APG5043 Language in Society 社科 assignment 代写

100%原创包过,高质代写&免费提供Turnitin报告--24小时客服QQ&微信：120591129

APG5043 Language in Society 社科 assignment 代写

Assessment task title: Major essay

Due date: 26 May

Details of task: This assignment is an essay on one of a range of topics which reflect important theoretical issues in sociolinguistics. For this assignment you are expected to conduct wide-ranging research beyond the set readings for this course, though of course you are also welcome to cite the set readings where appropriate. All students have access to the extensive electronic collection of the Monash library and should avail themselves of these resources in preparing this assignment.

Topics:
Your essay should address one of the topics listed below. Some topics contain multiple questions/areas for exploration – in preparing your answer please make sure you have addressed all aspects of the topic and demonstrate a clear knowledge of the sociolinguistic theories informing your topic.

To what extent has Australian English undergone Americanization in the last 30 years? Explore whether features are being taken from Standard US English, or non-standard varieties and the role of the mass media/ internet in the transmission of American usages.
Why do dialects persist when standard varieties have greater prestige? Illustrate your argument with examples from at least two pairs of dialects and standard languages.
Language change in progress: Women are more likely than men to use innovative variants in their speech. At the same time, women are more conservative in the sense that they choose prestige forms more often than men. Is this inconsistent? In your answer consider models of how language change spreads through communities.
To what extent is speaking a heritage language an essential part of maintaining ethnic identity?
Compare the methodologies used in variationist sociolinguistics and linguistic ethnography and assess the relative strengths and weaknesses of the two approaches.
Language activists have been lobbying for an amendment to the American constitution that would make English the official language of the United States. What are the key aims activists hope to achieve by such an amendment? Using language policy literature, evaluate how likely it is that an amendment would achieve its stated aims and discuss any potential problems with it. On balance do you agree or disagree with the idea of making English the official language of the United States?
Do we need both an outsider and insider perspective in sociolinguistic research? Use examples to support your answer.
To what extent does literature published in the last 15 years support the idea that women are more polite than men in the language they use in the workplace?

Release dates: N/A

Word limit: 3500 words. For this task you are expected to follow the word count to within 10%, and will be penalised if you go over or under. Note that your cover sheet and reference list do not contribute to your word count.

Value: 40%

Presentation requirements: pdf, doc or docx file submitted through both the Moodle assignment upload facility and also through Turnitin (see ‘assignment submission’ below for details on submitting assignments). Hard copy submission is not required.

Estimated return date: Approximately 2 weeks after submission date

Hurdle requirements: N/A

Individual assessment in group tasks: N/A

Criteria for marking: Your essay will be assessed on:

Clear identification and exploration of the major issues within the topic
Knowledge of key theories/ studies informing the topic
Evidence of wide reading
Critical engagement with theory, examples and previous literature to build your argument
Clear and accurate description of case studies/ empirical research used in the essay
Argument which is well-structured, logical and leads to clearly presented conclusions
Presentation/expression, including correct and consistent use of referencing conventions

Detailed criteria will be provided in the marking rubric for this task, which will be provided on Moodle.

Referencing requirements: Students are expected to follow the referencing standards of the APA 6th Edition.
To build your skills in citing and referencing, and using different referencing styles, see the online tutorial Academic Integrity: Demystifying Citing and Referencing at http://www.lib.monash.edu/tutorials/citing/

Additional information: Further information on this task will be provided on Moodle.

APG5043Language n in Society

Week 1: Introduction to

sociolinguistics

DR MELANIE BURNS

MELANIE.BURNS@MONASH.EDU

Today

• Unit outline

• Knowledge about language ‐ communicative

competence

• Sociolinguistics and the relationship between

language and society

• Methodological approaches to studying language

in society

Welcome to Language in

Society!

This unit explores key topics in sociolinguistics

• Regional variation (dialects)

• Social variation

• Ethnolects (ethnically‐based varieties)

• Style shifting

• Gendered speech

• Age‐based variation

• Bilingualism, language contact

• Language maintenance, shift, loss

• Language policy

Unit objectives

1. Understand and be able to apply key terms and concepts

used in sociolinguistics.

