« Chapter 3 Response "No Kinda Sense" | Main | Chapter 3 »
December 03, 2005
Chapter 5
Comments:
No language or dialect is inherently superior or inferior to any other, and all languages and dialects are suited to the needs of the community they serve. Needless to say, dialects are inherently systematic and rule governed, deeply organized systems of great complexity.
It is almost impossible to hear someone speak without immediately drawing conclusions about social class, background, level of education and what part of the country someone comes from. This is a linguistic stereotype. People of Standard English are percieved as more ambitious, more intellegent, more self confident and more reliable. This is a social fact because people judge one another's worth on the basis of language.
The official definition of dialect is the language variety used in particular geographical region by a particular social class group. Also, in Britain the regional and social dimensions are related. The higher up the social class scale one goes, the less one encounters regional variation in speech. This accounts for the reason why British people are so sensitive to social implications of the language a person uses. This is often documented in movies and plays, for example Pygmalion and My Fair Lady.
People's way of talking can change according to the topic. Furthermore, contemporary linguistics is strictly descriptive and describes what people do. It does not mean that "anything goes." Speakers have assymetrical linguistic systems which means they can perciece and understand linguistic distinctions which they do not (or cannot themselves make.
There is a correlation between a child's language and their education. A child's language may be a disadvantage in their own educational progress, not because the language is deficient, but merely because it is different. This is often reflected in test scores of children.
Questions
Why is the term "lazy" attributed to regional or social dialects? Is this a British way of classifying language and separation of class?
Have there been any experiments done about linguistic stereotyping in American Sign Language?
If people know that no language is superior or inferior to any other then why do people still continue to discriminate people by their use of language?
Are there any dialects in history that have formally become a language?
Why are languages with writing systems considered higher and more functional than those without? ASL is an example of a language without a writing system, and I often feel at times that I can express more with ASL than with English.
Do you think that people have become more or less tolerant of linguistic diversity over the years?
Posted by lcissearls at December 3, 2005 02:31 PM