Sociolinguistics

Sociolinguistics & Psycholinguistics
Pr. Chergui Saber Ahmed

1. Sociolinguistics: setting the stage
In this introductory chapter, we delineate the study of sociolinguistics and consider some of its important
characteristics. So, how can sociolinguistics be defined?
Sociolinguistics can be defined as the field that studies the relationship between language and society. It
investigates the ways in which language is integrated with human society. The fundamental assumption is that
language is a social phenomenon and should be studied as such.
What are some of the key properties of sociolinguistics?
A variety of languages and societies

Any discussion of the relationship between language and society should begin with some attempt to define each
of these terms. The term society is defined as any group of people who are drawn together for a certain purpose
or purposes. By this definition, this term becomes a very comprehensive concept. This comprehensive view of
society is useful because of the different kinds of societies that are dealt with in sociolinguistics. The
term language can be defined as a system of linguistic communication particular to a group; this includes
spoken, written, and signed modes of communication. In other words, a language is what the members of a
society speak. This definition of language is also an inclusive one and it is also useful because of the different
languages spoken by different societies.
What is noteworthy is that the definitions of language and society are not independent of each other: the
definition of language includes in it a reference to society. These terms are inextricably intertwined. A society
must have a language or languages in which to carry out its purposes. The connection is both inevitable and
complex. Sociolinguists attempt to tease out this complex relationship between language and society by offering
more specific ways in which to study it.
One fundamental assumption in sociolinguistics is that language has a social function, both as a means of
communication and also as a way of identifying social groups. In other words, language characterizes speech
communities of different kinds. So, what is a speech community?
Speech community is defined by Crystal (1999, p. 315) as:
A regionally or socially definable human group, identified by the use of a shared spoken language or language
variety. It can vary in size from a tiny cluster of speakers to whole nations or supranational groups.
Description
For communication to occur in various contexts, knowledge of language is needed. Knowledge of language can
be characterized as knowledge of a code. A code can be defined as any system of sending and receiving
messages. The senders are said to encode the message and the receivers are said to decode it. Monolingual
speakers make use of a code which draws on one language; multilingual speakers have access to two or more
codes, and who for one reason or another shift back and forth between languages in some form of multilingual
discourse. The system itself (or the grammar) is something that each speaker „knows‟, but two very important
issues for linguists are (1) just what that knowledge comprises and (2) how we may best characterize it.
Knowledge of language may be characterized in two ways by writing either a prescriptive grammar or
a descriptive grammar. A prescriptive grammar seeks to „prescribe‟ or lay down what is judged to be „correct‟,
outlining the standard language and how it „should‟ be spoken or written. A descriptive grammar, by contrast,
describes, analyses, and explains how people actually speak their languages. Sociolinguists seek to write
descriptive grammars rather than prescriptive ones.
E-language
Knowledge of language has also been characterized in terms of the distinction between competence (also called
I-language) and performance (also called E-language) (initially made in the early 1960s by the American
generative linguist Noam Chomsky). Competence is the language system stored in a speaker‟s mind.
Performance is the speech and writing that language users produce. For generative linguists, like Chomsky,
competence is the proper object of linguistics. He claims that the linguist‟s task is to characterize what speakers
know about their language (competence), not what they do with their language (performance).
1 I-language – Chomsky‟s term from the mid-1980s for the knowledge of language seen as an internalized system
in the minds of speakers. The opposite is the E-language or „externalized language‟.
The knowledge that sociolinguists seek to describe and explain involves more than knowledge of the grammar of
the language. Speakers possess knowledge that goes beyond knowledge of grammar. Knowing a language also
means knowing how to use that language, since speakers know not only how to form sentences but also how to
Edited by R@MO | ©2025

use them appropriately. There is therefore another kind of competence, communicative competence (initially
distinguished by Dell Hymes in the late 1960s from Chomky‟s concept of competence).
Communicative competence can be defined as the ability to take part in interactions within a speech
community, which implies knowing more than the language (phonology, morphology, syntax, lexicon), including
norms of interaction, when it is appropriate to speak and to keep silent, the rules for turn taking, how to be polite,
and so on. The sociolinguist Gumperz (1972, p. 205) explains that term as follows: „Whereas linguistic
competence covers the speaker‟s ability to produce grammatically correct sentences, communicative competence
describes his ability to select, from the totality of grammatically correct expressions available to him, forms
which appropriately reflect the social norms governing behaviour in specific encounters.‟
Linguistic variation
One central topic in sociolinguistics is linguistic variation. The language that speakers use in their everyday
interactions is remarkably varied. Speakers may use different linguistic items to express the same meaning. For
example, speakers may use different lexical items to denote the same object or concept or use different
grammatical constructions to express the same idea or proposition. Speakers may also display noticeable
differences in the way they pronounce words and utterances. So, variation involves the lexicon, the grammar
(morphology and syntax) as well as the phonology of a language.
Linguistic variation may occur across speakers, reflecting their social class, age, gender, region, or ethnic group.
In every language, there are linguistic correlates to a whole range of parameters including social stratification,
age grading, gender, region and ethnicity.
Linguistic variation occurs also within the speech of a single speaker. A speaker does not speak the same all the
time and her/his speech may vary according to the specific social context. People constantly exploit variation
within the languages they speak for different purposes in accordance with the social contexts they find
themselves in.
Thus, one claim that is strongly made in sociolinguistics is that language exhibits considerable internal
variation. More importantly, the patterns exhibited in this variation carry social meanings, such as signalling the
relative (in)formality of the situation, indexing various relations among people (like power and solidarity), or
indicating a speaker‟s social class, gender, age, ethnicity, occupation or geographical region. Sociolinguistics is
all about linguistic variation and seeks socially relevant explanations for regular patterns of variation in language
use. Another interesting aspect of linguistic variation is its relation to language change. Variation in language
allows and may even cause changes to occur within a language over time.
Sociolinguistics and the sociology of language

Some investigators draw a distinction between sociolinguistics or micro-sociolinguistics and the sociology of
language or macro-sociolinguistics. Sociolinguistics is concerned with investigating the relationship between
language and society with the goal being a better understanding of the structure of language and of how language
functions in communication. The equivalent goal in the sociology of language is trying to discover how social
structure can be better understood through the study of language. The difference between sociolinguistics and the
sociology of language is very much one of emphasis, according to whether the investigator is more interested in
language or society. There is a very large area of overlap between the two. There is no sharp dividing line
between the two but a large area of common concern. Both micro-sociolinguistics and macro-sociolinguistics are
needed to contribute to a better understanding of language as a necessary condition and product of social life.
2. Research methods in sociolinguistics
Methodologies for sociolinguistic research
Methodology refers to the body of methods of investigation used in sociolinguistics. Methods are usually rule-
bound modes of investigation of sociolinguistic research. Sociolinguistic investigations have a twofold concern:
1) they must ask interesting questions and 2) they must find the right kinds of data that bear on those questions.
The Observer’s Paradox

Sociolinguists attempt to observe language as a dynamic phenomenon in its natural setting, i.e., the natural
unmonitored speech patterns that participants use among themselves.
Speech patterns regularly change when another person (especially a stranger) enters the conversation. Given this
2 sensitivity of speech to audience, how can a sociolinguist, who is a stranger and an outside observer, witness and
record natural speech patterns? Doesn‟t the presence of the sociolinguist kill or affect the naturalness of the
speech? This methodological difficulty is what William Labov labels the Observer‟s Paradox: how can we
observe people speak when they are not being observed?
The insight of William Labov is that, when an investigator attempts to collect „natural‟ speech from an informant
or group of informants, their presence influences the way in which the informants speak, often leading to

hypercorrection on the part of the informants. The „paradox‟ is that an investigator has to be present to collect
speech samples, but their presence affects the samples they are trying to collect. Labov‟s rapid and anonymous
surveys were an attempt to overcome this problem, as was his practice of trying to turn interview conversations
to more lively and personal topics.
Methods of inquiry
Sociolinguistics, being an empirical science, is founded on an adequate data base. This data base is drawn from a
wide variety of sources. The empirical methods used in data collection can be either quantitative or qualitative.
Quantitative methods represent data in the form of numbers and statistics drawn from censuses, documents, and
surveys using various elicitation techniques such as questionnaires and interviews. Qualitative methods collect
data by directly observing naturally occurring speech events via participant observation or ethnographic
methods.
Participant observation is a method used in the social sciences to study the lived practices of a community in a
natural environment, i.e., outside a laboratory or experimental context. Participant observation is a form
of ethnography which seeks to obtain a greater understanding of a phenomenon through the submersion of the
researcher into the lives of their research subjects. It is the practice of spending long periods of time with
speakers observing how they use language. It is a means of gathering qualitative data rather than quantitative
data. Participant observation is an attempt to overcome the Observer‟s Paradox. Researchers spend long periods
of time working and/or living with the people whose speech they are interested in, and they hope by doing this
they will eventually achieve insider status themselves.
Ethnography is a method of research that evolved out of the field of anthropology. It studies a group from the
inside. Ethnography relies on participant observation, which involves researchers immersing themselves with a
group in an attempt to gain insight into their choices and behaviour.
3. Psycholinguistics: a short introduction
This introductory chapter provides an overview of psycholinguistics. The aim is to attempt to delineate the field
of psycholinguistics by specifying its object of study and delimit its main areas of investigation.
How can psycholinguistics be defined?