2. Reflect on your own sociolinguistic repertoire.

3. Apply sociolinguistic insights to your own professional

context.

4. Describe the main data gathering methods used in

sociolinguistics, and select appropriate methods for a

range of research questions.

5. Engage in informed debate on matters of theoretical and

practical significance in the areas of language and

society, language education, language purism, and

language planning.

Unit materials

1. Unit guide

2. Moodle site

3. Textbook and readings

1. Unit guide

Download the unit guide from the Moodle site if you have

not already done so

Includes:

◦ week‐by‐week topics and readings

◦ assessment details

◦ policies

◦ student services details

2. Moodle site

This is where we will communicate outside class

Contains:

◦ discussion forums

◦ assignment submission facilities

◦ links to study resources (e.g. extra readings, assignment materials)

Please check Moodle and your Monash email regularly!

3. Textbook and readings

Required textbook:

Wardhaugh, R. & Fuller, J.M. (2015). An introduction to sociolinguistics

(7th ed.), Malden, MA: Wiley Blackwell.

Recommended resource:

Allan, K., Bradshaw, J., Finch, G., Burridge, K., & Heydon, G. (2010). The

English Language and Linguistics Companion. Houndmills, Basingstoke:

Palgrave

Most weeks also have additional readings – you can download

these from the library website (link on Moodle)

Week Date

(Monday)

Topic Readings

1 Feb 27 Introduction to Sociolinguistics Wardhaugh & Fuller Ch 1 and Ch 2

2 Mar 6 Exploring regional and social variation Wardhaugh & Fuller pp. 62-74 and Ch 6

Wolfram & Schilling-Estes (2006), Oliver et al (2002)

3 Mar 13 Measuring and explaining variation Wardhaugh & Fuller Ch 7

O’Hanlon (2006)

4 Mar 20 Language change Wardhaugh & Fuller Ch 8

Pope, Meyerhoff & Ladd (2007), Tagliamonte & Denis

(2008)

5 Mar 27 Language attitudes and accommodation Wardhaugh & Fuller pp. 74-77 and 98-101

Meyerhoff (2006), Neisen & Hay (2005)

6 Apr 3 Sociolinguistic ethnography Wardhaugh & Fuller Ch 9

Heath & Street (2008), Bucholtz (2009)

7 Apr 10 Gender and language Wardhaugh & Fuller Ch 12

Cameron (2005)

Mid semester break 14/4–21/4

8 Apr 24 The sociolinguistics of power Wardhaugh & Fuller Ch 10 and Ch 13

Dominco et al (2005)

9 May 1 Multilingualism and language choice Wardhaugh & Fuller pp. 82-98

Grimes (1994), Myers-Scotton (2006)

10 May 8 Language maintenance, shift and endangerment Schupbach (2009), Patrick (2007)

OPTIONAL: Dorian (1998)

11 May 15 Language contact Wardhaugh & Fuller Ch 5

Trudgill (2006), Taylor-Leech (2012)

12 May 22 Language policy and planning Wardhaugh & Fuller Ch 14

Verhoef & Venter (2008)

Class format

Each week we have:

1. 2 hour seminar

2. 1 hour tutorial

Please do the reading for each week before class,

as we’ll be discussing issues/concepts raised in

these.

Contact Details

Unit coordinator/lecturer:

Dr Melanie Burns

Email: Melanie.Burns@monash.edu

Office: S530, Menzies (note: I’ve moved office)

Office hour: 4‐5pm Thursdays (during semester

only) or by appointment

Assignments

Assessment Task 1 (5%) Due 24 March

◦ Bibliography exercise: find and summarise a variationist

sociolinguistic study published within the past two years

Assessment Task 2 (25%) Due 28 April

◦ Sociolinguistic survey: carry out your own sociolinguistic

study and present your results in report form

Assessment Task 3 (40%) Due 26 May

◦ Major Essay: explore one of the essay topics listed in the

unit guide concerning theoretical issues in sociolinguistics

Assignment Submission

You are required to submit assignments via the

Moodle assignment upload facility and to also

submit a copy of your assignments to Turnitin

• Hard copy submission is not required for this unit

• Assignments must be .doc, .docx, or .pdf

• Must be a single file – no multiple documents

Assignment Submission

See unit guide for detailed instructions regarding

assignment format and submission guidelines.

