7.
There is also a growing amount of work originally called critical sociolinguistics (Singh 1996; Kress 2001) but now often termed critical discourse studies (Wodak and Meyer 2015; van Dijk 2009). This approach takes what can be called an ‘interventionist’ approach to matters that interest us; we will discuss its findings in more detail in the section on Critical Discourse Analysis in chapter 7, and in Part IV of the book on Sociolinguistics and Social Justice. Rooted in critical theory, research in this vein is concerned with looking at power structures and the reproduction of inequalities. This work focuses on how language is used to exercise and preserve power and privilege in society, how it buttresses social institutions, and how even those who suffer as a consequence fail to realize that many of the things that appear to be ‘natural’ and ‘normal’ are culturally constructed and not inevitable; it is power relations in society that determine what is defined as ‘normal.’ Critical discourse studies thus seek to bring such power relations to light, with the aim of bringing more social equity.
This is very much an ideological view, and its proponents maintain that all language use is ideological as are all investigations, that is, that there is no hope of an ‘objective’ or ‘neutral’ sociolinguistics. Indeed, neutrality is not sought within critical discourse studies. As noted by Blommaert: ‘it is not enough to uncover the social dimensions of language use. These dimensions are the object of moral and political evaluation, and analysing them should have effects in society: empowering the powerless, giving voices to the voiceless, exposing power abuse, and mobilising people to remedy social wrongs’ (2005, 25). It is important to note that this perspective of the societal utility of sociolinguistics is not new or solely in the area of critical discourse studies. Linguists have long seen the importance of weighing in on social issues connected to their research; a well‐known example is the testimony of linguists about the status of so‐called Black English and the educational rights of its users in 1979 (Labov 1982). Recent discussions of engagement in sociolinguists are a call to go beyond mere consciousness raising (see Lewis 2018; Labov 2018; Rickford 2018; and Rickford and King 2016 for a deeper discussion of this).
The intellectual history of sociolinguistics and linguistic anthropology also reflects broader ideas and movements of its time. Heller and McElhinny (2017) address how political and economic ideologies and events, such as colonialism and capitalism, have influenced how language is studied and what conclusions are drawn from sociolinguistic studies. Block (2018, ix) notes that sociolinguistics increasingly includes social theory more broadly. His text on political economy in sociolinguistics addresses the study of topics such as English world‐wide (which we will pick up in chapter 13), the language of tourism, language in the workplace, and the importance of social class in not just how we speak but also discourses about social groups and their inherent social value. Further, sociolinguists and linguistic anthropologists have often been involved in language revitalization movements and language policy and planning, topics which will be addressed in chapter 13.
As can be seen by this brief introduction, the study of sociolinguistics has grown out of an interest in the role of society in how we use language to encompass a concern for how language is part of the construction of social realities. This volume seeks to present contemporary research but acknowledge the history of the field, presenting theories and findings which contribute to our understanding of language in society in different ways.
Overview of the Book
As should now be apparent, the study of sociolinguistics is deeply concerned with aspects of scholarship which are sometimes labeled theoretical and others which are said to be applied. At the very least, sociolinguistics is a socially relevant variety of linguistics, but it is probably much more.
These chapters are organized within four general topics. However, there will be considerable moving back and forth with cross‐referencing within topics and among topics. Inter‐relationships are everywhere, and our themes will recur across the discussions of dialects, multilingualism, discourse, and social justice.
Part I, Languages, Communities, and Contexts, deals with some traditional language issues: trying to separate languages from dialects and looking at types of regional and social variation within languages (chapter 2); trying to figure out what kinds of ‘groups’ are relevant when we study language use (chapter 3); and looking at the role of context in language use and interpretation (chapter 4).
Part II, Theory and Methods, looks at three broad approaches to research in sociolinguistics and how they are carried out. Chapter 5 deals with variationist sociolinguistics, chapter 6 ethnographic approaches, and chapter 7 discourse analytic research.
Part III, Multilingual Matters, addresses both macro‐ and micro‐sociolinguistic topics in the study of multilingualism. These topics include interactional as well as societal patterns of multilingualism (chapter 8), structural consequences of language contact (chapter 9), and language in national, transnational, global, and digital contexts (chapter 10).
Part IV, Sociolinguistics and Social Justice, looks into three areas of life in which sociolinguistics offers us some hope of understanding pressing problems (and which some sociolinguists argue require our deliberate intervention). Language, gender, and sexuality, one of the great ‘growth areas’ in language study, is the first of these (chapter 11). Sociolinguistics and education is the second (chapter 12). Language planning and policy issues, including the spread of English world‐wide and the ‘death’ of many languages, is the third (chapter 13).
Chapter Summary
This chapter provides an introduction to the field of sociolinguistics as well as to some of the major themes that will recur throughout this textbook. We propose broad definitions for the terms ‘language’ and ‘society,’ and introduce the concept of ‘identities,’ which is central to the study of contemporary sociolinguistics. We also explore the possible relationships between language and culture, most notably the Whorfian hypothesis. Finally, we note the interdisciplinary nature of the field of sociolinguistics, as well as the breadth of topics, both macro and micro, that we will deal with in the coming chapters.
Exercises
1 Look at the list of grammar rules below. Write an essay defending the use of one of these ‘incorrect’ grammatical constructions. Why do you think using these constructions is justifiable? Explain how the difference between these rules and natural speech demonstrates the difference between descriptive and prescriptive grammars. Prescriptive rules and examples:Never end a sentence with a preposition; use ‘whom’ instead of ‘who’ in object position. Example of a violation: Who did you give it to? (‘Correct’ speech: ‘To whom did you give it?’)Adverbs (words
