Staff Site Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta
Meeting II
Language and Society
Siti Mukminatun
Sociolinguistics
Study the relationship between language and society.
1. explaining why we speak differently in different social
contexts
2. identifying the social functions of language and the
ways it is
used to convey social meaning.
An attempt to find correlations between social structure and
linguistic structure and to observe any changes that occur
(Gumpers, 1971: 223)
Language and society → intertwined → impossible to
understand one without the other.
The language used by the participants is influenced by a
number of social factors.
Sociolinguistics vs. the Sociology of
language
Sociolinguistics
investigating the relationships between language
and society with the goal of a better
understanding of the structure of language and
of how languages function in communication
Sociology of language
to discover how social structure can be better
understood through the study of language, e.g.
how certain linguistic features serve to
characterize particular social arrangement
Sociolinguistics vs. the Sociology of
language
Hudson, 1980: 4-5
a. Sociolinguistics is the study of language
in relation to society’,
b. Sociology of language: the study of
society in relation to language
Similarity:
a. Both require systematic study of
language.
The relationship between language
and society
(wardaugh, : 10)
1. Social
structure → linguistic structure and/or behavior
a. age-grading phenomenon
young children speak differently from older
children and in turn, children speak differently
from mature adults.
b. studies → the varieties of language that speakers
use reflect such matters; their regional, social,
or ethnic origin and possible sex.
c. other studies → particular ways of speaking,
choices of words,
and rules for conversing
are
determined by social requirement
The relationship between
language and society
(wardaugh, : 10)
2. Linguistic structure and/or behavior may
either influence or determine social structure
(behind Whorfian hypothesis)
3. The influence is bi-directional; language and
society may influence each other.
4. There is no relationship at all.
Social factors
The participants
Who is talking to whom (wife-husband, customer-shopkeeper,
boss-worker)
The social setting and function of interaction
e.g. home, work, school
The aim or purpose of the interaction
(informative, social)
The topic; What is being talked about?
Example I
Ray : Hi mum.
Mum: Hi. You’re late.
Ray : Yeah, that bastard Sootbucket kept us in
again.
Mum: Nana’s here.
Ray : Oh sorry. Where is she?
Analysis I
Language
serves a range of functions; to
ask for and give people information, to
express indignation and annoyance, as
well as admiration and express feelings.
Example II
Ray
: Good afternoon, sir.
Principle : What are you doing here at this
time?
Ray
: Mr. Sutton kept us in, sir.
For the analysis, see Holmes, 1995: 2-3
Example III
Every
afternoon my friend packs her bag and
leaves her Cardiff office at about 5 o’clock. As
she leaves, her business partner says goodbye
Margaret, (she replies goodbye Mike) her
secretary says goodbye Ms Walker, (she replies
goodbye Jill) and the caretaker says Bye Mrs.
Walker (to which she responds goodbye Andy).
As she arrives home she is greeted by Hi mum
from her son, Jamie, hello dear, have a good
day?, from her mother, and simply you’re late
again! from her husband.
Example III
Later
in the evening the president of the
local flower club calls to ask if she would
like to join. Good evening, is that Mrs.
Billington? she asks. No, it’s Ms Walker,
but my husband’s name is David
Billington, she answers. What can I do for
you? Finally a friend calls Boradar Meg,
how’s thing?
Example IV
Sam : You seen our ‘enry’s new ‘ouse
yet? It’s in ‘alton you know.
Jim : I have indeed. I could hardly
miss it Sam. Your Henry now
owns the biggest house in Halton.
It illustrated a range of social influences on
language choice.
Social dimensions
A Social
distance scale concerned with
participant relationship
A status scale concerned with participant
relationship
A formality scale relating to the setting or
type of interaction
Two functional scales relating to the
purposes or topic of interaction
The solidarity – social distance
scale
Intimate Distant
High solidarity Low solidarity
The scale is useful in emphasizing that how well
we know someone is a relevant factor in
linguistic choice.
e.g. meg vs. Mrs. Belington
The status scale
Superior high status
Subordinate
low status
e.g.
1. The use of ‘sir’, ‘Mrs.’, to the lecturer by the
students
2. The [h]-dropping reflect someone’s lower
social group
The formality scale
Formal High formality
Informal
1.
2.
Low Formality
Useful in assessing the influence of social setting
or type of interaction on language choice.
Often degrees of formality are largely determined
by solidarity and status relationship. But not
always.
The referential and affective
function scales
Referential
High low
Information
information
Content
content
affective
Low high
Affective affective
Content
content
The referential and affective
function scales
1. The more referentially oriented an
interaction is, the less it tends to express
the feelings of the speaker.
Chaika
( 1988, 10)
the context determines meaning,
1. the social status of speakers
2. the speech event and social conventions
governing it;
3. the social-cultural and physical environment
4. previous discourse between the speakers or
known to them
5. the intent of the speaker.
Conclusion
Our
word choices depend on who we are
talking to.
Language choices convey information
about the social relationships between
people as well as about the topic of
discussion.
Linguistic variation occurs at other levels
of linguistic analysis: sounds, wordstructure, grammar as well as vocabulary.