• Assignments will be returned via Moodle

• Penalties apply for late submission without an extension (5%

per day overdue)

• If you anticipate having difficulties in submitting by the due

date contact me as soon as possible

• Extensions of more than 2 days will require a special

consideration application

Other assessment: Test

Test (25%)

◦ to be completed any time between 9am 6 June and 5pm

13 June

◦ two hour open‐book test completed through Moodle

Other assessment:

Participation

Participation (5%)

◦ Class attendance is compulsory. Please contact me if you

anticipate any difficulties meeting the attendance

requirement.

◦ Students are expected to participate in discussions by

raising questions, giving their thoughts on class

activities, and responding to the comments of others.

Need any help?

• If you feel overwhelmed in the unit or feel you are

struggling, please do let me know

• Monash provides many services to support students, see

http://www.monash.edu/students/support

• I’ll pass on details on useful academic skills support

services, such as the linguistics coursework students library

sessions – see Moodle.

Let’s Chat

• Start speaking confidently

• Fun classes run by student-facilitators

• Learn through games and make friends

• Register online –registration opens in

early February

Peer Support

• Help with your academic English

grammar

• Drop in sessions Monday – Friday in

Clayton libraries (RLS Points)

• Facilitated by your peers, one-on-one

ENGLISH CONNECT

Develop your language for success

• Polish Up Your Grammar

Grammar workshops

• Speaking with Confidence

Pronunciation and public

speaking course

All programs are

FREE

PEER‐TO‐PEER

ON ALL CAMPUSES

www.monash.edu/english‐connect

Knowledge about language

• Knowledge of the sounds of a language

• Knowledge of words

• Knowledge of grammar

• Knowledge of how to use language

“Knowing a language also means knowing how to use that language,

since speakers know not only how to form sentences but also how to

use them appropriately” (Wardhaugh & Fuller, 2015, p. 5)

Communicative competence

What we say and how we say it is not just dependent on the

resources a language provides but is also determined by the

norms and rules of a society

For example, norms and rules regarding:

◦ Being polite

◦ Being relevant/appropriate

A simple example...

The following are some common greetings:

Good morning/afternoon/evening

G’day

Hello

Hey

What would be an appropriate context of use for each of these? Are there

any circumstances where the use of any of the above greetings would be

deemed impolite or inappropriate?

What would be an appropriate response to each of the above greetings?

Variation

 Language is not simply a fixed set of rules to which

speakers always adhere

 Linguists distinguish between what speakers know

about language and how speakers actually use

language

 There is a great deal of variation in how individual

speakers use language

Identity

Differences in how individual speakers use a language can

be explored in terms of issues of identity

Popular understandings of identity:

◦ individual

◦ constant/unchanging

◦ personality/traits

◦ singular, the ‘core’ of who we are

Identity

Newer understandings of identity:

◦ relationship to groups (group identity vs individual identity)

◦ changing or even contradictory

◦ plural (identities)

◦ not expressed but performed

“the active negotiation of an individual's relationship with larger social

constructs” (Mendoza‐Denton, 2002, p. 475)

“the social positioning of self and Other” (Bucholtz & Hall, 2004)

Identity

We each have a range of identities, formed through social

interaction and our experiences with the world.

◦ e.g. student, Australian, male, footballer, waitress, parent, sister, etc,

etc.

Reflect on your own identity: How do you define your identity? What do

you think are the essential components of your identity?

