People’s democratic republic of Algeria

Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research

CHADLI BENJDID UNIVERSITY-EL TARF-

Introducing sociolinguistics by Miriam Meyerhoff Summary

Ati Nesrine

Master 1

2017/2018
 A teacher's role is not only teaching a language, but also teaching the cultures and societies

that surround the language. Sociolinguistics and Language Teaching looks at the relationship

between language and society and the importance of showing language in a real social setting

mainly because students who already have a first language (L1) will have a set of values

cultural awareness that had been taught the whole time during their lives before they are being

introduced to the second language (L2). This is why Introducing Sociolinguistics by Miriam

Meyerhoff provides a set of sociolinguistic issues that a teacher can include to promote

language curriculum like language variation, style and attitudes in social settings .

This book includes twelve chapters each one contains an exercise except for the introductory

chapter, but in this summary we are interested in only the first three. the first chapter , like any

educational textbook , is an introduction to the whole book which defines sociolinguistics ,

methods to study it , and how it is related to other fields . in the second chapter , the terms

variant and variable are highly repeated to highlight how a particular language varies from

one place to another and why speakers of a language have different language styles . The 3rd

chapter accounts for style shifting and variation in speech depending on the situation and the

addressee.

In chapter one , sociolinguistics is defined by Miriam Meyerhoff as a broad field where

researchers have different interests and use different methods for collecting and analysing

data .furthermore , sociolinguistics is about how a language is used by individuals , how it is

used differently in different regions , how it is chosen as a language of court and education

and how speaker can draw on their linguistic knowledge in order to change their style

according to the addressee .In order to conduct a research in this field , sociolinguists use a

number of methods. This can be by a systematic observation using records , checking libraries

and archives materials for those who are interested in investigating national language policies

,or just a normal discussion with a sample of a community.However, while collecting data ,
sociolinguists face a major challenge where people are completely unaware of the way they

change their speech in different contexts, or they just talk about it in general terms

.sociolinguistics is about both social questions and linguistic question , and regardless which

one weighs more in the balance puzzle ; it still have something to say about both of them .

In chapter two , Miriam Meyerhoff introduces the two terms variable and variant . a variable

is the general or abstract representation of the source of variation ; a variant is the actual

realisation of a variable which can be lexical or phonetic . for example , cheers has a

variation in pronunciation [tʃiəz]and [tʃeəz]in Bequia .the variable here is the centring

diphthong which is the vowel , and the variant is the actual realisation of one of the two

pronunciations. The relationship between the two terms is very similar to the abstract notion

of a phoneme and its actual realisation ;the orthographic representation of a sound has a

variety of pronunciations depending on where it occurs in a word ;therefore, the variation is

predictable (regular) and it is constrained by where it occurs in syllable. On the other hand ,

the alternation between [tʃiəz]and [tʃeəz]in Bequia is more of a free variation where the same

person can use both variants even in the same conversation ;therefore, the variation is

probabilistic. Besides to Edmond Edmont , a researcher that investigated the pronunciation of

different words in different villages in France , who helped to give clarity to the relationship

between the language and geography or regional variation with his study that shows the role

of non – linguistic factors ;the example of the fens by Dave Britain on page 13 clearly

highlights how the pronunciation of an isolated region can change after the swampy area has

drained . Britain observed that some of the regional differences began to fade ; the speaker

had reallocated the regional forms according to regular linguistic principles , and he began to

use a raised pronunciation of the words that have a voiceless consonants after the diphthong

such in night and ice ;however , some other words ,strut and foot , still have variation in

pronunciation within the same region or in the speech of a single person . He claimed that
people did not develop any new set of norms for these words because there were no linguistic

principles for these two word classes .

In 1961, William Labov conducted a social study in Martha’s Vineyard where he found that

the pronunciation of some variables in the island differs from the mainland united states

although it was not far from its shores .moreover, he found that price words are pronounced

more raised and centralised , but not all year –round .also some of vineyarders pronounce it

like those of the mainland , this variation does not only exist between a group of speakers but

also it can be an intraspeaker variation that happens within individual speakers .Labov , at the

end of the research , found that this variation is not free or unconstrained but it is due to both

linguistic factors and speakers attitudes about living in the vineyard .people tend to talk like

the mainland united states when they have a negative attitude toward living in the island .the

centralisation of the price words can be what the author described as an indicator or a marker

which are different from stereotype . Stereotype is the recognition of linguistic features and

the awareness of linguistic varieties in a certain area .on the other hand , markers and

indicators is when people show no awareness of certain variables only then the richest data

for sociolinguists pop out . markers are different from indicators ; we can define markers as

the existence of some subconscious awareness of a variable within speakers , and have social

significance where people alternate between two variants depending on the situation . on the

other hand , indicators is when people does not show any subconscious awareness of a

linguistic variable and stick to just one variant no matter what the situation is .