Psycholinguistics goes to the heart of what humans do with language. It provides insights into how we construct
(or assemble, put together, or piece) our own speech and writing and how we understand the speech and writing
of others; it seeks to shed light on how we store and use vocabulary; it also attempts to illuminate how we
manage to acquire a language (or more languages).
While linguistics examines language itself, psycholinguistics studies the mental processes involved in language.
Psycholinguists study understanding, producing, and remembering language, and, hence are concerned with
listening, reading, speaking, writing, and memory for language. They are also interested in how we acquire
language.
Thus, psycholinguistics can be defined as the study of language and mind. In other words, it aims to find out
about the mental or cognitive structures and processes which form the basis of or underlie humans‟ ability to
acquire, speak, write and understand language. Psycholinguistics is the study of how individuals comprehend,
produce, and acquire language.
The study of psycholinguistics is part of the field of cognitive science. Cognitive science reflects the insights of
psychology, linguistics, and, to a lesser extent, fields such as artificial intelligence, neuroscience, and philosophy.
Psycholinguistics stresses the knowledge of language and the cognitive processes involved in ordinary language
use. Ordinary use of language means such things as understanding any discourse such as a lecture or a public
speech, reading a book or an article, writing a letter or an email, or holding a conversation, etc. Cognitive process
refers to such things as perception, memory, and thinking. Considerable cognitive processing is going on during
activities such as speaking and listening.
Contemporary interest in psycholinguistics began in the 1950s. It is a field of study whose goals are to
understand how people acquire language and how they use it to speak and understand one another. It combines
the disciplines of psychology and linguistics.
Although there seems to be no limit to the aspects of the subject which could be explored, three topics seem to be
of particular interest:
3
1. The acquisition problem: Do humans acquire language because they are born equipped with some
linguistic ability? Or are they able to learn language because they are highly intelligent beings who are
skilled at solving problems of various types? Or could it be a mixture of these two possibilities?

2. The link between language knowledge (competence) and language usage (performance): What
knowledge of language is needed for us to use language? In other words, how does usage link up with
knowledge?
3. Comprehending and producing speech: What actually happens when a person comprehends or produces a
chunk of speech?
What are the main areas of psycholinguistics?
The three primary processes investigated in psycholinguistics are language comprehension, language production,
and language acquisition. These processes have given rise to three distinct but interrelated areas.
1. Language comprehension refers to the processes involved in understanding the meaning of spoken, written
or signed language. Theories of language comprehension are an important aspect of psycholinguistics,
cognitive psychology, and second language acquisition. Understanding what other people say and write (i.e.,
language comprehension) is more complicated than it first appears. Comprehending language involves a
variety of capacities, skills, processes, knowledge, and disposition that are used to derive meaning from
spoken, written, and signed language. Among the different processes involved are:
Perceptual processing: Attention is focused on the oral or written text and parts of it are retained in short-term
memory. Some initial analysis of the text may begin and attention is focused on cues which will help identify
constituents or meaningful sections of the text. These cues may be pauses in spoken text or punctuation or
paragraph separation in written text.
Parsing: Words are identified and matched with representations in long-term memory creating basic units of
meaning called propositions. Knowledge of the grammatical structure of the language is used to identify
constituents and arrive at propositions.
Utilization or elaboration: Propositions are related to other information and concepts in long-term memory and
connections are formed with existing concepts.
Proposition is the basic meaning which a sentence expresses. Propositions consist of (a) something which is
named or talked about (known as the argument or topic) and (b) an assertion or predication which is made about
the argument.
2. Language production refers to the processes involved in creating and expressing meaning (referential,
expressive, conative, phatic, etc.) through language. Numerous theories in psycholinguistics and cognitive
psychology attempt to account for the different processes involved in language production (i.e., from having
a concept or meaning in mind to translating that meaning into spoken, written or signed form). Among the
different stages involved are:
Construction: The speaker or writer selects communicative goals and creates propositions which express
intended meanings.
Transformation or articulation: Meanings are encoded in linguistic form according to the grammar of the
target language.
Execution: the message is expressed in audible or visible form through speech, writing, or sign language.
An important issue in theories of language production is whether the processes involved are analogous (or
comparable or similar) to those involved in language comprehension (though in reverse order).
3. Language Acquisition
Language Acquisition is the process by which humans acquire the capacity to perceive and comprehend
language, as well as to produce and use words and sentences to communicate. Language Acquisition usually
refers to First Language Acquisition, which studies infants‟ acquisition of their native language. This is
distinguished from second language acquisition, which deals with the acquisition (in both children and adults) of
additional languages.
First Language Acquisition (also, FLA)
First Language Acquisition is the process of learning a native language. First Language Acquisition has been
studied primarily by linguists, developmental psychologists, and psycholinguists. Most explanations of how
children learn to speak and understand language involve the influence of both the linguistic input to which
4 children are exposed in social interaction with their parents and other caregivers and a natural aptitude for
grammar that is unique to humans. However, proponents of different positions disagree strongly on the relative
importance of these factors.
Second Language Acquisition (also, SLA) is the process of acquiring a second or foreign language. In a broad
sense, a Second Language is any language learned after one has learnt one‟s native language. However, when

contrasted with a Foreign Language, the term refers more narrowly to a language that plays a major role (in
government, education and science and technology) in a particular country or region though it may not be the
first language of many people who use it.
Some fundamental current research questions related to the field of language acquisition are:
1. What is it about the human mind that makes it possible to acquire language?
2. Which aspects of the language programme are biologically programmed or determined?
3. What underlies apparent differences between language acquisition in children and adults?
4. Is there a “critical period” for language acquisition that critically distinguishes first and second language
acquisition?
5. Are there universal specific stages in the acquisition of sounds and structures of language.
4. Psycholinguistics Subject-matter and data:
This chapter builds on the previous one and delimits further the subject-matter of psycholinguistics in addition to
considering the nature of its data.
Linguistic competence vs. linguistic performance
When people know a language, they know its grammar (i.e., a set of rules said to be internalized by members of
a speech community). This underlying knowledge is called linguistic competence. It is knowledge of language
that is in a person‟s mind. Linguistic performance, in contrast, is the use of such knowledge in the actual
processing of sentences, by which we mean their production and comprehension.
Typically, linguists are concerned with describing linguistic competence and psycholinguists are concerned with
describing linguistic performance. Psycholinguists are concerned with the actual use of language. The description
of how language is actually used is called pragmatics. It is important to distinguish between the grammatical and
pragmatic aspects of a particular linguistic event. Let us consider two cases and see how they are dealt with in
linguistics and psycholinguistics.
Case one: structural ambiguity
A structurally or grammatically ambiguous sentence has two or more meanings because it can have two distinct
syntactic structures. For example, “I like good food and tea.”
Where „good‟ might bear a syntactic relation to both „food‟ and „tea‟ („good food and good tea‟) or to „food‟
alone („good food and any tea‟). Each meaning is described by a different structural representation. These two
structures are made available by the linguist‟s grammar and conform to a number of syntactic rules. In this case,
linguistic analysis is made use of in order to disambiguate an ambiguous sentence by providing two separate
structural representations, each corresponding to a distinct interpretation. This process is referred to as
disambiguation.
Disambiguation is the use of linguistic analysis to show the different structures of an ambiguous sentence.
Many linguists will talk of ambiguity only when they see it as a property of sentences as explained by the
language system (competence).
However, if the above sentence is actually used by a speaker and understood by a hearer, only one of the two
meanings will be the one intended by the speaker and only one of the two meanings will be recovered by the
hearer. Which meaning is intended or recovered will be a purely pragmatic issue, determined by the situation, the
participants in the conversation, the function of the communicative exchange, and so on. The grammar is
completely indifferent to the speaker‟s intent or to the hearer‟s recovery of the message. The grammar simply
provides structures that are available for the encoding of meaning in sentences. The actual use of those sentences
in conversation is a function of encoding and decoding processes and pragmatics (i.e., performance). Usually,
additional information either from the speaker or writer or from the situation indicates which meaning is
intended.
Case two: Speech errors (also called slips of the tongue)
Speech errors are accidental faults which are made by speakers during the production of sounds, words, and
sentences. Both native speakers and non-native speakers of a language make unintended mistakes when
speaking. Some of the commonest speech errors include „spoonerisms‟ such as „Drive into the par cark‟ instead
5 of „Drive into the car park‟ and „malapropisms‟ such as „What are you incinerating?‟ for „What are you
insinuating?‟
Speech errors like these have been important for psycholinguists as a source of evidence for mental processes
involved in speech production. They have been studied by psycholinguists in order to find out how people store
language items in long-term memory and how they select items from memory when speaking. A great deal of
what is known about the levels of production planning comes from analyses of speech errors. This research

draws on speech error corpora collected by investigators. The objective of such work is to examine how fluent
speech is produced, and what conditions cause fluent speech to break down. Slips of the tongue tell us more
about the way a person plans and produces speech.
In contrast to psycholinguists, linguists approach speech errors differently. In the quest to build a model that
represents linguistic competence, which is considered as the proper object of investigation, speech errors are
discarded. This is usually done as a result of what is referred to as idealization.
Idealization
Idealization is the degree to which linguists ignore certain aspects of the variability in their raw data, in order to
arrive at an analysis that is as generally applicable as possible. Idealization is a major assumption of generative
linguistics, as it underlies the notion of competence. A main aim of linguistics, in this view, is to account for the
language of an ideal (or idealized) speaker-hearer in an ideal (i.e., homogeneous) speech community, who knows
the language perfectly, and is unaffected by memory limitations, distractions, errors, etc., in actually using the
language.
Speech data may be idealized compared with ordinary speech by removing any errors, hesitations, or self-
corrections; the data is decontextualized, i.e., the sentences are separated out from any specific context in which
they might be used.
So, idealization is the process by which the elements and rules of a language are established as a system
underlying the phenomena of speech. Errors are not considered as significant and would, thus, be eliminated
from the data. So, a competence account attempts to establish the rules that make up the system of a language
and would discard speech errors from the data.
What counts as data in psycholinguistics?
Psycholinguists examine the above questions by considering four types of evidence:
1. Animal communication
2. Child language
3. The language of normal adults
4. The speech of aphasics (people with speech disturbances)
Animal communication
The diverse methods (e.g., movement, sound, touch, smell) used as communication within the different species,
such as the „dancing‟ of bees, the whistle patterns of dolphins, and cries and calls of various primates.
Child language
The type of language spoken by young children who are still learning their mother tongue.
Child language is different from adult language in many ways. For example:
1. different sentence structures, e.g. Why not coming you? Instead of Why aren’t you coming?
2. different word forms, e.g., goed instead of went, mouses instead of mice.
Differences like these show that children have their own set of rules, and do not learn language by simply
imitating adults.
Aphasia (Also, dysphasia)