Identity and language

Identities are performed

◦ Not “I talk like a white middle‐class woman because I (already) am a white

middle‐class woman” but the way I talk in part constitutes this (Cameron,

1995, p. 16)

What features of the way you speak do you feel say something about

your identity? What do you think others can tell about you from the way

you talk?

Sociolinguistics

This emphasis on identities as socially situated follows a

shift in linguistics from focussing on individual speakers and

languages to how different social groups use language

Human societies are complex and socially differentiated,

and linguistic resources reflect these social differences

Sociolinguistics

Sociolinguistics is the study of language in its social context

– the relationship between language and society

◦ Does social structure influence linguistic structure/behaviour?

◦ Does linguistic structure/behaviour influence social structure?

Sociolinguistics vs sociology of language

◦ Do we explore the relationship between linguistic variables and

social variables to understand more about linguistic processes (e.g.

language change) or social structure (e.g. power)?

Linguistic variants

A variant is one of several different forms speakers could

use for the same thing (the variable)

◦ e.g. footpath, sidewalk and pavement are three variants

in English for the concept “path for pedestrians running

between buildings and the street”

Variants may be:

 words

 different pronunciations

e.g. [n] [ŋ] or [nk] as final sound in words like nothing

 different grammatical forms

e.g. the data was collected vs. the data were collected

Social factors

 region (does a linguistic feature vary regionally?)

 age (age‐related variation)

 gender (gendered speech)

 context (style shifting)

 ethnicity (ethnically‐based varieties)

Can you think of any other social factors which may

influence linguistic variants?

Varieties of English

As competent speakers we’re attuned to many

sociolinguistic differences that allow us to

distinguish various varieties of English

◦ even if we can’t identify what it is about someone’s

language tells us they’re from the US, or are working class

etc, we generally pick up on these cues really quickly

Think of a variety of English that you know well. What are

the features of language you associate with this variety?

When does one variety stop

and another begin?

• Often tricky to distinguish, as sociolinguistic variation is

normally statistical rather than categorical

–people will often use more than one variant in their speech: they

might for example say nothing 80% of the time, but say nothink 20%

of the time, rather than using one variant 100% of the time

• Moving from one variety to another often sees a gradual

change in the frequency with which speakers use each of

the possible variants, rather than an abrupt shift from

everyone using one variant to everyone using another

variant

When does one variety stop

and another begin?

Varieties can also be tricky to isolate because the one

speaker will often change the frequency with which they

use marker variants between different social contexts

However, we can say that if two speakers use different

variants for a number of variables then they are speaking

different varieties.

Different methodological approaches to

studying language in society

Variationist sociolinguistics is concerned with

documenting and explaining this type of language

variation

To do this, researchers survey a large pool of

speakers and count the frequency with which they

use each variant.

Variationist sociolinguistics

• statistical surveys which look for overarching patterns (i.e.

people who do X will also do Y)

• thus, variationistsprefer variables where the list of variants is

quite clear cut

• tend to concentrate on broad social categories when

dividing up their populations for analysis

• for example, contrasting men and women, older and younger

speakers, or people living in different places or from different

social classes

Different methodological approaches to

studying language in society

A more nuanced understanding of the ways in

which language is used and negotiated in particular

settings is achieved in ethnographic research.

Variationist vs Ethnographic

studies

Variationist studies: large and focussed on

generalisations (e.g. what are the main differences in

the speech of 100 men and 100 women in Australia?)

Ethnographies: generally small‐scale and focus on small

differences in language use and understanding the local

meaning attributed to these differences.

Ethnographic research: An

example

In her famous ethnography of a US high school,

Penny Eckert (2000) found that how students

pronounced their vowels was related to their social

group membership at school (particularly whether

students were heavily involved in school activities

versus one who is on the edge of dropping out)

Group membership was also linked to other

aspects of self‐presentation, e.g.:

• what kind of clothes the students wore

•where they ate their lunch

•what sort of activities they engaged in after school

and at the weekend.

