sociolinguistics october 27, 2008. sociolinguistics: methods 1. observation 2. observation of a...

39
Sociolinguistics October 27, 2008

Upload: monica-flowers

Post on 17-Dec-2015

218 views

Category:

Documents


2 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Sociolinguistics October 27, 2008. Sociolinguistics: Methods 1. Observation 2. Observation of a small group over a period of time 3. Interview 4. Surveys

Sociolinguistics

October 27, 2008

Page 2: Sociolinguistics October 27, 2008. Sociolinguistics: Methods 1. Observation 2. Observation of a small group over a period of time 3. Interview 4. Surveys

Sociolinguistics: Methods

1. Observation 2. Observation of a small group over a period

of time 3. Interview 4. Surveys and questionnaires 5. Accent Judgment Test 6. Language attitude studies 7. Role-playing 8. Discourse Completion Tests

Page 3: Sociolinguistics October 27, 2008. Sociolinguistics: Methods 1. Observation 2. Observation of a small group over a period of time 3. Interview 4. Surveys

1. Observations, interviews

Pronunciation of /r/ in Labov’s New York City Study:

Page 4: Sociolinguistics October 27, 2008. Sociolinguistics: Methods 1. Observation 2. Observation of a small group over a period of time 3. Interview 4. Surveys

Ex 1: Labov: /r/ in New York City

the absence or presence of consonantal /r/ in postvocalic position

reason for that type of pronunciation.

Hypothesis: --There is a certain social

significance in the way of producing this sound, that there is a distinct difference in the social environment of the people with or without deletion of postvocalic /r/.

Page 5: Sociolinguistics October 27, 2008. Sociolinguistics: Methods 1. Observation 2. Observation of a small group over a period of time 3. Interview 4. Surveys

Labov did his research in three New York stores.

Three stores: Saks 5th Avenue (upper middle class) Macy’s (lower middle class) S. Klein (working class)

informants---employees

Page 6: Sociolinguistics October 27, 2008. Sociolinguistics: Methods 1. Observation 2. Observation of a small group over a period of time 3. Interview 4. Surveys

To get comparable results Labov asked for a department on the fourth flour.

“Fourth floor.” “Excuse me?”

a more careful pronunciation of “Fourth floor” transcription of the pronounciation of /r/ in ``fourth'' and

``floor'' both in the first response and in the careful pronunciation

Page 7: Sociolinguistics October 27, 2008. Sociolinguistics: Methods 1. Observation 2. Observation of a small group over a period of time 3. Interview 4. Surveys

Results of the New York City interviewsOverall Distribution of /r/ in Labov's Department Store Study,

NYC

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Saks' Macy's Klein

Department Store

variable /r/

100% /r/

Page 8: Sociolinguistics October 27, 2008. Sociolinguistics: Methods 1. Observation 2. Observation of a small group over a period of time 3. Interview 4. Surveys

% /r/ per repetition

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

fourth floor FOURTH FLOOR

Saks'

Macy's

Klein

Page 9: Sociolinguistics October 27, 2008. Sociolinguistics: Methods 1. Observation 2. Observation of a small group over a period of time 3. Interview 4. Surveys

1. Observations

The preferred dialect of pop music (social situation)

Trudgill Peter. 1983. ‘Acts of Conflicting Identity. The Sociolingistics of British Pop-Song Pronunciation’.

In 1960s British pop songs were usually sung with what was perceived as an American accent:

- flap for intervocalic /t/- /æ/ instead of /a:/ in dance, last, half, can’t etc. - rhotic /r/- [a:] instead of diphthongs for /life/, /my/ etc. - words like love with a long schwa- body, top etc.. with unrounded vowel. (No single British variety has all these features, although all can be found

somewhere in Britain.)

Page 10: Sociolinguistics October 27, 2008. Sociolinguistics: Methods 1. Observation 2. Observation of a small group over a period of time 3. Interview 4. Surveys

Historical analysis:

The percentage of potential postvocal /r/s actually realized was 36% in 1950-60, and 4% in late 1970s (?).