Loss of the ability to use and understand language, usually caused by damage to the brain. The loss may be total
or partial and may affect spoken and/or written language ability.
There are different types of aphasia: agraphia is difficulty in writing; alexia is difficulty in reading; anomia is
difficulty in using proper nouns; and agrammatism is difficulty in using grammatical words like prepositions,
articles, etc.
5. Language, dialect, and variety
We have seen that sociolinguists seek out linguistic variation and attempt to describe and explain it. A language,
such as English, exhibits internal variation. This means it takes on many different forms or varieties; it varies
geographically in the way it is spoken in different countries such as the UK, the USA, and Australia. People who
come from different English-speaking countries around the world, or from different geographical regions within
6 those countries, not only pronounce words differently, but also display regular lexical, phonological and syntactic
differences from Standard English. Similarly, people belonging to different social classes, age groups, genders,
and ethnicities within those countries show similar systematic differences. Each language has got its own
regional and social dialects as well as style, register, and genre.
Linguistic variety
The fact that a language exhibits internal variation means that it exists in a number of varieties and it is the sum
of those varieties. In sociolinguistics, the term variety is used as a general and neutral term to denote a way of
speaking or any form of a language (pronunciation, grammar, vocabular) that is seen as systematically distinct
from others. It can include the standard and the vernacular, a dialect of a specific region or a social dialect, as
well as functionally distinctive language such as legalese (or legal English), or situationally defined speech such
as cocktail party talk.
A variety is a set of linguistic items (sounds, words, grammatical features) whose use is governed by regional,
social, situational or occupational variables. Varieties of English include (among others) British English,
American English, Welsh English, Cockney English, formal English, colloquial English, scientific English,
religious English, legal English, lower-class New York city English, etc.
Language and dialect

One distinction that is often made both by lay people and by sociolinguists is the one between a language and a
dialect. A language can be defined as a system composed of arbitrary agreed-upon elements that a particular
society (that is, any group of people who are drawn together for a certain purpose or purposes) uses for
communication. A dialect can be defined as a language variety in which the use of grammar, vocabulary and
pronunciation identifies the regional or social background of the user.
The question is: How can a dialect be differentiated from a language?
Size
There are several points of judgment or criteria that may be considered. First, in terms of their sheer size, a
language is bigger than a dialect. This could mean that geographically speaking, a language is spoken over a
larger area than a dialect. Alternatively, it could mean that more people speak a language in comparison to those
who speak a dialect. So, in terms of population of native speakers, a language is spoken by a larger population of
people than a dialect. Dialects are often considered subsets of a language. In other words, a language contains
many dialects.
This can also mean that a language contains more items than one dialect (more lexical items, grammatical
constructions, phonological features). For example, English is spoken in various dialects. There is a difference of
size, because a language is larger than a dialect. A language contains more items than any of its dialects. This is
the sense in which English is considered a language. A language contains the sum total of all the terms in all its
dialects. Therefore, we can say that in terms of size, a dialect is a subordinate variety of a language.
Prestige
Another way in which the requirement of subordination is met is through the criterion of prestige (a necessary
property of languages). So, the other contrast between a language and a dialect is a question of prestige. A
language has prestige which a dialect lacks. Whether some variety is called a language or a dialect depends on
how much prestige one thinks it has, and for most people this is a clear-cut matter, which depends on whether it
is used in formal writing. Accordingly, people refer to languages which are unwritten as dialects, or „mere
dialects.‟
A related idea is that a language is usually understood to be the standard form of a given language and a dialect
is usually understood to be a nonstandard form or substandard form.
The standard language
The standard language is actually an idealized variety, because it is not associated with any specific geographical
region. It is the variety which is learned and accepted as correct across a community or set of communities. It is
the variety associated with administrative, governmental, commercial and educational circles, regardless of
region. Standard English, for example, is the variety of English used as a standard throughout the English-
speaking countries. It is the version that is widely used in the mass media and is taught in schools. It is the variety
taught to learners of English as a second or foreign language. It is clearly associated with education and
broadcasting in public contexts and is more easily described in terms of the written language (i.e., vocabulary,
spelling, grammar) than the spoken language.
If we are thinking of that general variety used in public broadcasting in the USA, we refer more specifically to
Standard American English or, in the UK, to Standard British English. In other parts of the world, we can talk
about other recognized varieties such as Standard Australian English, or Standard Canadian English.
The standard language, in which prescriptive grammar guides usage in formal contexts, is a fact of life in modern
society. Since business and professional communities ascribe to the ideal, most people would be well advised to
7 become consciously aware of the differences between the colloquial version of English acquired naturally by
children and the standardized form of the language that help someone communicate effectively in various formal
contexts as well as enhance one‟s employability.
So, the standard is the prestige variety of language used within a speech community, providing the norm for such
purposes as the media and language teaching. Linguistic forms or dialects that do not conform to this norm are

often called substandard or nonstandard. Standardization is the natural development of a standard language
in a speech community, or an attempt by a community to impose one dialect as a standard.
In this way, a language may be regarded as the correct form of given speech while a dialect is somehow inferior
or less correct from a prescriptive point of view.
While there is a need to be aware of the natural variation that occurs in English across time, social situation, and
social group, we need also to recognize the importance of Standard English and the need for mastering it.
Standard English is the variety of English that many people in the economic mainstream and predominant social
culture of the English-speaking world speak and write. Standard English is the variety of English that grammar
books describe. It is standard not in the sense that it is better than other varieties but in the sense that it is a
widely recognized and codified version of English. Standard English is also sometimes referred to as the
Language of Wider Communication.
Mutual intelligibility
Another frequently used criterion is that of Mutual Intelligibility (a necessary property of dialects). It refers to
the ability of people to understand one another. If two varieties of speech are mutually intelligible, they are
strictly dialects of the same language; if they are mutually unintelligible, they are different languages. In other
words, if one person can understand another, they must be speaking dialects of the same language while if one
person does not understand the other person, they must be speaking different languages. Therefore, dialects are
often regarded to have mutual intelligibility.
Dialect and accent

Whether people think they speak a standard variety of English or not, they all speak with an accent. It is not
accurate to say that some speakers have accents while others do not. We might feel that some speakers have very
distinct or easily recognized types of accent while others may have more subtle accents or less noticeable
accents, but every language user speaks with an accent.
Technically, the term accent is restricted to the description of aspects of pronunciation that identify where an
individual speaker is from, regionally or socially. It is different from the term dialect, which is used to describe
features of grammar and vocabulary as well as aspects of pronunciation. So, the term “dialect” should not be
confused with the term “accent”. While “accent” refers to pronunciation only, “dialect” refers to every aspect of
language including pronunciation.
Standard English is spoken in a variety of accents, with clear regional associations. We may speak of the
American accent as against the British accent, the Canadian accent, the Indian accent or the Irish accent. Within
the UK, we may speak of the southern British accent as against the northern British accent, of the West Midlands
accent or the Black Country accent. In the USA, there are accents associated with the Greater New York City,
New England and North Central US, South-eastern US, and Western US.
One aspect of pronunciation that sets these English accents apart is whether they are rhotic or non-rhotic or R-
dropping. In Rhotic accents of English, /r/ is pronounced following a vowel, in such words as car, bird, early. A
geographical area in which this sound is used (such as much of south-west England, Scotland and Ireland) is
called a rhotic area to be distinguished from non-rhotic areas (most of England, Wales, Australia and New
Zealand). American English is generally spoken with a rhotic accent, despite the fact that we can hear some non-
rhotic accents in New England and north-central United States.
Thus, we can say that many people who live in such places speak Standard English (because they show
remarkable uniformity in vocabulary and grammar) and the differences are merely those of accent. So, they do
not speak different dialects but one variety (Standard English) with different accents.
Received Pronunciation
One English accent which has received a certain eminence is the accent known as Received
Pronunciation (or RP). This accent is used by a small number of people in England. This accent is usually
associated with a higher social or educational background, with the BBC, and is taught to students learning
English as a second language. Other names for this accent are the Queen‟s English, Oxford English, and BBC
English. The small number of speakers who use RP do not identify themselves as coming from any particular
geographical region. RP is a non-localized accent.
It is impossible to speak English without an accent. RP is an accent, a social rather than a regional one.
Regional dialects
8 Regional dialects are varieties of a language spoken in distinct geographical areas or regions. One of the most
noticeable ways in which we observe variety in language is regional variation in the way a language is spoken.
Regional variation is based on geography.
As we travel throughout a wide geographical area in which a language is spoken, we are almost certain to notice
differences in pronunciation, in the choices and forms of words, and in syntax; such distinctive varieties are
usually called regional dialects of a language.

