Li2 class-based social variation I

1. Li2class-based social variation I

2. Today’s topics • Linguistic variation conditioned by socio-economic status (class) • Stigmatization and prestige • varieties • sources • discrimination • Class and traditional dialect • Correlations of linguistic variables with class are arbitrary

3. Socio-economic status/class • Professions most likely to have local accent: • policeman, fireman… • Correlation between class (socioeconomic status) and traditional dialect • Lower classes tend to have more regional variation and preserve/use regional/non-standard variants (e.g. h-deletion in England) • Why? • Upper class more likely to move, go away to school, etc. • Regional pride (cf. later discussion of Martha’s Vineyard)

4. Class-based variation in Norwich % application of t-glottalization (t) and h-deletion (h) from Trudgill 1974

5. Stratification can be the same across communities R-deletion in NYC and Detroit Mean % r-deletion in the black community in Detroit (Wolfram 1969) • Many dialects of English delete non-prevocalic r. • “non-prevocalic r” = any r-sound that isn’t followed by a vowel: • car, party, sophomore, etc. Mean % r-deletion in 3 New York department stores (Labov 1966)

6. Language/class correlations are arbitrary r-deletion in America vs. England data from Labov (NYC) and Trudgill (Norwich) Percentage of non-prevocalic r’s pronounced

7. Language/class correlations are arbitrary Raising of long a to u before nasal consonants in two Persian dialects Figure 1. Percent raising of (an) in the Farsi of Tehran and Ghazvin. Yahya Modaressi-Tehrani (1978) A Sociolinguistic Analysis of Modern Persian. Doctoral dissertation, University of Kansas.

8. Stigmatization • Some stigmatized features in American English: • r-deletion • double negation • ain’t • N.B. stigmatized features sometimes have covert prestige, as we’ll see later • 150 respondents from SE Michigan (Preston 2000) • Mean scores of rankings for “correct English”, 1-10 • Least correct: South, NYC, NJ • Most correct: Michigan (only state in the 8 range)

9. Prestige • Linguistic variables often assigned to qualitative scale by speakers (unmarked, better, worse…) • Most prevalent with class-linked variables, because of independent social links between class and quality • A famous example:

10. Linguistic prestige on Martha’s Vineyard • Labov 1962 • linguistic variable: centralization of diphthongs • /Aj, aw/ → [j, w] • In the chart above, higher numbers = more centralization • began with fisherman (traditional inhabitants) • spread to other islanders (presumably to distinguish them from tourists) • Labov study of college-age Vineyarders found two groups: • one hated the island and intended to leave as soon as possible • one intended to stay • strong correlation between positive attitudes toward life on the island and degree of centralization.

11. Types of linguistic prestige • overt • covert • crypto • schizo • none

12. Overt prestige • double negation, ain’t • changes toward forms with overt prestige normally spearheaded by middle-class women (Trudgill 1978)

13. Covert prestige • Overt prestige is about seeking prestige by assimilating to the standard. • Covert prestige is about not choosing to assimilate to the standard. • Each choice has a distinct set of costs and benefits… • pull of ultra-masculinity: working-class male • Particularly noticeable in teenage years • Important force in maintaining non-standard varieties of speech

14. Cryptoprestige • when only one person knows the high prestige form • what the yam really is • between you and me (?) • using hopefully and ironic “properly”

15. Schizoprestige • Agreement that there is a prestigious form and a stigmatized form, but no agreement on which is which • often: [t] vs. [] • coupon vs. cyoupon • foreign words and local words • Des Plaines, Desmoines, Worcester, etc. • regional splits: • r-deletion • gymshoes/sneakers?

16. No prestige • spicket vs. spigot • Harvard Dialect Survey, Q41: Do you use "spigot" or "spicket" to refer to a faucet or tap that water comes out of? (10860 respondents) • spigot (66.89%) • I say "spicket" but spell it "spigot" (12.64%) • I don't use either version of this word (9.23%)      • spicket (6.38%) • I use both interchangeably (2.52%) • I use both with different meanings (2.00%) • Doodlebug/pill bug/roly poly/etc.

17. Sources of linguistic prestige • spelling?? (often cited in the literature) • Often • hors d’oeuvres • r-deletion • night • change in progress: • forms undergoing change are more stigmatized (Labov 2000)

18. Discrimination • Linguistic variables play a major role in discrimination • nonstandard dialect confused with stupidity • Newcastle • Ebonics • masked guise assessments of education, height, etc. based on speech • Canada bilinguals recorded speaking French and English • when speaking English, listeners judged them to be: • more intelligent • more dependable • taller • better looking • same results for (Canadian) anglophone and francophone listeners

19. Conclusions • Prestige combines linguistic and social elements • Socioeconomic status is thereby closely linked to language and attitudes about language • Not everyone aspires to speak the prestige form • There is no absolute good in language: • Correlations of linguistic variables with class are arbitrary

20. References Labov, William. 1962. The social history of a sound change on the island of Martha’s Vineyard, Massachusetts. Master’s essay, Columbia University. Labov, William. 1966. The Social Stratification of English in New York City.  Washington, D.C.:  Center for Applied Linguistics. Labov, William. 2000. Principles of Linguistic change. Volume II: Social Factors. Oxford: Blackwell. Modaressi-Tehrani, Yahya. 1978. A Sociolinguistic Analysis of Modern Persian. Doctoral dissertation, University of Kansas. Preston, Dennis. 2000. Some plain facts about Americans and their language. American Speech 75.4:398-401. Trudgill, Peter. 1974. The Social Differentiation of English in Norwich. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Trudgill, Peter. 1978. Sex,covert prestige, and linguistic change in the urban British English of Norwich. Language in Society 1:179-96. Wolfram, Walt. 1969. A Linguistic Description of Detroit Negro Speech. Washington, D.C.: Center for Applied Linguistics.