Same pattern for /t/ and /æ/ instead of /a:/ (can’t, half)… except for Mick Jagger, who always uses /æ/.

Why? Because the need to imitate became

weaker: Britain dominated the field from the mid 1960s.

Page 11: Sociolinguistics October 27, 2008. Sociolinguistics: Methods 1. Observation 2. Observation of a small group over a period of time 3. Interview 4. Surveys

3. Interviews

-g dropping Trudgill (1983)

UMC LMC UWC LWC

Men 6.3 32.4 40.0 90.1

Women 0.0 1.4 35.6 58.9

Page 12: Sociolinguistics October 27, 2008. Sociolinguistics: Methods 1. Observation 2. Observation of a small group over a period of time 3. Interview 4. Surveys

5. Accent Judgment Tests

In these tasks, listeners hear speakers of different dialects and attempt to determine whether or not the speaker is or is not from a certain location.

Page 13: Sociolinguistics October 27, 2008. Sociolinguistics: Methods 1. Observation 2. Observation of a small group over a period of time 3. Interview 4. Surveys

5. Accent Judgment Tasks

Study: Perceptions of Utah English

In this study, listeners were asked to determine whether or not a speaker was from Utah

Page 14: Sociolinguistics October 27, 2008. Sociolinguistics: Methods 1. Observation 2. Observation of a small group over a period of time 3. Interview 4. Surveys

What do these signs have in common?

Utahisms!

Page 15: Sociolinguistics October 27, 2008. Sociolinguistics: Methods 1. Observation 2. Observation of a small group over a period of time 3. Interview 4. Surveys

5. Accent Judgment Tests

Research Questions:part 1: dialect recognition1. can native English speakers recognize the

difference between two very similar varieties of English?

2. what factors influence this ability (linguistic, listener, speaker characteristics)?

part 2: dialect prejudice3. for stigmatized varieties, can/do listeners

distinguish between non-standard features and dialect specific features?

Page 16: Sociolinguistics October 27, 2008. Sociolinguistics: Methods 1. Observation 2. Observation of a small group over a period of time 3. Interview 4. Surveys

method

participants: Adult American English Speakers (n=63)

demographics: online test

judging:

scale from 0 (no Utah accent) to 6 (strong Utah accent)

Page 17: Sociolinguistics October 27, 2008. Sociolinguistics: Methods 1. Observation 2. Observation of a small group over a period of time 3. Interview 4. Surveys

Linguistic items noted as part of variety

phonological items lexical1. fail/fell merger2. cord/card merger3. bowl/bull merger4. intrusive ‘t’ (else as

eltse)5. glottal stop

(mountain as moun’ an)

6. intrusive glottal stop (conference as con?ference)

7. singing as singkingk8. pronounced ‘l’ (in

words like folk)

1. lurpy 2. sluff3. ignert4. oh my heck!

(interesting expletives)

syntactic1. propredicate do2. time + that3. up to the store4. we was5. might could

Page 18: Sociolinguistics October 27, 2008. Sociolinguistics: Methods 1. Observation 2. Observation of a small group over a period of time 3. Interview 4. Surveys

stimuli: part 1

12 speakers, 6 from Utah, 6 from other Western states differed in age (20, 40, or 60 years old) and gender read paragraph full of Utahisms

Man, tests really stress me out. I think they’re giving me ulcers. My mom says the calcium in warm milk really helps, but I think she’s full of it. Sometimes I just feel rotten like there’s no pleasure in life.

a. b. c.

Page 19: Sociolinguistics October 27, 2008. Sociolinguistics: Methods 1. Observation 2. Observation of a small group over a period of time 3. Interview 4. Surveys

stimuli: part 1

12 speakers, 6 from Utah, 6 from other Western states differed in age (20, 40, or 60 years old) and gender read paragraph full of pronunciations of Utahisms

Man, tests really stress me out. I think they’re giving me ultcers. My mom says the caltcium in warm melk really helps, but I think she’s foll of it. Sometimes I just fill ro??en like there’s no playzure in life.