As we have seen above, one of the criteria used in the study of dialects is mutual intelligibility; dialects typically
display mutual intelligibility. Despite occasional difficulties, there is a general impression of mutual
intelligibility among many speakers of different dialects of English. This criterion is used to distinguish between
different dialects of the same language (whose speakers can usually understand each other) and two different
languages (whose speakers cannot understand each other). It is important to recognize, from a linguistic point of
view, that none of the varieties of a language is inherently “better” than any other. They are simply different.
Regional dialects may be arranged in a dialect continuum, a range of dialects distributed geographically across a
territory, such that adjacent varieties are mutually intelligible but those at the extremes are not. In other words,
while dialects at either end of a country may not be mutually intelligible, those that are geographically
contiguous will be, thus providing a continuum of mutual intelligibility across dialects of a language. The
term dialect chain is used similarly. One such continuum is said to stretch from Amsterdam in the Netherlands
through Germany to Vienna in Austria, and another from Paris in France to the south of Italy.
Speakers who move back and forth across border areas (such as between Holland, Germany and Austria or
France and Italy), using different dialects with some ease, may be described as bidialectal (i.e., speaking two
dialects). Most of us grow up with some form of bidialectalism, speaking one dialect “in the street” among
family and friends, and having to learn another dialect “in school.” However, in some places, there are different
languages used in the street and in school. When we talk about people knowing two distinct languages, we
describe them as bilingual.
Dialectology
Dialectology (also known as dialect geography) is the systematic study of geographical dialects: e.g., in the
preparation of a dialect atlas, or of dialect grammars or dialect dictionaries of specific varieties. Within
dialectology, the existence of different regional dialects is widely recognized. Dialectologists have been involved
in the serious investigation of regional dialects and have devoted a lot of research to the identification of
consistent features of speech found in one geographical area compared to another.
6. Language and social variation
Social dialects
Whereas the traditional study of regional dialects tended to concentrate on the speech of people in rural areas, the
study of social dialects has been mainly concerned with speakers in towns and cities. The term „dialect‟ can also
be used to describe differences in speech associated with various social groups or classes. Regional dialects are
geographically based while social dialects originate among social groups and are related to a variety of factors
which include social class, ethnicity, gender, and age. Like regional dialects, social dialects comprise regular
differences in vocabulary, grammar and pronunciation.
Social dialects are investigated within what is called social dialectology. Social dialectology examines how ways
of speaking are linked to social differences within a particular area or country by considering such factors as
socio-economic class, ethnicity, gender, and age. Thus, social differentiation can take different forms based on
these variables. One particular type of social differentiation is based on social stratification. Social stratification
is a term used to refer to any hierarchical ordering of groups within a society. In the industrialized societies of the
West, this takes the form of stratification into social classes and gives rise linguistically to social-class
dialects (or sociolects).
Language and social class
In the social study of dialects, it is social class that is mainly used to define groups of speakers as having
something in common. Social class may be defined primarily by wealth, circumstances of birth, occupation, or
education (or by all these criteria).
Two main groups are generally distinguished and they are identified as middle class - those who have more years
of education and perform non-manual work, and working class - those who have fewer years of education and
perform manual work of some kind. The speech of a given social class is reflected in the social dialect that its
members speak. So, when we refer to “working-class speech,” we are talking about a social dialect. The terms
“upper” and “lower” are used to further subdivide the groups, mainly on an economic basis, making “upper-
middle-class speech” another type of social dialect or sociolect. The social dialect one speaks reveals one‟s social
status.
The role of education
9 Although the unique circumstances of every individual‟s life result in each of us having an individual way of
speaking, a personal dialect or idiolect, we generally tend to sound like others with whom we share similar
educational backgrounds and/or occupations.
Among those who leave the educational system at an early age, there is a general pattern of using certain forms
that are relatively infrequent in the speech of those who pursue and complete their high studies at the university.
For example, in English, the grammatical feature of double negation, in which more than one negative word is

used within the same clause (e.g., I didn’t give him nothing.), is generally associated with speakers who have
spent less time in education. Similarly, -s dropping (dropping the third-person singular -s morpheme in the
present simple) (e.g., He play football. instead of He plays football.) indicates a low educational level.
Those who spend more time in the educational system tend to have more features in their spoken language that
derive from a lot of time spent with written language and the standard variety. In the English-speaking world
(the UK, the USA, Australia, New Zealand, Canada and South Africa), members of the upper class, thanks to the
many years spent in education, end up developing a social dialect which is very close to the standard variety.
This resulting social dialect clearly sets them apart from the working-class group.
As adults, the outcome of time in the educational system is usually reflected in one‟s occupation and socio-
economic status. This is, in turn, reflected in the social dialect that one uses. For example, the way professionals
(such as bank executives, physicians, or engineers), as opposed to blue-collar workers (such as window cleaners,
construction workers, or handymen), talk to each other usually provides linguistic evidence for the significance
of these social dialects.
Social markers
The presence or absence of features such -s dropping or double negation in one‟s speech marks the speaker as a
member of a particular social group, whether one realizes it or not. Features like these are referred to as social
markers. A social marker can be defined as any feature of a person‟s speech seen as reflecting and indicating her
or his status in a society.
One feature that seems to be a fairly stable indication of lower class and less education, throughout the English-
speaking world, is the final pronunciation of -ing with [n] rather than [Ƞ] at the end of words such
as sitting and drinking. Pronunciations represented by [sɪtɪn] and [drɪnkɪn] are typically associated with working-
class speech.
Another social marker is called “[h]-dropping,” which makes the words „at‟ and „hat‟ sound the same. It occurs at
the beginning of words and can result in utterances that sound like I’m so ‘ungry I could eat an ‘orse („I‟m so
hungry I could eat a horse‟). In contemporary English, this feature is associated with lower class and less
education.
Language and ethnicity: Ethnic dialects
Ethnicity is generally understood in the social sciences to mean common, or shared, characteristics attributed to
common descent. As the term „ethnicity‟ encompasses a distinct culture, a seemingly natural correlation is often
assumed between genetic lineage and cultural identity. Culture is conceived of in the anthropological sense as
involving a total way of life. The total way of life includes not only a set of distinct everyday customs, values,
norms and attitudes, but also a unique historical group experience. A distinct culture is a manifestation of a
group‟s distinct historical experience.
A multi-ethnic speech community (such as the US or the UK) may pattern in several different ways with respect
to language use: (1) subgroups in the community may use only their minority ethnic language(s); (2) minority
group members may be bilingual in their ethnic language(s) and the dominant language; or (3) minority group
members may be monolingual in the dominant group. In conditions (2) and (3), members of minority groups who
identify themselves as such often speak a distinctive variety of the dominant language. This distinctive variety is
what is referred to as an ethnic dialect. It is usually interpreted simply as arising from the influence of the ethnic
language(s). Indeed, linguistic features may be maintained and cultivated (consciously or unconsciously) as
ethnic markers of ethnic identity. These markers of ethnicity may occur at levels of phonology, vocabulary and
morphosyntax.
African American Vernacular English
African American Vernacular English (AAVE), also known as Black English Vernacular or Ebonics, is a
variety used by (not all) African Americans in different regions in the USA. It has a number of characteristic
features that, taken together, form a distinct set of ethnic markers.
The term vernacular has been used to characterize any non-standard spoken version of a language used by lower
status groups. So, the vernacular is a general expression for a kind of social dialect, typically spoken by a lower-
status group, which is treated as “non-standard” because of marked differences from the “standard” language.
Some features of African American Vernacular English

What linguistic features are specific to AAVE?
On the phonological level, consonant clusters are reduced; words such as taste, best, bask, pint etc. may be
10 pronounced without their final consonants. Another feature is: /ai/ monophthongization: the diphthong /ai/
becomes a monophthong (e.g., I’ll do it is pronounced /al du it/ and I’ve been busy. as /av bin bizi/). On the
morphological level, verbal -s marking is absent (-s dropping) (e.g., He hate cheese instead of He hates
cheese.) Syntactically, AAVE is characterized by the double negation, as in he don’t know nothin or I ain’t
afraid of no ghosts. Another salient feature is the zero copula., i.e. be is often deleted (e.g. He tall instead of He
is tall, She workin now instead of She is working now). Still another feature of AAVE is called habitual