Variation in language is motivated or triggered by different factors ; it can be to prove an

identity ,a desire to differentiate himself from other groups , because the community values a

certain variant consciously or unconsciously ,or just avoiding variants that are inappropriate

within a speech community .

In chapter 3,variation and style, terms like accent , dialect , speech community , and style

shifting are introduced. Sociolinguists are used to identifying the regions of different persons

according to the features of their accent and dialect. an accent is the actual pronunciation of a

word and the dialect is a sub variety of a single language which includes pronunciation ,

vocabulary and sentence structure . however, the term dialect is sometimes avoided by

researchers because of its complicated , negative connotation where people sometimes

confuse it with good or bad English ; this is why Miriam preferred to use a neutral word

which is variety .a variety refers to various forms of a language triggered by social factors ,

this language can change from region to region and can be used as an indicator to the

speaker’s social class . As it was mentioned in the chapter 2 in Martha’s vineyard study that

the variation is not free , in this chapter a further study support the same idea , the social dilect

survey in Lower East Side of Manhattan by Labov . Labov was successful to provide

evidence against the notion of free variation when he observed that people show consistent

use of some variables in formal and informal styles ; this is what came to be defined as speech

community .

Why people do style shifting ? a number of reasons were given , among them the fact that

people sometimes do not pay attention to their speech in a particular conversation, or simply

to suit a particular type of an audience .Labov turned his attention this time to the stereotyped

accent of the ‘r’ in new York city. Although new York is surrounded by other varieties, it still

have its own stereotype where the r must be followed by a vowel otherwise it will not be

pronounced .Labov has used different methods to get the appropriate data . the first method

which is the sociolinguistic interview where data was collected from a random sample of

people from the Lower East Side in New York in their own homes using language tasks,

interview recording where the interviewee was asked to read a list of minimal pairs ,words or

talking to the interviewee about their lives .what Labov noticed while analysing the result
that the choice of the formality or informality of the style is according to speaker s attention to

their own speech . if the speaker is reading a list of words and he is paying more attention to

his speech ,he will clearly pronounce the (r)even if he does not use it in his causal speech ,

but if he is just talking to the interviewer he will use the stereotyped accent of new York .so

these variants associated to the variable (r) are restricted by some independent factors or by a

style .the relationship between the variants and the style is described by the author as

monotonic , so the variant will change if the style does .

The second method used by Labov was what he called rapid and anonymous survey where

three department stores were chosen. Labov tried to ask the employees a question and he

already knows the answer was fourth floor then he pretended like he did not hear the phrase

and ask them to repeat it. the phrase was chosen carefully because of the existing consonant

after the r . after hearing the repeated word, Labov right down whether or not the staff have

used a constricted r along with their sex ,their age, and their occupation in the store. the result

of this survey shows that speakers were more likely to use the constricted r when they repeat

the word for the second time than when they utter it in the first time . on the basis of this

survey Labov concluded that a speaker is part of a speech community if they share the same

variants and they are all conscious or unconscious about theses variants .

Another term introduced on page 37 is prestige. a prestige of a variable is what people tend to

use on more formal context and in careful situations. it is not necessarily something that

speakers are consciously aware of, and it is not called so because it is used by a higher social

class . This led sociolinguists to make a distinction between overt and covert prestige . Overt

prestige is the one that people are highly aware of and is related to people with high status.

Covert prestige on the other hand is when people overtly recognize one variant as a proper

one , and they think they are using it , but actually they do not . Moreover, Labov introduces a

new term which is the observer’s paradox , knowing how people behave when they are not
being observed . this paradox is what faces sociolinguists when they start to record the speech

of the speaker , but actually the recording changes the dynamic . to overcome this paradox

researchers in the field tend to spend long period working or living with certain persons in

order to observe how they use the language , react to it , and how it is embedded in other

social practices and ideologies. However , it is not possible for the researcher to gather the

information by Surreptitious recording where the speakers word are recorded without his

knowledge this kind of recording is considered as an abuse of the privacy of people you are

recording.

Labaov‘s notion of variation and paying attention to speech was refuted by The British social

psychologist Howard Giles who begun to look closely at the role of language in shaping the

dynamic of interaction between groups and individuals. Giles argued that labov was wrong

for attributing speech differences across different styles tto the effect of speakers paying

attention to their own speech , but he rather preferred linking the stylistic variation to speaker

s adjustments according to the norms associated to different addressees . by attuning the

speech , speakers are trying to talk a according to the situation they are in , and to whom they

are talking to . Giles suggested that the changes in the new York study by Labov was a

consequence of the speaker’s adjustment to their speech according to the context and the

norms that have been socialised to associate with certain tasks like reading aloud .