Page 20: Sociolinguistics October 27, 2008. Sociolinguistics: Methods 1. Observation 2. Observation of a small group over a period of time 3. Interview 4. Surveys

research question 1

can native English speakers recognize the difference between Utah and non-Utah speakers?

Page 21: Sociolinguistics October 27, 2008. Sociolinguistics: Methods 1. Observation 2. Observation of a small group over a period of time 3. Interview 4. Surveys

Utah vs. non Utah

0

1

2

3

4

5

Utah Non Utah

3.39

2.72

p<.0001

*

YES!

Page 22: Sociolinguistics October 27, 2008. Sociolinguistics: Methods 1. Observation 2. Observation of a small group over a period of time 3. Interview 4. Surveys

research question 1 (cont.)

are native speakers of the variety (Utah speakers) better at recognizing their variety than are non speakers (Westerners and Non-Westerners)?

are the aspects used to recognize speakers of Utah English the same for participants regardless of their native variety of English (Utahans, Westerners, Others)

Page 23: Sociolinguistics October 27, 2008. Sociolinguistics: Methods 1. Observation 2. Observation of a small group over a period of time 3. Interview 4. Surveys

place of origin and dialect recognition

0

1

2

3

4

5

Utahns Westerners Other

Utahns Non Utahns

*

Non-Westerners, people from places other than Utah and the West could not recognize the Utah from non-Utah speakers

p<.05

kind of . . .

*

Page 24: Sociolinguistics October 27, 2008. Sociolinguistics: Methods 1. Observation 2. Observation of a small group over a period of time 3. Interview 4. Surveys

research question 2 what factors influence dialect recognition?

linguistic factors phonological aspects that differ from other

surrounding varieties speaker demographic factors

age gender

Page 25: Sociolinguistics October 27, 2008. Sociolinguistics: Methods 1. Observation 2. Observation of a small group over a period of time 3. Interview 4. Surveys

1. fail/fell merger2. deal/dill merger3. pool/pole merger4. cord/card merger5. bowl/bull merger6. intrusive ‘t’ (else as eltse)7. glottal stop (mountain as moun’ an)8. intrusive glottal stop (conference as con?

ference)9. singing as singkingk10. pronounced ‘l’ (in words like folk)11. Sunday as Sundee

1. linguistic factors

Page 26: Sociolinguistics October 27, 2008. Sociolinguistics: Methods 1. Observation 2. Observation of a small group over a period of time 3. Interview 4. Surveys

1. fail/fell merger2. deal/dill merger3. pool/pole merger4. cord/card merger5. bowl/bull merger6. intrusive ‘t’ (else as eltse)7. glottal stop (mountain as moun’ an)8. intrusive glottal stop (conference as con?

ference)9. singing as singkingk10. pronounced ‘l’ (in words like folk)11. Sunday as Sundee

1. linguistic factors

combined: r2 = .98

Page 27: Sociolinguistics October 27, 2008. Sociolinguistics: Methods 1. Observation 2. Observation of a small group over a period of time 3. Interview 4. Surveys

linguistic factors

are the aspects used to recognize speakers of Utah English the same for participants regardless of their native variety of English (Utahans, Westerners, Others)

Page 28: Sociolinguistics October 27, 2008. Sociolinguistics: Methods 1. Observation 2. Observation of a small group over a period of time 3. Interview 4. Surveys

linguistic factors

Utahans Westerners Others

fail/fell r = .78 fail/fell r = .59intrusive /t/ r = .94folk with /l/ r = .96

fail/fell r = .78deal/dill r = .84

Yes!