be or ‘invariant’ be: the copula be is not conjugated but used in its base form for all subjects (e.g. I be nice; she
be nice; they be nice). It is called habitual‟ because it marks an action which is done repeatedly. For example, in
the utterance They be watching a movie every evening means that they get together every evening and watch a
movie. The “invariant be” of AAVE is generally recognized as an ethnic marker.
As the vernacular language of African Americans, AAVE shares a number of features with other non-standard
varieties, such as “Chicano English”, spoken in some Hispanic American communities in the USA.
Individual speakers born into the ethnic group – or the entire group membership – can generally succeed in
eliminating all ethnic markers in their speech if they desire to fully assimilate to the dominant group, or they can
develop both marked and unmarked varieties and shift between them depending on desired group identification
in specific situations.
Language and gender
Another type of variation in language use that is systematically studied in sociolinguistics is the one related to
gender. Gender may be defined as a social category or identity that is based on a person‟s sex either as a
biological trait or as a socially constructed category. The term genderlect is used to refer to the speech of women
and men.
In many speech communities, women and men have been observed to speak differently. This is gender-related
variation in language use. Many researchers have observed that women prefer more the standard forms (the
overtly prestigious forms) and men usually use vernacular forms. Across all social groups in Western societies,
women generally use more standard grammatical forms than men and men tend to use more vernacular forms
than women. For instance, multiple negation (e.g., I don’t know nothing about it), a vernacular feature of speech,
is more frequent in men‟s speech than in women‟s speech. This pattern has been found in western speech
communities all over the world. So, why does female and male speech differ in this way? What is the explanation
for it? Why do women use more standard forms than men?
Different (though not mutually exclusive) explanations have been suggested. Some linguists have suggested that
women use more standard speech forms than men because they are more status-conscious than men. They claim
that women are more aware of the fact that the way they speak signals their social class background or social
status in the community. Standard speech forms are generally associated with high social status, and so,
according to this explanation, women use more standard speech forms as a way of claiming such status. A second
explanation for the fact that women use more standard forms than men is related to social expectations and
norms. Society tends to expect „better‟ behaviour from women than from men and this is reflected in women
adopting the prestigious forms. A third explanation of the question „why don‟t men use more standard forms?‟ is
that men prefer vernacular forms because they carry macho connotations of masculinity and toughness. If this is
true, it would also explain why many women might not want to use such forms.
Language and age: age-graded variation
There are features of people‟s speech which vary at different ages. This kind of variation is called age-graded
variation in speech. In other words, age-graded features of speech habits within a community are associated
with age. Age-grading occurs when individuals change their linguistic behaviour throughout their lifetimes. Age-
grading can be studied in the way that children, adolescents, young adults, and the elderly speak. Age-graded
changes recur at a particular age in successive generations and are regular and predictable changes. These
changes are thought to mark developmental/maturational stages in the individual‟s life. Thus, age-grading may
be defined as the idea that some aspects of language use change over time within the speech of individuals; that
is, they may use a particular feature when younger and then not use this feature when they reach adulthood.
When children are first exposed to language, their model in this process is their mother and/or primary
caretakers. When they grow older, they adopt a different norm in the preadolescent and adolescent years.
Adolescents tend to increase their use of vernacular forms to differentiate themselves from the adult population.
Not only pitch, but vocabulary, pronunciation and grammar can differentiate age groups. There are patterns
which are appropriate for adolescents which disappear as they grow older. These are age-graded patterns. For
example, one feature which characterizes adolescents‟ language use is the extensive use of swear
word vocabulary. This feature is likely to change over time. The frequency with which they use such words
tends to diminish as they grow older. Slang is another area of vocabulary which reflects a person‟s age. Current
slang is the linguistic prerogative of young people. Linguistic features that are age-graded are typically
stigmatized. These features generally sound odd in the mouth of an older person. They signal membership of a
particular group – the young.
11
How can age-graded variation in speech be explained?
Non-prestigious age-graded linguistic features tend to peak during adolescence when peer group pressure not to
conform to society‟s norms is greatest. The use of standard or prestige forms peaks between the ages of 30 and
55. When people reach middle age, they tend to follow societal norms because that is when the societal pressure
to conform is greatest. At this stage of life, people become more conservative and use the fewest vernacular

forms. Non-prestigious forms may resurface in old age when people are out of the workforce and societal
pressures are reduced.
Adults have been shown to be more conservative in their use of linguistic items. This has been attributed to the
desired use of standard language which is used in the workplace. Adolescents tend to use more slang and swear
words, but these features recede as they become adults. Although middle-aged adults have conservative speech,
older adults tend to have less formal speech. Older men and women who are past the age of retirement and no
longer in the workforce also have less formal speech because of reduced social pressure to conform.
7. Speech style, registers, and genres
Speech styles
The study of language variation is further complicated by the fact that speakers can adopt different styles of
speaking in different situations. Speech style refers to a distinctive way of communication which consists in
making certain choices of lexical items, features of grammar and pronunciation. Each set of these choices can
form a distinct speech style.
At times, speakers are more careful and at times they are more relaxed. They can speak very formally or very
informally. The choice is determined by the relative formality of the occasion. Ceremonial occasions require very
formal speech, public lectures somewhat less formal, casual conversations quite informal, and conversations
between intimates on matters of little importance may be extremely informal and casual. Variation in speech can
be described on a scale from the maximally formal to the maximally colloquial. These various levels of style
form a natural continuum from the highly formal to the extremely informal.
Compare choice of words, features of grammar and pronunciation in the following situations: sermon, a public
speech, a task group meeting to come up with a solution to a problem, a family gathering over the dinner table, a
naturally occurring conversation between two friends, and talk between two significant others. We are likely to
notice differences in the use of words, grammar, and pronunciation in these different situations.
Stylistic variation can be defined as differences in the speech or writing of a person or group of people
according to the relative formality of the situation. Stylistic variation can be observed in pronunciation, the use of
different words or expressions, or different sentence structures.
The most basic distinction in speech style is between formal uses and informal uses. Formal style is when we pay
more careful attention to how we are speaking and informal style is when we pay less attention. They are
sometimes described as careful style and casual style. A change from one style to the other by an individual is
called style-shifting.
There are two possible accounts for the consistency of style-shifting across individuals in a speech community.
The first is the suggestion that people pay more or less attention to their speech when they are engaged in
different kinds of verbal tasks. Style-shifting is explained by reference to the dimension of formality. The more
formal the situation, the more attention is paid to language and to the standard and prestigious norms associated
with education and literacy. The more informal the situation, the less attention is paid to language and to the
prestigious norms.
Audience design
Another idea that has been put forth to account for style-shifting is that speakers have an audience in mind, and
they design their speech to suit that audience (Bell, 1984). Audience design can be defined as the behaviour of
speakers in adjusting their style of speaking to the nature of whoever they may be addressing. A speaker who can
control more than one variety chooses a level of speech according to the audience the speaker is addressing. This
concept can be illustrated by two specific cases.
Case 1: Child-directed speech

One case which illustrates this idea of audience design is when adults design their language to fit the level of
young children. The resulting language is referred to as Child-directed Speech or Care-giver language (also
called Motherese, Parentese, Baby Talk, Caretaker speech). Child-directed speech can be defined as a form of
speech used especially by caregivers (including parents, siblings, and others) in talking to very young children. It
is the language spoken to young children by the people who look after them.
In general, such language is spoken slowly and clearly. Adults talk in a simplified way to young children, taking
care to make their speech easily recognizable. The topics of sentences tend to focus on the „here and now‟ and
the use of phonologically simplified, made-up „baby words (e.g., „gee-gee‟ for a horse „moo‟ for a cow, „baa‟ for
12 a sheep). The utterances are short.
Case 2: Elder-directed speech

Another case of audience design is illustrated by Elder-directed speech (or Elderspeak). Elderspeak is a speech
style used in many different contexts by young people when talking to elder adults. Both volunteers and
professional caregivers engage in elderspeak when interacting with the elderly. Elderspeak is characterized by

simpler vocabulary and sentence structure, shorter sentences, over-endearing terms (such as sweetheart, dearie,
or honey), using the collective “we” (in place of you, e.g., How are today?), repetition, and speaking more slowly
and more loudly.
Elderspeak stems from the stereotype that older people have reduced cognitive abilities in language
comprehension and production and suffer from memory problems, hearing problems, or energy problems. Its use
may be a result of ageism. Although some aspects of elderspeak may be beneficial to some recipients, it may be
considered as expressing a condescending attitude towards the elderly. It is generally seen as inappropriate and a
hindrance to intergeneration communication.
Speech accommodation
A related concept is the notion of speech accommodation (first proposed by Howard Giles in the 1970s). Speech
accommodation can be defined as a speakers‟ ability to modify their speech style to become similar to or
different from the perceived style of the person(s) they‟re talking to. We may adapt to the style of our
interlocutor, i.e., adjust our speech to be more like that of our interlocutor; we can adopt a speech style that
attempts to reduce social distance and use forms that are similar to those used by the person we‟re talking to.
This is described as convergence. In contrast, a speech style may be used to emphasize social distance between
speakers. We may wish to dissociate from a conversational partner by adopting a speech style which is different
from that of our interlocutor. We can make our speech style diverge from another‟s by using forms that are
distinctly different. This is called divergence.
Convergence serves to express approval and even liking of an interlocutor; it may also serve to achieve
solidarity. Divergence serves to express disapproval and dissociation from an interlocutor. This perspective
highlights the importance of language in establishing social relations and in representing a speaker‟s sense of
identity.
For example, an American English speaker and a British English speaker may adopt features of each other‟s
speech (i.e., converge) or they may exaggerate the features of their respective regional dialects (i.e., diverge).
Similarly, in England, an upper middle-class speaker may use features of the low working-class social dialect
when interacting with a member of that class. This is an example of convergence.
Registers: varieties associated with activity domain

We have seen that the term „dialect‟ concerns variations that are located regionally or socially. The term „style‟
refers to differences in degree of formality. The term „register‟ concerns varieties associated with a profession,
occupation or other interests. It is an in-group variety. Included in this category are varieties of language which
serve the wide-ranging purposes of groups that are organized along lines of occupation, skills or training, and
interests, and which are used in the conduct of their affairs. These activity domains are very diverse. They
include occupations of various sorts, hobbies and special interests, and secret societies. Each of these has its own
register.
One of the defining features of a register is the use of a jargon, which is a special technical vocabulary
associated with a specific area of work or interest. People who work at a particular trade or occupation develop
new terms for new concepts. For example, surgeons, airline pilots, bankers, lawyers, engineers, biologists, etc.
employ different registers. These special terms seem to facilitate easy and speedy communication among the
members.
A specialized jargon serves not just to label new and needed concepts, but to establish bonds between members
of the in-group and enforce boundaries for outsiders. In social terms, a jargon helps to create and maintain
connections among the members and to exclude others who do not belong to the group. This exclusive effect can
be clearly seen in the medical jargon (e.g., Zanoxyn is a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug for arthritis,
bursitis and tendonitis).
Register is closely connected with the concept of Community of practice.
Community of practice can be defined as a group of people who share a concern or a passion for something they
do and learn how to do it better as they interact regularly. This concept is very broad. It applies to a group of
engineers who learn how to design better devices or a group of civil servants who seek to improve service to
citizens or a street gang whose members learn how to survive in a hostile world. Let us consider two examples of
register in English: the legal register and the medical register.
13 Some Features of the legal register (or legalese) in English

*Legal English employs a great deal of technical terminology which is unfamiliar to the layman
(e.g., waiver, restraint of trade, restrictive covenant, etc.). This makes legal English difficult to understand.
These technical terms may include ordinary words used with special meanings. For example, the familiar
word consideration refers, in legal English, to contracts and means. Other examples
include construction, prefer, redemption, furnish, hold and find.

