creole of the standard language are merged so that there is only a dialectal distinction, generally reflecting social stratification in the country. This is the case of Guyana, which according to DeCamp (1971), is a good example of “postcreole continnum”, where the creole continues to be affected by, and to be dependent on, the standard variety, especially in terms of vocabulary and structure. Nevertheless, there is much linguistic variation between the creole language and the other existing varieties, especially at the level of syntax. These differences are due to the fact that initially there were remarkable differences between the standard or dominant language and the pidgin from which the creole language subsequently developed as soon as it acquired its native speakers. In other contexts, the creole may be promoted to the status of official language, with the proviso that it goes through the standardization process, or it may be demoted to the level of patois, which is the French term for unwritten regional varieties. Lingua Francas Lingua francas are the languages or varieties which are popular and widely used for trade and communication purposes by almost everybody in a community where many languages and dialects are used. In other words, any language can function as a lingua franca. English, for example, has been termed the lingua franca of the world simply because it is used all over the globe by different groups with different native languages. Thus, tourists, businessmen and foreign students of different nationalities find themselves speaking English to each other because that is the only language that they have in common; they cannot use their own native languages for these are alien to their addressees. French is also used as a lingua franca in France by many groups of immigrants from different linguistic backgrounds for reasons of commerce and communication. In Morocco, Moroccan Arabic is used as a lingua franca by the speakers of the different and at times mutually unintelligible Berber dialects, namely Tarifit in the north, Tamazight in the Middle Atlas, and Tashlhit in the Souss; for instance, since Tarifit and Tamazight are not completely mutually intelligible, in the sense that the Tarifit and Tamazight users can hardly understand each other, their speakers use Moroccan Arabic instead in order to communicate or establish transactional and human relations amongst themselves. Thus, Moroccan Arabic is the lingua franca of Morocco. 38 Sociolinguistics L. Meriem Ouahidi Language and Thought The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis (SWH) The relationship between language and thought has been a subject of considerable interest over the years. It has occupied philosophers, linguists, anthropologists and psychologists for centuries. It is considered one of the main topics of psycholinguistics. The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis has changed the way many people look at language. It has influenced many scholars and opened up large areas of study. SWH is named after the linguist and the anthropologist Edward Sapir and his student Benjamin Whorf. This hypothesis has two versions, the strong and the weak. ** The Strong Version of SWH The strong version of the hypothesis expresses an extreme viewpoint. It states that language determines thought and emphasizes that the determining effect of language on thought is absolute. It suggests that there is no thought without language and language and thought are identical. This extreme version excludes the possibility of translatability between languages. Yet, it does not exclude the possibility of bilingualism. It argues that the bilingual has two incompatible views of the world, allowing him to switch from one world to another as he switches from one language to another. The linguistic categories we use determine the perception of things in a certain way. The behaviour of the individual toward a group of people is also determined by language. For example, ‘uncle’ in the English language refers to the mother’s brother and father’s brother. According to this concept, these members of the family are perceived in the same way and the behaviour toward them is the same since one word is used to refer to both members. The equivalent word for ‘uncle’ in Arabic is xaal and çamm. xaal refers to the mother’s brother and çamm to the father’s brother. These two members are seen differently and the behaviour toward them is different since two distinct words refer to them. The speaker of different languages, therefore, constructs reality differently. Being a speaker of English and Arabic, I have to say that I view the world in two different ways. I have two different attitudes and even two different personalities, depending on which language I use. Language, therefore, forces multilingual people to see the world in a multidimensional way. The Weak Version of SWH The weak version holds that thought is affected and influenced by language. It recognizes that there is indeed some effect on the perception of one’s language. It does not define one’s 39 Sociolinguistics L. Meriem Ouahidi view of the world. The structure of language does not determine the world view but is still influential in predisposing speakers of a language toward adopting a particular world view. This version