W1A-001 Linguistics essays-0.txt
This book outlines two uses of language. It outlines how language can be used to achieve effective communication; this is contrasted with how language can be used to help maintain power and prestige in society. The former is a description of how language is used; the latter is a catalogue of prescribed rules based on attitudes.

Language development is part and parcel of a child's socialization. What a child learns instinctively is the basic rules described by linguistic analysis. He may be introduced to notions of 'bad' language, but this will have only a superficial effect. The need to communicate is infinitely more important, so he grasps the grammar and builds his vocabulary.

Social distinction is based on such aspects as wealth and formal education. Members of these classes can be recognized by the cues they signal, consciously or unconsciously, to others. Language is the vehicle for this communication; it is not only what is said and how it is said, but what is not said. For those who always use the standard English dialect there would be strict conformity to the grammar, vocabulary and accent associated with that dialect. Grammatical constructions such as: 'I seen him' would be avoided. Slang might be employed providing it supported the solidarity of that particular group. Useless words which fill gaps in sentences would probably be similar to phrases like: 'in my view' rather than phrases like 'ye know'. Other strategies might be avoiding features such as the 'double negative'.

But if we look scientifically at linguistic behaviour, we see other dialects allow us to communiate just as effectively. When the word 'youse' is used the basic rules are applied; there is reference to the plural form. Slang and swearing are presented in sentences with correct grammar; 'Who gives a fuck?' This phrase has no symbol function (little or no meaning) but is has symptom and signal function; the emotional state of the speaker is transferred to the listener. So the rules are implicit; in any century there is diverse use of English, and the language is always changing.

We must also remember that we use language differently in different social contexts. Sociolinguistics gives us a complete model of language use; besides grammar and vocabulary, there is register and style. In a formal situation we are more rigid in our application of grammar, more careful in our choice of words. If we are performing as a member of a profession, we may use words which we regard as appropriate and significant. This use of register may make them feel excluded by what they regard as jargon. Style is a heading for the appropriate use of various forms of languge use. A performer can move to and fro along a spectrum; at one end of this spectrum is highly formal, at the other end is highly informal. So writing an essay and talking to a friend require different styles of language use. We may feel someone is moving closer to us if they include more slang and swearing. We can still use the dialect of standard English (spoken with the accent of another dialect) to swear or employ the language of an 'expert'. So a strange sounding dialect, which uses slang and swearing, can communicate much more than a verbose speech which contains empty phrases such as 'Everything possible will be done'.

Over the centuries the phonetic, semantic and grammatical aspects of language alter. But there always has been an effort to establish what is correct. Trudgill and Anderson describe studies which reveal the impact of geographical location and socio-economic variation. Here we move back from description to prescription; the emphasis is on how language reflects the structure of society itself. Linguistic variables such as saying 'ing' rather than 'in' at the end of a word are used to map out region and class. The upper class is numbered 1; the lowest socio-economic class is numbered 4. This is placed on the vertical axis. Class 4 shows the largest variation of dialect. Class 1 seeks to maintain standard English. But members of all classes are sensitive to received pronunciation, and most increase their efforts to say 'ing' rather than 'in' at the end of a word. But this 'correctness' is imposed by convention; it varies according to culture. In the U.S. will include 'r' after a vowel, in the U.K. the 'r' is dropped. So the highest socio-economic group in both countries have an opposing view of what is 'correct'. But we must not confuse socially significant signals regarding class with the real processes of language in everyday use. These notions of 'correct' language use are 'arbitary'. What matters is the successful communication of thought and feeling from one's inner world out into a shared world. The fact that some features such as accent is deemed to be 'correct', perhaps reminds us of the old saying: 'money talks'.

I agree with the arguments presented by Anderson and Trudgill. To view language use as correct only when standard English is observed is to be very narrow minded. Attitudes based on class distinction restrict our response to others; feeling and thought can be expressed powerfully in any dialect. Shakespeare used language that would certainly not be considered 'nice'.

We will resist inevitable change in language if we put one dialect on a pedestal. We will resist contact with those who introduce new forms of language use; this is foolish arrogance; there are two hundred million speakers of English in America alone. The language can only become richer the more it is used.

In schools a need to conform to a standard usage need not put aside respect for local dialect. The local alterations of grammar or vocabulary are not mistakes; these alterations are legitimate. Language does not belong to anyone. Even the language of the drug culture soon changes from private slang to words in everyday use: 'fix', 'high'. Words like 'gallavant' which belongs to Ulster slang add colour and comedy to conversation. Those who look back to the rules of Latin, forget that it does not change because it is no longer used. We should not waste our energies saying: 'It is I'. We should use language to reach out, not hide behind verbosity. To take ourselves too seriously and pompously assume we know best about language use, is to live in a shrinking world.