*Another characteristic of legalese is the use of binomials: two or three words that are put together to convey
what is usually a single meaning (e.g., null and void, fit and proper, due care and attention, terms and
conditions, dispute, controversy or claim, and promise, agree and covenant).
*The length and complexity of sentences are the most obvious syntactic features. Sentences include a great deal
of information, repetitiveness, long noun phrases with plenty of modification, prepositional phrases, as well as
coordinate and subordinate clauses.
*The passive voice is inherent in legal language.
*Nominalization: nouns derived from verbs are often used instead of verbs, such as the use of the
noun consideration instead of to consider, to be in opposition rather than to oppose, to be in agreement rather
than to agree.
*Foreign phrases are sometimes used instead of English phrases (e.g., inter alia instead of among others).
Some features of the medical register
 Medical jargon: medical technical terms that cannot be understood by lay people.
 Long and complicated sentences: unnecessary words leading to redundancy and superfluous
ornamentation of medical statements which obscure the key message. Hence, it will be difficult for
readers to comprehend what is written.
 Overuse of the passive voice
*Nominalization: tendency to turn verbs into nouns. There is the tendency to use nouns derived from verbs
instead of the verb itself (e.g., examination, analysis, investigation, study and performance).
Genre
Register is a language variety which is associated with a specific activity domain. Genre focuses more on the text
type. The term genre has been used for many years to refer to different types of literary text such as lyric,
narrative, or dramatic genres. A literary genre is a recognizable category of written work with its established
conventions. It highlights the fact that different types of texts can be identified by their overall shape or generic
structure.
Recently, the term has been adapted by functional linguists to refer to different types of text (whether literary or
not) such as sermons, political speeches or media texts (such as advertisements or news reporting).
An established genre has a number of established conventions:
1. Each genre has a widely acknowledged purpose, addressing some particular need or question in target
audiences.
2. A genre tends to have a standard structure, or lay-out, with predefined components appearing in a certain
order.
3. A genre tends to dictate a style by convention.
Compare, e.g., a news article, an advertisement, and a novel.

You should have noticed that these texts belong to different genres. A news article‟s purpose is to inform; it has
an established structure or lay-out and it has a certain style (e.g., containing facts, avoiding repetition and
presenting information in a clear way). An advertisement belongs to a different genre. Its purpose is to persuade a
target audience to follow a certain course of action, namely, to buy a certain product or service. It has a different
lay-out and makes use of a different style (e.g., not necessarily containing facts, using a lot of repetition, and a
heavy use of commands). A novel belongs to yet a different genre. Unlike a news article and an advertisement, it
is fictitious; it has a different lay-out and uses a different style (e.g., making use of adjectives and adverbs in
order to depict vivid pictures and it appeals to the five senses).
Ways of speaking (such as dialects and registers) require a certain socialization into a particular social group or
occupational group. Genre, by contrast, requires an acquired familiarity with certain norms of language used in
particular contexts and for specific functions.
8. Stages of First Language Acquisition
14
As we have seen, one of the fundamental tasks of psycholinguistics is to explain language acquisition, i.e., the
learning and development of a person‟s language. The learning of a native first language is called First
Language Acquisition (FLA), and of a second or foreign language, Second Language Acquisition (SLA).
Language acquisition applies to the process or result of learning a first language by children (FLA) and to the
learning of further languages (SLA).

FLA is the process of acquiring a first language. A first language is the language first acquired by a child. It is
acquired naturally during childhood, usually because it is the primary language of a child‟s family or household.
A child who grows up in a multilingual setting may have more than one “first” language. A first language is also
called native language, mother tongue, or L1. In order to gain a broad understanding of FLA, we consider one
of its major aspects: its stages.
Stages of FLA
Several stages in the early acquisition process have been identified. Let us go through these stages. The term
„stages‟ refers to recognizable periods in the process of first language acquisition. At every stage of development,
child language exhibits specific linguistic patterns which are uniform. All normal children develop language at
roughly the same time, along much the same schedule. The stages of first language acquisition can be divided
into prelinguistic stages and linguistic stages.
Crying and cooing (from birth to 6 months)
At birth, the first stage of language acquisition is referred to as crying and cooing. This stage extends from birth
to six months. The period from 0 to 3 months is characterized by crying. During the first three months, the child
develops a range of crying styles, with different patterns for different needs (such as need for food and care).
By 3 months, the child is able to bring back the tongue into regular contact with the back of the palate (or velum)
and this allows the infant to create sounds similar to the velar consonants [k] and [g] and gradually becomes
capable of producing sequences of vowel-like sounds, particularly high vowel sounds similar to [i] and [u], hence
the common description as “cooing” or “gooing” for this type of production.
Most scholars agree that the earliest cries and cooing noises of the newly born infant cannot be considered early
language. Such noises are completely stimulus controlled: they are the child‟s involuntary responses to hunger,
discomfort, the desire to be cuddled, or the feeling of well-being. A major property of human language is its
creativity, in the sense of being free from either external or internal stimuli. During the earliest period, the noises
produced by infants in all language communities SOUND THE SAME. This clearly shows that these noises are
not language.
Babbling (from 6 months to 12 months)
The babbling stage covers the period extending from six months to one year. The child is sitting up and
producing a number of different vowels and consonants, as well as combinations such as „ba-ba-ba‟, „da-da-da‟
and „ga-ga-ga‟ (apart from the continuing stimulus-controlled cries). This type of sound production is described
as babbling. Nasal sounds also become more common. Certain syllable sequences such as „ma-ma-ma‟ and „da-
da-da‟ are interpreted by parents as versions of “mama” and “dada” and repeated back to the child. This use of
sound provides the child with some experience of the social role of speech because adults tend to react to
babbling as if it is actually the child‟s contribution to social interaction.
Babbling is the earliest stage in FLA. Babbling is not prelinguistic. One view suggests that it is during this period
that children are learning to distinguish between the sounds of their language and the sounds which are not part
of the language. During the babbling period, children learn to maintain the “right” sounds and suppress the
“wrong” ones. Besides, the babbling stage allows children to train their speech organs.
Single words: the one-word stage (from 12 to 15 months)
After one year, children begin to use the same sequence of sounds repeatedly to “mean” the same thing. They
have learned that sounds are related to meaning, and they are producing their first words. Most children seem to
go through “the one-word = one sentence” stage. The one-word “sentences” are called holophrastic sentences.
At this stage, the child uses only one word to express concepts or predications that will later be expressed by
phrases and sentences.
A holophrase is a single word which represents a whole phrase or sentence in early child language, as in “No”
meaning “I don‟t want to go to bed”; “nana” to mean “I want a banana”; “mine” to mean “That‟s my shoe”.
15 During this early one-word stage, the twin phenomena of under-extension and over-extension are features of
children‟s word use. Under-extension is a case in which the child acquires a word for a particular thing and fails
to extend it to other objects in the same category. For example, if a child uses the word „dog‟ to refer only to the
family pet and not to the neighbour‟s dog and all dogs, this would be an instance of under-extension. Over-
extension is more common. Over-extension is when the child extends a word incorrectly to other similar things.
For example, a child might call all four-legged animals „doggie‟, or everything that is bright „light‟.

More examples of over-extensions:
„Moon‟ to refer to cakes, round marks on windows, letter „O‟
„Ball‟ to refer to anything round like apples, grapes, eggs
„Stick‟ to refer to all stick-like objects such as cane, umbrella, ruler
„Horse‟ to refer to all four-legged animals such as cows and pigs
Two-word utterances: the two-word stage (from 18 months to 2 years)
Around 18 months, and as children leave the one-word stage, their vocabulary development speeds up and they
begin to combine words to form small sentences. Children begin to produce two-word utterances. During this
stage, there are no syntactic or morphological markers – that is, no inflections for number, person, tense and so
on. The child starts to produce utterances exhibiting rudimentary combinations of words, e.g., “mummy ball” to
mean “mummy has got the ball” or “mummy, bring me the ball”, “mummy, I want that ball, “mummy, where is
my ball?”
There does not seem to be any “three-word” sentence stage. When a child starts putting more than two words
together, the utterances may be two, three, four or five words longer.
The first utterances of children larger than two words have a special characteristic. “Function” words (such as
„to‟, „the‟ „can‟, „is‟) are missing; only the words that carry the main message – the “content” words – occur.
Such utterances are sometimes called telegraphic speech (e.g., “Cathy build house”). Apart from lacking
grammatical morphemes, such utterances appear to be “sentence-like”.
Function words and inflections (from 2 to 3 years)
The multi-word utterances are syntactically complete and express complete semantic units and trigger
appropriate responses from adults without much difficulty. Many researchers consider the multi-word stage
crucial for the development of child language as a whole. It is at this stage that children start to create their own
sentences in the sense that they often come up with sentences of their own.
Throughout the third year of life, as children produce sentences that more and more approximate the adult
grammar, they begin to use grammatical function words and also the inflectional morphemes of the language. For
example, they add the 3rd person singular -S morpheme (e.g., He wants an apple.), the past tense -ED morpheme
(e.g., I helped mummy.), the progressive -ING inflection (e.g., I am singing.) and the articles A and THE (e.g.,
He is a doctor.)
Questions and negatives (from 3 to 5 years)
As auxiliaries and copula BE enter the child‟s speech, so do modals and negative modals, such as „can‟t‟ and
„don‟t‟. Children at this stage rarely produce passive sentences but can form adult-type-questions and adult-type
negative sentences. By the age of four, most children can ask questions, use correct word order and grammatical
markers, and give commands. In fact, it is generally accepted that by age four, children have acquired the basic
structures of the language or languages spoken to them in these early years. They continue to learn vocabulary at
the rate of several words a day.
Rare or complex constructions (from 5 to 10 years)
At around the age of five, children begin to acquire less frequent and more complex linguistic structures such as
passives and relative clauses. This is a very important linguistic development because it means that the child has
developed the capacity of syntax – to create complex sentences out of simple ones. As children grow older, they
develop much more proficiency with language. Their processing capacity increases and their ability to produce
and interpret longer and more syntactically complex sentences improves. By eight years, the child can use
compound sentences with words like „and‟ or „but‟ to join sentences together. Vocabulary learning continues at a
rapid rate.
Mature speech (from 10 years to puberty)

