Language and Society (week 5) - Description, prescription and verbal hygene
Based on Prof. David Britains course for MA Students of English Languages and Literatures at the University of Bern.
Based on Prof. David Britains course for MA Students of English Languages and Literatures at the University of Bern.
Kartei Details
| Karten | 13 |
|---|---|
| Lernende | 13 |
| Sprache | English |
| Kategorie | Englisch |
| Stufe | Universität |
| Erstellt / Aktualisiert | 07.12.2017 / 03.12.2018 |
| Weblink |
https://card2brain.ch/box/20171207_language_and_society_week_5_description_prescription_and_verbal_hygene
|
| Einbinden |
<iframe src="https://card2brain.ch/box/20171207_language_and_society_week_5_description_prescription_and_verbal_hygene/embed" width="780" height="150" scrolling="no" frameborder="0"></iframe>
|
What is prescriptivism and who holds prescriptive views (3 examples)?
Prescriptivism: Languages have a set of externally set rules that speakers should follow.
Who: Dictionary writers, grammar writers, government institutions (media, education, civil service, etc.) employers, parents, everyone?
What is descriptivism and for what historical and linguistic reasons is it used?
Descriptivism: Interest in how people actually speak.
Historical reasons: e.g. the development of English from Indo-European
Linguistic reasons: all varieties have fully functioning grammars acquired by native speakers.
How do pre- and descriptivist views on grammar differ?
learned vs. acquired.
prescriptivist views treat grammar as external set of rules imposed from outside by authority.
descriptivist views treat grammar as complex and abstract human system, not imposed overtly.
What attitudes towards language to we leave school with?
We acquire prescriptivist views through school. A sense of what is 'right' or 'wrong' and what can and cannot be written. Prioritise written over spoken. Language structure= tied to written language.
Why do sociolinguists call standard languages artificial?
- Socially and historically created
- derived from national elites and supported through institutions of power
- codified in an attempt to get rid of variability
- Often seen as symbol of national unity, distinctiveness, prowess and prestige
- The NORM, seen as correct and proper
- trigger a complaint tradition
What other aspects (apart from being artificial) don't sociolinguists like about standard languages?
- symbols of political power, rather than based on linguisitic distincitiveness (e.g. Yugoslavia)
- Linguistically odd, as they suppress language variation. Std English does not permit much variability
- Most 'tidy' in their written form; but writing is learnt not acquired. Speech and song = naturally human. BUT knowlege of spoken grammars is poor in comparison to written.
- don't have native speakers: they are ideological
- They conserve odd forms (e.g. 3rd pers. sing. 's')
- They're not the only one with norms anyway! Every variety/community needs them
What are some of the differences between writing and speech?
- no paralinguistic cues
- unspoken background language
- largely solitary, not so social;
- doesn't permit vagueness, ellipsis, ambiguitiy, etc. to the same extent
- planned, context-free, elaborated, permanent, learned
Constant standard use in formal contexts by powerful people leads speakers to:
- combine use of standard with non-standard forms in their speech;
- absorb attitudes of linguistic inferiority about the non-standard form;
- assume the standard form denotes correctness, civilization, education, truth, etc.
- internalize 'standard ideologies'.
How do linguists also engage in verbal hygene?
- they shun analysis of metalinguistic commentary
- simply dismiss prescriptivism
- treat language as a biological, natural phenomenon with a life of its own.
- tolerate forms of prescription hidden under language planning and management
Examples of verbal hygene (maybe know 3-4. There are 7 listed)
- campaigning for use of plain English
- dialect/minory language preservation societies
- taking courses in assertiveness or better conversational English
- editing text for a newspaper
- language planning (e.g. Cornish)
- national curriculum for English
- guidelines for non-sexist language
Why the fuss about political correctness and corporate language? Arguments for it!
- offensive, objectionable linguistic behaviour is the same as the physical equivalent - avoidable.
- language not only reflects society it also shapes it. The use of such linguistic behaviour can preserve abuse.
- any group has the right to name itself.
Why the fuss about political correctness and corporate language? Arguments against it!
Words don't have meaning outside our intention to use them. If a word is racially charged a speaker might deny that because she or he did not intend to be racist
freedom of expression is restricted...
both pretty shit arguments imho...
What quarrels does sociolinguistics have with the general public?
It is generally misunderstood. The findings it makes are not in line with the ideologies that most people hold and not directly applicable in local contexts.
