#Sociolinguistics definition series#

When sociolinguistics serves as a legitimizing label for such activity, it is, as said, not conceived as a challenge to normal linguistics linguists who perceive such a challenge in the label tend to eschew it.

For the most part this work is conceived as application, lacking theoretical content, or else as pursuing theoretical concerns that are in addition to those of normal linguistics, or perhaps even wholly unrelated to them. The salient examples today involve American cities and developing nations and concern problems of education, minority groups, and language policies. American linguistics does have a tradition of practical concerns-one can mention Sapir’s semantic research for an international auxiliary language, Bloomfield’s work in the teaching of reading, Swadesh’s literacy work, the “Army method” of teaching foreign languages. Here may be placed ventures into social problems involving language and the use of language, which are not seen as involving a challenge to existing linguistics.

Let me characterize each of these in relation to linguistic theory. Nevertheless, three main orientations can be distinguished, orientations that can be labeled: the social as well as the linguistic socially realistic linguistics socially constituted linguistics. Indeed, not everyone whose work is called sociolinguistic is ready to accept the label, and those who use the term include and emphasize different things. The term sociolinguistics means many things to many people, and of course no one has a patent on its definition. Orientations and concerns in sociolinguistics As to (3), if we take “integrated” to encompass the structure of sentences within the structure of discourse, of referential meaning within the meanings of speech acts, and of dialects and languages within the organization of verbal repertoires and speech communities, then we can see a convergence implicit in much of the best recent work and envisage a unity it can attain. At the same time, facts of practical experience (e. g., the organization of linguistic features in terms of verbal repertoires the role of social meaning as a determinant of acceptability and the “creative aspect of language use” the effects of personal identity, role, and setting as constraints on competence) point to severe limitations of present linguistic theory and stimulate efforts to overcome them. As to (2), note that findings about the organization of variation and the structure of speech acts-both are central to linguistic theory-contribute to the scientific basis that successful practice needs. As to (1), witness the current disarray with regard to arguments in syntax and semantics and to the place of semantics, intonation, and even phonology and lexicon in a model of grammar itself, as issues of empirical adequacy and validity are pressed against the dominant “intuitionist” approach-and as other, contextually oriented traditions of work are gradually reinvented or grudgingly rediscovered. But in the present state of sociolinguistics, I would maintain (1) that the scientific as well as the practical side of linguistics stands in need (2) that scientific and practical needs converge and (3) that steps taken during the past decade have brought us to the threshold of an integrated approach to linguistic description. Some of what is done under the rubric of sociolinguistics may be justified only in the sense that something is better than nothing, when need is great. If relevance to social problems were not recognized, sociolinguistic research would still be needed for the sake of an adequate theory of language. However, there are scientific as well as practical needs. The energetic activity in sociolinguistics is nourished in important part by the obvious relevance of much of its subject matter, joining other academic fields in which concern for education, children, ethnic relations, and governmental policies find expression. We are all familiar with the gap that can exist between public concerns and the competence of scientists. In one fundamental regard, I think, simply to a threshold. Where do we stand? How far have we progressed? In some ways, very far. The present meeting is in a way a culmination of the decade’s activity.

#Sociolinguistics definition series#

There have been general symposia symposia on major topics notable major research efforts the launching of series of working papers books of readings, increasingly specific to the field textbooks even a series of collected papers of middle-aged men who find themselves senior scholars and journals. The subsequent decade has seen a great deal of activity. The term “sociolinguistics” began to gain currency about ten years ago.