16
The discrepancies between children‟s speech and that of the adults around them gradually disappears over the
next few years. By the age of about eleven, children exhibit a command of the structure of their language
comparable to that of adults. At the age of puberty, children‟s language development is essentially complete,
apart from vocabulary. Children would continue to accumulate lexical items throughout their life.

All children seem to pass through a series of similar stages or phases as they acquire their first language. The
milestones are normally reached in the same order and they give us an idea of a child‟s likely progress.
9. Theories of First Language Acquisition
Several theories have been put forth to explain the process by which children learn to understand and speak a
first language. It is important to bear in mind that these theories should not be seen as replacing one another,
conflicting or contradicting one another. Rather, they should be recognized as complementing one another. Each
theory has added to our overall understanding of First Language Acquisition, placing emphasis on different
aspects of the process. This chapter reviews three major theories: behaviourism, innateness, and interactionism.
Let us consider each theory in turn and see what it offers.
Behaviourism
Behaviourism is a theory of psychology which was predominant prior to the 1950s. It states that human and
animal behaviour can and should be studied only in terms of physical processes, without reference to
mind. Behaviourism was used by psychologists like B. F. Skinner to explain first language learning. Language
was considered just another behaviour that can be learned by general laws of behaviour, such
as imitation and reinforcement. Imitation and reinforcement were proposed as mechanisms by which children
could learn language. In other words, behaviourism suggested that children acquire language by imitating the
language of their parents or caregivers.
The role of imitation: Do children learn a first language by imitation?
Imitation is involved to some extent, of course. Imitation of adult speech (and that of other children) plays an
important role in acquiring aspects of pronunciation (such as accent and intonation). However, although children
imitate aspects of adult language, it is clear that imitation CANNOT BY ITSELF be a driving force of language
development, and particularly of syntactic development. An analysis of the sentences produced by children
shows that they cannot be imitating adults. Children make mistakes that adults do not. The sentences produced
by children show that they are not simply imitating adult speech. In other words, children do not just imitate
adults when they acquire language. This is clear from utterances produced by children such as “Mummy comed”
and “Me taked a bissy”, which could not have been copied from adults.
Another point is that there seems to be a great deal of individual variation when it comes to imitation during
language acquisition. It turns out that not all children imitate, and those who do imitate do not do it most of the
time. Moreover, there is no evidence that imitators acquire language any faster than non-imitators, nor is there
evidence that the children of adults who regularly encourage imitation acquire language any faster than other
children.
The role of reinforcement: Do children learn an L1 by reinforcement?
Another behaviourist proposal highlights the role of reward and reinforcement in First Language Acquisition. It
suggests that children learn to produce “correct” sentences because they are positively reinforced when they say a
correct utterance and negatively reinforced when they say an incorrect utterance. The idea of reward and
reinforcement can be understood as approval or disapproval by parents and caregivers. One might suppose that a
parent smiles and says “Yes dear, that‟s right” when a child makes a correct utterance. Successful attempts by the
child are rewarded because an adult who recognizes a word spoken by a child will praise the child and/or give the
child what it is asking for. Successful utterances are therefore reinforced while unsuccessful ones are forgotten.
This view assumes that children are being constantly corrected for using “bad grammar” and rewarded when they
use “good grammar”. Various researchers report from their studies that reinforcement seldom occurs. In addition,
attempts to “correct” a child‟s language seems to be doomed to failure. Children do not know what they are
doing wrong and are unable to make corrections even when they are pointed out. Explicit correction of
inappropriate utterances DOES NOT play any significant role in FLA.
Innateness
The prominent American linguist Noam Chomsky published a criticism of the behaviourist theory in 1957.
According to him, children have an inborn faculty for language acquisition. This is referred to as
the Innateness Hypothesis. According to this hypothesis, First Language Acquisition is grammar
construction. Children are guided in this complex process of grammar construction by an innate natural
capacity. The human brain is specially equipped from birth for acquisition of human language grammars. The
genetic makeup for language consists of abstract universal principles or what is called Universal
17 Grammar (UG) (formerly called Language Acquisition Device). Every child is born with knowledge of a set
of principles which apply to all languages.
Therefore, the process of FLA is biologically determined – the human species has evolved a brain which contains
linguistic information at birth. The newly born infant‟s natural predisposition to learn language is triggered by
hearing speech around her/him and his/her brain is able to interpret what it hears according to the underlying
principles or structures it already contains.

Children form rules and construct a grammar. Children appear to form the simplest and most general rules they
can from the language input they receive and they use the rules whenever they can. They progress from those
simple rules to more complex ones. Children show regular changes in their grammar in the acquisition of various
constructions (such as negation and questions).
Language acquisition is a creative process. Children are not given explicit information about the rules, by either
instruction or correction. They must somehow extract the rules of the grammar from the language they hear
around them, and their linguistic environment does not need to be special in any way for them to do this.
Observations of children acquiring different languages under different cultural and social circumstances reveal
that the development stages are similar, possibly universal. These factors have led many linguists to believe that
children are equipped with an innate template or blueprint for language – Universal Grammar (UG) – and this
blueprint aids the child in the task of constructing a grammar for her/his language. It hardly needs saying that the
process is unconscious. We cannot envisage the small child working out grammatical rules consciously.
Is there any evidence for the innateness hypothesis?
First, the innateness hypothesis receives its strongest support from the observation that the grammar a person
ends up with is vastly underdetermined by linguistic experience. In other words, we end up knowing far more
about language than is exemplified in the language we hear around us. This argument for the innateness of UG is
called the poverty of the stimulus.
Poverty-of-the stimulus is the argument that because language input to children is impoverished (deprived of
richness and elaboration) and they still acquire an L1, there must be an innate capacity for L1 acquisition.
Although children hear many utterances, the language they hear is INCOMPLETE, NOISY, and
UNSTRUCTURED. The utterances they hear include slips of the tongue, false starts, ungrammatical and
incomplete sentences, and no information as to which utterances are well formed. In this sense, the data they are
exposed to is IMPOVERISHED. It is less than what is necessary to account for the richness and complexity of
the grammar they attain.
Second, the innateness hypothesis provides an answer to the logical problem of language acquisition posed by
Chomsky in the 1980s: what accounts for the ease, rapidity, and uniformity of language acquisition in the face of
impoverished data? The answer is that children acquire a complex grammar quickly and easily without any
particular help beyond exposure to the language because they do not start from scratch. UG helps them to extract
the rules of their language and to avoid many grammatical errors. Because the child constructs his grammar
according to an innate blueprint, all children proceed through similar developmental stages.
Interactionism
Chomsky‟s theory relies on children being exposed to language but takes no account of the interaction between
children and their caregivers. In contrast to the work of Chomsky, more recent theories have stressed the
importance of the language input children receive from their caregivers. Language exists for the purpose of
communication and can only be learned in the context of interaction with people. It seems likely that a child will
learn more quickly and progress fast in FLA with frequent interaction. Interactionists, such as the American
psychologist Jerome Bruner, suggest that the language behaviour of adults when talking to children (known by
several names but most easily referred to as Child-Directed Speech or CDS) is specially adapted to support the
acquisition process. This support is often described as scaffolding for the child‟s language learning. Bruner‟s
scaffolding theory states that children need support and active help from their parents and caregivers if they are
going to become independent learners as they mature. Children are more dependent on people who have more
knowledge than they do.
Scaffolding is the support provided to children in their language learning. Children may be unable to produce
certain structures within a single utterance but may build them through interaction with another speaker.
Scaffolding is thought to be one way in which learners acquire new linguistic structures. One form that
scaffolding takes is Child-Directed Speech (CDS). So, what is CDS and does it contribute to FLA?
Adults, such as parents, grandparents, and caregivers, tend not to address the newly born infant before them as if
they are involved in normal adult-to-adult interaction. Rather, they tend to address them with a characteristically
simplified speech style. This style is called Child-Directed Speech or Caregiver Speech or Language. (It is
also called Motherese or Parentese.)
What are the salient features of CDS?
In general, such language is spoken slowly and clearly. Adults usually talk in a simplified way to children, taking
care to make their speech easily recognizable. Salient features of this type of speech also include the frequent use
18 of questions, often using exaggerated intonation, extra loudness and a slower tempo with longer pauses. In the
early stages of FLA, this type of speech also uses phonologically simplified, made-up „baby-words‟, i.e., a lot of
forms associated with BABY TALK. These are either simplified words (e.g., `tummy`, `nana`) or alternative
forms, with repeated simple sounds and syllables, for things in the child‟s environment (e.g., „choo-choo‟, „poo-
poo‟, „pee-pee‟, „wa-wa‟, „gee-gee‟). Caregiver speech is also characterized by simple sentence structures and a
lot of repetition. The topics of sentences tend to focus on the „here and now‟.