does not exclude the possibility that languages come into contact to give birth to translation and bilingualism. To support this version, Ferraro (2002: 117-118) suggests the tests of Carrol and Casagrande (1960) and Ervin Tripp (1964). The first experiment, known by Carrol and Casagrande’s colour and Shape saliency, is carried out on Navaho. This language is known by the fact that many of its noun classes are based on shape. To learn this language, children have to know the shape of objects to put them on the right noun class. They devise the experiment to test whether Navaho and English speakers behave similarly or differently according to their awareness of shape. They give a white rope, red rope and a red stick to Navaho-speaking Navaho children and English-speaking Navaho children to put them in the right class noun to test whether shape or colour is more salient. They find out that shape is more dominant than colour in the answers of Navaho-speaking Navaho children. Ervin Tripp (1964) is among the scholars who have tested this hypothesis. He asked Japanese-American women the same questions in English and Japanese. He found out that each woman gave different answers in English and Japanese for the same question. For example, he asked a bilingual woman to finish the statement “real friends should….” The respondent replied in English: “be very frank”. When asked the same question at a different time in Japanese, she answered: “help each other”. These two tests show that language influences our perception of the world. Accordingly, they are support for the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis in its weak version. In fact, this version of the hypothesis is more difficult to reject once it is widely accepted today. However, the fact that members of different cultures see the world differently because they use different languages would attract few followers today. It has strong evidence against it, namely the impossibility of translation between languages. For this reason, it remains a hypothesis rather than a widely accepted fact. 40 Sociolinguistics L. Meriem Ouahidi Language and Gender The fact that language is closely related to gender differences and inequalities has increasingly stimulated the interest of many researchers. Their studies scrutinize the perceptions of how women and men use language as well as “the relationship between language and our ideas about women and men” (Goddard and Paterson 2000: 1). Having their roots in different academic disciplines, namely linguistics, sociolinguistics, sociology, psychology and women’s studies (Tannen 1994: 4), researchers working on this area try to define and give explanations to the relationship between language and gender. Graddol and Swann (1989: 9-11) summarize this relationship into three views. The first view suggests that language is just a mere reflection of social divisions and inequalities that exist outside language. The second states that language does not reflect gender divisions and inequalities; however, it creates and maintains them. The last view confirms that language does not only mirror gender divisions but also creates and maintains the inequalities that exist between women and men. For a more detailed investigation of this relationship, three eminent theories are going to be discussed. The Deficit Theory Viewing men as superior to women, the deficit theory underlines that the language of women is “an essentially deficient version of men’s language” (Sadiqi 2003: 4), reinforcing, therefore, the perception of women as deficient. This view is mainly supported by the Danish grammarian Otto Jesperson and the American Robin Lakoff. Otto Jesperson’s Language: Its Nature, Development and Origin (1922) is the first work that discusses sex differences in speech. His author describes men’s speech as the norm and women’s as deviant and inferior to men’s. He depicts men as “the chief renovators of language” whose contributions to language are imagination and creativity whereas women’s contribution is to maintain and conserve the purity of language. He, therefore, celebrates, as postulated by Talbot (1998: 140), “the intelligence and importance of men and the empty-headed foolishness of women” based on the way women and men speak. Unlike Jesperson who develops stereotypical beliefs on both sexes, more specifically on women (Freed 1996: 55), Robin Lakoff develops her ideas on language and gender from a feminist point of view. Throughout her work, Language and Women’s Place (1975), she explores how language is sexist and identifies features of what she labels “women’s language” in the context of women’s devalued status. Because women are seen as second-class citizens, their language, which is not adopted by men, is seen as deficient. However, “men’s language” 41 Sociolinguistics L. Meriem Ouahidi is seen as “the norm” and “the language of the favoured”. Indeed, women’s language, as pointed out by Lakoff (1975: 7), submerges a woman’s personal identity, by denying her the means of expressing herself strongly, on the one hand, and encouraging expressions that suggest triviality in subject matter and uncertainty about it; and, when a woman is being discussed, by treating her as an object _ sexual or otherwise_ but never a serious person with individual views. She ends up