Bosh sahifa
Diplom ishlar
Ingliz tili
The influence of society to the vocabulary system of the language
The influence of society to the vocabulary system of the language
Yuklangan vaqt:
26.09.2019
Ko'chirishlar soni:
0
Hajmi:
386.5 KB
Ko'chirib olish
O'xshashlar
The relations of language units
The comparative analysis of the typological categories of gender
The Semantics of the English Spatial Prepositions
The selection and evaluation of words in teaching vocabulary to ESP students on the material of scale up
Satirical description of the vices of English society in the novel “Gulliver’s Travels” by Jonathan Swift
![be realised on the level of the individual sound/phoneme, as Labov discovered in investigating pronunciation of the post-vocalic /r/ in the North-Eastern USA, or on the macro scale of language choice, as realised in the various diglossias that exist throughout the world, where Swiss-German/High German is perhaps most well known. An important implication of sociolinguistic theory is that speakers 'choose' a variety when making a speech act, whether consciously or subconsciously. Understanding language in society means that one also has to understand the social networks in which language is embedded. A social network is another way of describing a particular speech community in terms of relations between individual members in a community 1 . A network could be loose or tight depending on how members interact with each other. For instance, an office or factory may be considered a tight community because all members interact with each other. A large course with 100+ students would be a looser community because students may only interact with the instructor and maybe 1–2 other students. A multiplex community is one in which members have multiple relationships with each other. For instance, in some neighborhoods, members may live on the same street, work for the same employer and even intermarry. The looseness or tightness of a social network may affect speech patterns adopted by a speaker. For instance, Sylvie Dubois and Barbara Horvath found that speakers in one Cajun Louisiana community were more likely to pronounce English "th" [θ] as [t] (or [ð] as [d]) if they participated in a relatively dense social network (i.e. had strong local ties and interacted with many other speakers in the community), and less likely if their networks were looser (i.e. fewer local ties) 2 . A social network may apply to the macro level of a country or a city, but also to the inter-personal level of neighborhoods or a single family. Recently, social networks have been formed by the Internet, through chat rooms, MySpace groups, organizations, and online dating services. In Chomskyan linguistics, a distinction is drawn between I- __________________________________________ 1 Hugh Holman C.A. Handbook to Literature, 1998 2 English Pronunciation in Use,R.Murphy,Cambridge,2004 10](/data/documents/3c3f576b-4e38-458d-b79f-e3b40c1f8c49/page-10.png)
![language (internal language) and E-language (external language). In this context, internal language is linguistic knowledge that a native speaker of language has. It applies to the study of syntax and semantics on the abstract level. External language applies to language in social contexts, i.e. behavioral habits shared by a community. Internal language analyses operate on the assumption that all native speakers of a language are quite homogeneous in how they process and perceive language. External language fields, such as sociolinguistics, attempt to explain why this is in fact not the case. Many sociolinguists reject the distinction between I- and E-language on the grounds that it is based on a mentalist view of language. On this view, grammar is first and foremost an interactional (social) phenomenon (e.g. Elinor Ochs, Emanuel Schegloff, Sandra Thompson).Sociolinguistics as a field distinct from dialectology was pioneered through the study of language variation in urban areas. Whereas dialectology studies the geographic distribution of language variation, sociolinguistics focuses on other sources of variation, among them class. Class and occupation are among the most important linguistic markers found in society. One of the fundamental findings of sociolinguistics, which has been hard to disprove, is that class and language variety are related. Members of the working class tend to speak less standard language, while the lower, middle, and upper middle class will in turn speak closer to the standard. However, the upper class, even members of the upper middle class, may often speak 'less' standard than the middle class. The looseness or tightness of a social network may affect speech patterns adopted by a speaker 1 . For instance, Sylvie Dubois and Barbara Horvath found that speakers in one Cajun Louisiana community were more likely to pronounce English "th" [ θ ] as [t] (or [ð] as [d]) if they participated in a relatively dense social network (i.e. had strong local ties and interacted with many other speakers in the community), and less likely if their networks were looser (i.e. fewer local ties) This is because not only class, but class aspirations, are important. Basil Bernstein, a well-known British socio-linguist, devised in his book, 'Elaborated and restricted codes: their social origins and some consequences,' a social code 11](/data/documents/3c3f576b-4e38-458d-b79f-e3b40c1f8c49/page-11.png)