Moreover, it has generally been observed that the speech of those regularly interacting with very young children
changes and becomes more elaborate as the child begins using more and more language. Child-directed speech
gradually fades away as the child gets older.
However, there is some controversy about the difference CDS makes to development. Do children require a
syntactically and phonologically simplified input in order to be able to acquire language?
There is no conclusive evidence that suggests that it is necessary for children‟s language development. First,
although its use is widespread, it is NOT UNIVERSAL across all cultures. This shows that CDS might not be
necessary for language development, although it is possible that CDS has an effect on linguistic development at
an early age, at just one year.
However, it has already been noted that children in all cultures pass through the same stages in acquiring
language. We have also seen that there are cultures in which adults do not adopt special ways of talking to
children. So, CDS may be useful but seems not to be essential.
As stated earlier, the various theories, behaviourism, innateness, and interactionism, should not be seen simply as
alternatives to one another or as attempts to contradict one another. Rather, each one of them offers a partial
explanation of the process of FLA.
10. Language choice in multilingual communities
Multilingualism refers to a language situation where a speech community makes use of several languages, as in
Switzerland, Belgium, or Morocco. It also describes the competence of an individual who masters several
languages. Bilingualism refers to a speech situation where an individual or community controls two languages.
In simultaneous bilingualism, the two languages are learned at the same time in early childhood;
in sequential bilingualism, the second is acquired after the first has been established. The majority of the world‟s
speakers are bilingual – a point which tends to surprise Britons and Americans, for whom monolingualism -
knowledge and use of a single language - is traditionally the norm.
At the societal or national level, two types of multilingualism are distinguished: official and de
facto multilingualism. Switzerland is an officially multilingual nation in that it has been declared as such in the
Swiss constitution as such making of French, German, and Italian official languages. Canada is officially a
bilingual nation because English and French are enshrined in the Canadian constitution as the official languages.
Moreover, there are many other languages used in Canada today – over a hundred heritage languages brought to
Canada by immigrant groups, some of them maintained for several generations. So, Canada, while officially a
bilingual nation, is a de facto multilingual one.
Societal multilingualism may be promoted or created by factors such as population flow all over the world
especially international migration (as in the US), colonialism and conquest (e.g., Morocco), and the spread of
international languages (such as English). In these situations, there is likely to be one language which has social
dominance, and in this situation language shift may occur, that is speakers shift to speaking the dominant
language and abandon their heritage language. In situations of immigration, commonly within three generations,
members of the minority group shift to the dominant language. In some situations, we have what is
called language maintenance, that is, both languages continue to be spoken.
One can differentiate between symmetrical multilingualism, where all the languages have equal status,
and asymmetrical multilingualism, where at least one of the languages has more status than the others.
Language use in multilingual communities is usually influenced by the range of languages and varieties mastered
(completely or partially) by an individual. This is referred to as linguistic repertoire. Linguistic repertoire refers
to the languages and language varieties that a person knows and uses within his or her speech community in
everyday communication. A particular group of speakers may use not just one language or language variety to
communicate with one another but several, each appropriate for certain areas of everyday activity. The linguistic
repertoire of a French Canadian in Montreal could include Standard Canadian French, Colloquial Canadian
French and English (perhaps more than one variety).
Most people who are multilingual do not necessarily have exactly the same abilities in all the languages (or
varieties) that make up their repertoires. This means that multilingualism involving native-like command of the
languages in the repertoire is rather uncommon. Typically, multilinguals have varying degrees of command of
the different languages in their repertoires. The differences in competence in the various languages might range
from command of a few rudimentary conversational skills all the way to excellent command of the grammar and
vocabulary and specialized registers and styles.
The study of multilingualism embraces many aspects, but two have received special attention from researchers:
19 (1) language choice and the functions of the languages in a multilingual society and (2) the linguistic
consequences of multilingualism.
Language choice and domains of language use
In order to understand language choice in multilingual communities, the concept of domain is used. Many
multilingual societies observe a functional distribution between several languages or distinct language varieties.
„Domain‟ determines multilinguals‟ choice of languages. „Domain‟ may be defined as a distinct area of human

activity. Examples of domains include the family domain, the work domain, the education domain, the religion
domain, the business domain, the leisure domain, and the friendship domain. In bilingual and multilingual
communities, one language may be used in some domains and another language in other domains. For example,
Puerto Ricans in the USA may use Spanish in the family domain and English in the work domain. Another
example is provided by Paraguay, where both Guarani and Spanish are used. The following table shows which
language is used in which domain.
Domains of language use in Paraguay
Domain Language
Family Guarani
Friendship Guarani
Religion Spanish
Education Spanish
Administration Spanish
Domains of language use and diglossia
The concept of „domain‟ can also be used to describe and understand not only multilingual settings but also
language situations which are characterized by the phenomenon of diglossia. The term „diglossia‟ describes a
specific language situation which has three main characteristics:
1. Two distinct varieties of the same language are used in the community, with one regarded as a high
(H) variety and the other a low (L) variety.
2. Each variety is used for quite distinct functions; the high and low varieties complement each other.
3. No one uses the high variety in everyday conversation.
Diglossia is a language situation where distinct varieties of a language are used in distinct domains. We speak of
diglossia when two distinct varieties of the same language exist side by side in a community and each one is used
for different purposes. Usually, one is a more standard variety (the high variety), which is used in government
and administration, the media, education, and for religious services. The other one is usually a non-prestige
variety (the low variety), which is used, for example, in the family, with friends, or when shopping. This
language situation is found in a number of communities. Arabic-speaking countries use classical Arabic or
Standard Arabic as their H variety and regional colloquial varieties as L varieties. Another example of diglossia
can be found in the German speaking part of Switzerland, where the H-variety is a form of standard German and
the L-variety is a range of regional Swiss dialects. Greece is also an instance of this situation.
In contrast to bilingual or multilingual situations, in diglossic situations, the high and low varieties
are linguistically related. However, there are marked differences between the two varieties. The pronunciation
of H and L varies. The H variety may contain certain sounds not found in the L variety and vice versa. The
grammar of the two linguistically related varieties differs too. The grammar of H is morphologically more
complicated. For example, Standard Arabic (the H variety) uses more case markers and markers of number on
nouns and tense inflections on verbs than colloquial Arabic (the L variety). There are also differences in the
vocabulary of H and L. Since it is used in more formal domains, the H vocabulary includes many formal and
technical terms while the L variety has words for everyday objects.
No one uses H for everyday interaction. In Arabic-speaking countries, for instance, classical Arabic is limited to
the religious domain. It is taught in school and used for very formal interactions and in writing. But in most
everyday conversations, people use the everyday colloquial variety. This is shown in the following table.
20

High variety Low variety
Religion: prayers and sermons ✔
Literature ✔
Newspapers and magazines ✔
Broadcasting: TV ✔
Broadcasting: radio ✔
Education (written material, lectures) ✔
Education (lesson discussion) ✔
Shopping and gossiping (conversation) ✔
Linguistic consequences of multilingualism: code-switching and borrowing
One common aspect of bilingual and multilingual discourse in bilingual and multilingual communities is code-
switching. Code-switching may be defined as changing from one language to the other within the same stretch of
SPEECH. A person may start speaking one language and then change to another one in the middle of their
speech, or sometimes even in the middle of a sentence. For example, an English-French bilingual may switch
between the two languages in this way:
I think j‟ai plus peur des serpents.

Ils ont pas mal de la misère, I guess.
Nous etions une quarantaine, I suppose, une quarantaine.
Code-switching is usually distinguished from borrowing. Borrowing is the introduction of a word or expression
or some other linguistic feature from one LANGUAGE into another LANGUAGE in order to fill a lexical gap.
Vocabulary borrowings are usually called loan words. A large proportion of English vocabulary is made up of
loan words. For example, English has taken words and expressions such as restaurant, chic, coup d’etat, faux
pas and deja vu from French, tsunami from Japanese, paparazzi from Italian, mecca and magazine from Arabic.
Sometimes, speakers try to pronounce borrowings as they are pronounced in the original language. However, if a
borrowed word or phrase is widely used, most speakers will pronounce it according to the sound system of their
own language. The meaning is borrowed but the form is nativized, such as when restaurant is given a totally
English pronunciation. Sometimes, an expression is introduced into one language by translating it from another
language. This is referred to as Calque. Calque is a type of borrowing where the parts (morphemes) of the
borrowed word are translated item by item into equivalent parts (morphemes) in the other language; it is a word-
for-word translation from one language to another; it is also called a loan translation. For example, Adam’s
apple is a calque of the French pomme d’Adam, flea market (a place selling second-hand goods) is a calque from
French marche aux puces. In both cases, the English phrases came from a direct, literal translation of the original
French expressions. Superman is a calque of the German Ubermensch; the French grate-ciel is a calque from
English skyscraper.
21

Sociolinguistics

Uploaded by

Document Informationclick to expand document information

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sociolinguistics

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sociolinguistics

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sociolinguistics & Psycholinguistics

Pr. Chergui Saber Ahmed

What are some of the key properties of sociolinguistics?

A variety of languages and societies

Edited by R@MO | ©2025