Language Differences Among Classes

1934 Words4 Pages

Language variation, whether across different regions or different social groups, is a complex topic with a plethora of factors worthy of investigation. As Figure A and Figure B show, there are some interesting patterns that develop as a result of such factors. The following analysis will consider ways in which a variety of issues can begin to explain the reasons for such correlation in the data. Specifically, ways in which methodological factors, linguistic prestige, and the notion of speech communities and ‘class’, all play a contributory role, will be considered. Before proceeding to a full evaluation of the implications the data may have, it is important to first establish exactly what the data shows. In Figure A, the use of post-vocalic ‘r’ by different social groups in New York and Reading is displayed. Interpreted on surface value, it appears that post-vocalic ‘r’ correlates with the higher social groups in New York, with the percentage of usage falling from 32% in the highest social group, to an eventual 0% in the lowest. On the other hand, post-vocalic ‘r’ is more prominent with lower social groups in Reading, with 49% of the lowest social group using it, as opposed to the 0% of the highest. In Figure B, the use of vernacular verb forms in Norwich and Detroit is presented in the same type of graph as Figure A. What immediately stands out is that vernacular verb forms are more commonly used by lower social groups in each area, however much more common in Norwich amongst these groups. Although not commonly evidenced in the higher social groups in either area, slightly more use vernacular verb forms in Detroit in the two highest social groups. Both sets of data offer a variety of potential lines of investigation, one of whi... ... middle of paper ... ...e isn’t a single ‘correct’ way of speaking or using grammar, and that prescriptive standpoints are more about maintaining elitist values than anything else. This can in fact be reinforced by the data in Figure A, as the use of post-vocalic ‘r’ is more common in the higher social groups in New York, but more common in the lower social groups in Reading. Consequently, this suggests that one social group’s idea of a ‘correct’ way to speak is not necessarily a universal view. In conclusion, the main point reinforced by all these points is that there are a plethora of complications in language variation, on both a regional level, and in social groups. It is also evident that there are several perspectives and critical viewpoints that can be applied to investigations, making a study into results such as those in Figure A and B all the more interesting and rewarding.

Open Document