![Specific points of connection between language and society must be discovered, and these must be related within theories that throw light on how linguistic and social structures interact. Holmes says that ‘the sociolinguist’s aim is to move towards a theory which provides a motivated account of the way language is used in a community, and of the choices people make when they use language.’ For example, when we observe how varied language use is we must search for the causes. ‘Upon observing variability, we seek its social correlates. What is the purpose of the variation? How is it evaluated in the community? What do its variants symbolize? 1 .For Chambers these questions ‘are the central questions of sociolinguistics.’ Chambers is not alone in holding such views. Others too believe that sociolinguistics is the study of language variation and that the purpose of such study is to find out what variation tells us about language and speakers’ ‘knowledge’ of language, in this case their unconscious knowledge of subtle linguistic differences. It can also be seen that there is some opposition to this idea that sociolinguistic investigations should be confined to fairly straightforward correlational studies of this kind. Critics such as Cameron 2 (1997) claim that these studies do not provide very satisfactory explanations for linguistic behavior because of inadequacies with social theory – sometimes there is none at all – and failure to appreciate the difficulties in using social concepts. Any conclusions are likely to be suspect. What is needed, according to Cameron is more social engagement so that sociolinguistics would ‘deal with such matters as the production and reproduction of linguistic norms by institutions and socializing practices; how these norms are apprehended, accepted, resisted and subverted by individual actors and what their relation is to the construction of identity.’ Milroy makes a somewhat similar claim in discussing the processes of standardization and change: ‘Social patterns are adduced only in so far as they may elucidate patterns ___________________________________________ Cameron [p.62], Chambers, 2003, p.226 21](/data/documents/3c3f576b-4e38-458d-b79f-e3b40c1f8c49/page-21.png)
![of language by exhibiting co-variation with linguistic variables . . . and as long as internal analyses are quite strongly biased in favor of linguistic, rather than social, phenomena, the quantitative paradigm will be to that extent impeded in its attempts to explain the social “life” of language and the social origins of language change.’ I have already mentioned this idea of necessary social engagement and I will return to it later 1 . However, one point is clear in the above disagreement: sociolinguistics, whatever it is, is about asking important questions concerning the relationship of language to society. 1.3.The impact of Neologisms in the society Neologisms are often created by combining existing words or by giving words new and unique suffixes or prefixes . Portmanteaux are combined words that begin to be used commonly 2 . Neologisms also can be created through abbreviation or acronym , by intentionally rhyming with existing words or simply through playing with sounds. Neologisms can become popular through memetics , by way of mass media , the Internet , and word of mouth , including academic discourse in many fields renowned for their use of distinctive jargon , and often become accepted parts of the language. Other times, however, they disappear from common use just as readily as they appeared. Whether a neologism continues as part of the language depends on many factors, probably the most important of which is acceptance by the public. It is unusual, however, for a word to enter common use if it does not resemble another word or words in an identifiable way. When a word or phrase is no longer "new", it is no longer a neologism. Neologisms may take decades to become "old", however. Opinions differ on exactly how old a word must be to cease being considered a neologism 1 . Many neologisms have come from popular literature and tend to appear in different forms. Most commonly, they are simply taken from a word used in the narrative of a book; a few representative examples are: " grok " (to achieve complete intuitive understanding ), from Stranger in a Strange Land by Robert A. Heinlein ; 1 1 Milroy [2001, pp.554–5] 2 neologism. from www.wikipedia the free encyclopedia 22](/data/documents/3c3f576b-4e38-458d-b79f-e3b40c1f8c49/page-22.png)