Page 29: Sociolinguistics October 27, 2008. Sociolinguistics: Methods 1. Observation 2. Observation of a small group over a period of time 3. Interview 4. Surveys

2. demographic factors: speakers specific features examined:

age gender

Page 30: Sociolinguistics October 27, 2008. Sociolinguistics: Methods 1. Observation 2. Observation of a small group over a period of time 3. Interview 4. Surveys

speaker’s age

0

1

2

3

4

5

20 year olds 40 year olds 60 year olds

2.7

3.9

*p<.001

3.5

*

Page 31: Sociolinguistics October 27, 2008. Sociolinguistics: Methods 1. Observation 2. Observation of a small group over a period of time 3. Interview 4. Surveys

speaker’s gender

0

1

2

3

4

5

Male Female

3.94

3.16

*p<.001

*

Page 32: Sociolinguistics October 27, 2008. Sociolinguistics: Methods 1. Observation 2. Observation of a small group over a period of time 3. Interview 4. Surveys

part 2: research question 3

can/do listeners distinguish between non-standard features and dialect specific features?

Page 33: Sociolinguistics October 27, 2008. Sociolinguistics: Methods 1. Observation 2. Observation of a small group over a period of time 3. Interview 4. Surveys

part 2: stimuli

4 female speakers (average age: 22) none of speakers were from Utah read sentences with typical lexical and

syntactic characteristics of either Utah English or non-standard American English

Page 34: Sociolinguistics October 27, 2008. Sociolinguistics: Methods 1. Observation 2. Observation of a small group over a period of time 3. Interview 4. Surveys

part 2: procedure

judged whether the speaker was or was not from Utah on same 6 point Likert scale

typical Utah: And oh my heck! You can’t believe

how many people were trying to get through it at the same time.

Well, it’s been at least a year that we haven’t talked to each other.

typical non-standard: She just said that I might could be on

the team.

I told her we was going to the game.

Page 35: Sociolinguistics October 27, 2008. Sociolinguistics: Methods 1. Observation 2. Observation of a small group over a period of time 3. Interview 4. Surveys

typical characteristics of Utah and non-standard American EnglishUtahisms ‘boughten’ ‘sluff’ ‘my heck’ ‘reservoir’ ‘for cute’ propredicate do

(‘I used to do’) time that compass directions ‘moisture’ ‘tend’ for babysitting ‘frontage road’

Non Standard Features focuser/quotative ‘like’ ‘you bet’ ‘might could’ ‘pop’ positive ‘anymore’ ‘there’s’ comparative ‘way’ ‘come with’ ‘what’s that?’ ‘ain’t’ double negatives ‘we was’

Page 36: Sociolinguistics October 27, 2008. Sociolinguistics: Methods 1. Observation 2. Observation of a small group over a period of time 3. Interview 4. Surveys

typical characteristics of Utah and non-standard American EnglishUtahisms ‘boughten’ ‘sluff’ ‘my heck’ ‘reservoir’ ‘for cute’ propredicate do

(‘I used to do’) time that compass directions ‘moisture’ ‘tend’ ‘frontage road’

Non Standard Features focuser/quotative ‘like’ ‘you bet’ ‘might could’ ‘pop’ positive ‘anymore’ ‘there’s’ comparative ‘way’ ‘come with’ ‘what’s that?’ ‘ain’t’ double negatives ‘we was’

Page 37: Sociolinguistics October 27, 2008. Sociolinguistics: Methods 1. Observation 2. Observation of a small group over a period of time 3. Interview 4. Surveys

non-standard items vs. Utah items do listeners identify the same non-standard

items as properties of Utah English regardless of their native variety of English (Utahans, Westerners, Others)?

Page 38: Sociolinguistics October 27, 2008. Sociolinguistics: Methods 1. Observation 2. Observation of a small group over a period of time 3. Interview 4. Surveys

non-standard items vs. Utah items

All Utahan Western Other

my heck reservoir my heck my heck

won them my heck won them for cute

for cute pop pop pop

pop tend sluff won them

boughten sluff might could sluff

reservoir you’re ok boughten quotative like

tend for cute for cute boughten

Page 39: Sociolinguistics October 27, 2008. Sociolinguistics: Methods 1. Observation 2. Observation of a small group over a period of time 3. Interview 4. Surveys

non-standard items vs. Utah items

All Utahan Western Other

my heck reservoir my heck my heck

won them my heck won them for cute

for cute pop pop pop

pop tend sluff won them

boughten sluff might could sluff

reservoir you’re ok boughten quotative like

tend for cute for cute boughten