Social Groups Flashcards
Who conducted the Detroit School study and in what year
Penelope Eckert’s Detroit School study in the year 2000
Who were the ‘jocks’ in Detroit school study
The jocks embodied middle class culture: they were upwardly sociably mobile individuals who wanted to prosper and academically succeed.
Who were the burnouts in Detroit school study
the burnouts were rebellious, resented school and often engaged in illegal activity.
How did the jocks and the burnouts differ in their use of language?
Jocks- used more standard, grammatically correct language, for example the absence of double negation and the pronunciation of their lexis in a way that conformed. Burnouts- This group did not conform to the standard forms of English
Detroit study shows that social groups affect your language use because
those part of the same group shared collective language features so there was a correlation between language use and social groups. It also shows language was used to appear like you belonged in a group so you could easily be linked to their values and attitudes.
Who also supports this study
Jenny Cheshire’s ‘Reading Study’ supports Eckert’s point that social groups are the key factor in a speaker’s use of language.
Cheshire’s method
She used thirteen boys and twelve girls to discern their attitudes towards drugs and crime.
Cheshire’s Reading study findings
It was found that the people who were considered tougher and who engaged in criminal activity, for example those part of gangs, conformed to the non-standard forms of the English Language. They used the negative concord ‘It ain’t got no pedigree or nothing’, the non-standard use of ‘what’, ‘do’ and ‘come’
Reading study demonstrates how social group is the main influencer of our language because
the use of non-standard English reflected the social groups the participants belonged to. The tougher groups established themselves as part of the group through doing things such as using ‘ain’t’ as the auxiliary ‘have’ and using non-standard forms. By creating their own rules through language, they could express their rebellious nature and their right to be a part of the social group they actively sought to be a part of.
Limits of Eckert and Cheshire
However, this study was only conducted on thirteen boys and twelve girls in Reading, therefore the sample size may not be large enough to determine the whole population, and the results could be unique to Reading alone. In addition, both Cheshire and Eckert’s studies were in artificial situations, like the school environment in Cheshire’s research. This means the study could be limited as the findings cannot be generalised to everybody in every situation.
Who conducted the Code Switching study?
Nicholas Copeland
Code Switching findings
he discovered that when people move from private to public discourse, their language changes so it is situationally based.
Code switching method
His study included a travel agent who was evaluated speaking to a variety of people holding a different relationship with him: clients from different classes (working and middle class) and colleagues. The participant’s language use differed substantially, with professionalism wearing away with familiarity and their accents becoming less RP.
How does this demonstrate how social groups are not the key factor in our language use
it depends on who the person you are talking to is and the degree of formality the situation holds.
What bolsters Code Switching study?
Howard Giles’ ‘Accommodation Theory’
What does ‘Accommodation theory’ imply
This implies language can be changed based on the situation we are presented with
Norwich study
Peter Trudgill’s
‘Norwich’ study in 1974.
Norwich method
He investigated the influence of class on a speaker’s language; his focus was on the final ‘ng’ velar nasal.
What did the pronunciation of the ‘g’ show
The more prestigious standard linked to the pronunciation of the ‘g’. It was discovered that the upper Working class and lower Middle class were more likely to use the prestigious form when conscious of their language. This demonstrates how class influences our language because those who want to be identified as a higher class pronounce their ‘g’s’ and those of a lower class who strive to be associated with having more prestige, recognised this was a key identifier as being part of a higher class and social group.
Labov’s ‘New York Study’ 1966
His focus was on the post-vocalic /r/. The three department stores he researched were ‘Saks’, ‘Macy’s’ and ‘S.Klein’. The staff at ‘Saks’, holding the most prestige, pronounced the /r/. Non-rhoticity occurred amongst the Lower class store ‘Klein’. Macy’s, the Middle class store, showed the greatest upshift of pronouncing the /r/ when asked to repeat themselves (so their speech changed from spontaneous to careful). This hypercorrection was to sound like they possessed overt prestige and improve their position in society.
Limitation of Trudgill’s study in Norwich
Trudgill’s study is extremely outdated and, as proven by the constant addition of neologisms to the dictionary and the introduction of new accents such as MLE, language is very dynamic. Therefore, using a study from 1974 may not replicate the environment of 2021, so it could be limited in use.
What did Labov avoid
Observer’s paradox and demand characteristics