Language and Society
Siti Mukminatun
Sociolinguistics
Study the relationship between language and society.
1. explaining why we speak differently in different social
contexts
2. identifying the social functions of language and the
ways it is
used to convey social meaning.
An attempt to find correlations between social structure and
linguistic structure and to observe any changes that occur
(Gumpers, 1971: 223)
Language and society → intertwined → impossible to
understand one without the other.
The language used by the participants is influenced by a
number of social factors.
Sociolinguistics vs. the Sociology of
language
Sociolinguistics
investigating the relationships between language
and society with the goal of a better
understanding of the structure of language and
of how languages function in communication
Sociology of language
to discover how social structure can be better
understood through the study of language, e.g.
how certain linguistic features serve to
characterize particular social arrangement
Sociolinguistics vs. the Sociology of
language
Hudson, 1980: 4-5
a. Sociolinguistics is the study of language
in relation to society’,
b. Sociology of language: the study of
society in relation to language
Similarity:
a. Both require systematic study of
language.
The relationship between language
and society
(wardaugh, : 10)
1. Social
structure → linguistic structure and/or behavior
a. age-grading phenomenon
young children speak differently from older
children and in turn, children speak differently
from mature adults.
b. studies → the varieties of language that speakers
use reflect such matters; their regional, social,
or ethnic origin and possible sex.
c. other studies → particular ways of speaking,
choices of words,
and rules for conversing
are
determined by social requirement
The relationship between
language and society
(wardaugh, : 10)
2. Linguistic structure and/or behavior may
either influence or determine social structure
(behind Whorfian hypothesis)
3. The influence is bi-directional; language and
society may influence each other.
4. There is no relationship at all.
Social factors
The participants
Who is talking to whom (wife-husband, customer-shopkeeper,
boss-worker)
The social setting and function of interaction
e.g. home, work, school
The aim or purpose of the interaction
(informative, social)
The topic; What is being talked about?
Example I
Ray : Hi mum.
Mum: Hi. You’re late.
Ray : Yeah, that bastard Sootbucket kept us in
again.
Mum: Nana’s here.
Ray : Oh sorry. Where is she?
Analysis I
Language
serves a range of functions; to
ask for and give people information, to
express indignation and annoyance, as
well as admiration and express feelings.
Example II
Ray
: Good afternoon, sir.
Principle : What are you doing here at this
time?
Ray
: Mr. Sutton kept us in, sir.
For the analysis, see Holmes, 1995: 2-3
Example III
Every
afternoon my friend packs her bag and
leaves her Cardiff office at about 5 o’clock. As
she leaves, her business partner says goodbye
Margaret, (she replies goodbye Mike) her
secretary says goodbye Ms Walker, (she replies
goodbye Jill) and the caretaker says Bye Mrs.
Walker (to which she responds goodbye Andy).
As she arrives home she is greeted by Hi mum
from her son, Jamie, hello dear, have a good
day?, from her mother, and simply you’re late
again! from her husband.
Example III
Later
in the evening the president of the
local flower club calls to ask if she would
like to join. Good evening, is that Mrs.
Billington? she asks. No, it’s Ms Walker,
but my husband’s name is David
Billington, she answers. What can I do for
you? Finally a friend calls Boradar Meg,
how’s thing?
Example IV
Sam : You seen our ‘enry’s new ‘ouse
yet? It’s in ‘alton you know.
Jim : I have indeed. I could hardly
miss it Sam. Your Henry now
owns the biggest house in Halton.
It illustrated a range of social influences on
language choice.
Social dimensions
A Social
distance scale concerned with
participant relationship
A status scale concerned with participant
relationship
A formality scale relating to the setting or
type of interaction
Two functional scales relating to the
purposes or topic of interaction
The solidarity – social distance
scale
Intimate Distant
High solidarity Low solidarity
The scale is useful in emphasizing that how well
we know someone is a relevant factor in
linguistic choice.
e.g. meg vs. Mrs. Belington
The status scale
Superior high status
Subordinate
low status
e.g.
1. The use of ‘sir’, ‘Mrs.’, to the lecturer by the
students
2. The [h]-dropping reflect someone’s lower
social group
The formality scale
Formal High formality
Informal
1.
2.
Low Formality
Useful in assessing the influence of social setting
or type of interaction on language choice.
Often degrees of formality are largely determined
by solidarity and status relationship. But not
always.
The referential and affective
function scales
Referential
High low
Information
information
Content
content
affective
Low high
Affective affective
Content
content
The referential and affective
function scales
1. The more referentially oriented an
interaction is, the less it tends to express
the feelings of the speaker.
Chaika
( 1988, 10)
the context determines meaning,
1. the social status of speakers
2. the speech event and social conventions
governing it;
3. the social-cultural and physical environment
4. previous discourse between the speakers or
known to them
5. the intent of the speaker.
Conclusion
Our
word choices depend on who we are
talking to.
Language choices convey information
about the social relationships between
people as well as about the topic of
discussion.
Linguistic variation occurs at other levels
of linguistic analysis: sounds, wordstructure, grammar as well as vocabulary.