A variationist example: Change

in Australian English

Lee (2002) is an example of a variationist study

from an Australian context

She researched grammatical change in Australian

English, and particularly whether older and

younger speakers have different attitudes about

the acceptability of certain constructions

Lee (2002)

Lee compared the attitudes of 104 teachers and

263 students to disputed usage through a three‐

pronged method:

◦ A judgement test where participants were asked them

to mark sample sentences as acceptable/unacceptable

◦ A cloze test (fill in the missing word in a sentence)

◦ An editing test, where participants were given the

opportunity to change sentences to make them more

like their actual usage

Lee (2002)

• Not only linguistically interesting, Lee’s findings are

important from an education perspective

• they alert us to the ways in which Australian English is

changing, and the fact that many teachers in the study were

still marking as ‘incorrect’ grammatical forms that actually

seem to be widely used and accepted in Australian English

Summary of some of the grammatical forms Lee investigated, and

the percentage of students and teachers who marked them as

acceptable in the judgement test:

An ethnographic study: Language

choice in a multilingual school

An ethnographic study was conducted by a team

led by Monica Heller (2006) at a French‐speaking

high school in Ontario, Canada.

◦ Ontario is predominantly English‐speaking, but borders Quebec and,

like Quebec, has a population of ancestral French speakers (some of

whom make greater use of French in their daily lives than others)

http://gocanada.about.com/od/canadatravelplanner/ig/Canada‐Maps.‐‐0v/Canada‐Map.‐‐2h.htm

Language choice in a multilingual

school

The school Heller studied was first established

to cater to this indigenous French‐speaking

population, but has also attracted:

◦English‐speaking families who want their children to

master high‐level competence in a second language

◦immigrants from French speaking nations

Heller (2006)

• Heller discovered that peer groups within the school

divided on linguistic lines

• each group used French (and other languages) in different

ways, both socially and in the classroom

• The four key peer groups Heller identified were:

– Students from working class Franco‐Ontario families (the original audience of

the school)

– Students from middle class English‐speaking families

– Students from Quebec (used to living in a French Canadian milieu)

– Somali‐born students who had been educated in French prior to immigration

A key point of difference for the peer

groups was what language they chose to

speak socially at school

• The Somali and Quebecois students (who were generally new to the

school at the time of Heller’s study) were surprised and dismayed to

find other students only spoke English in their peer groups.

• Strong dichotomy between the peer groups:

• Somali and Quebecois students lacked the fluency in conversational

English to join other peer groups

• other students lacked fluency and/or confidence in conversational French

to engage Somali and Quebecois students

• This was also an issue of willingness – most established students saw

little reason to bother to accommodate these newcomers

French, like English, is a pluricentric

language (multiple standard varieties)

• The school was contradictory at times, sometimes supporting and

validating the norms of Canadian French, and sometimes rejecting them

as “bad French” and preferring the norms of Parisian French.

– creates a dichotomy between:

1. English speaking and Somali students (learnt their French in school so

have acquired a more formal variety, free of many of the features of

Canadian French)

2. Franco‐Ontario and Quebecois (who have learnt their French through

interaction with other speakers of Canadian French – meaning they

have better conversational fluency on informal topics, but not always

“correct” according to school norms)

This was a difficult situation for the school to resolve

because it had been established to support Canadian

French, but was concerned that academic standards require

students to master ‘good’ French.

Heller’s study raises a number of important questions about

language policy and planning, as well as issues of inequality

Heller (2006)

• This study highlights that knowing whatever is

deemed to be the ‘correct’ variety is often a key

component of success in education,

employment etc.

• The study also shows how sociolinguistic

analysis can help us better understand conflicts

surrounding language use and create policy that

leads to more equitable outcomes.

A note on writing down

sounds

• One of the areas of interest for sociolinguists is studying

different accents. In order to write down differences in

pronunciation, linguists use the International Phonetic

Alphabet (IPA)

• The IPA allows us to accurately record the pronunciation of

any word in any language by any speaker

• Writers indicate that they are writing in IPA by placing the

sound or word in square brackets. Thus [i] indicates the

sound ‘ee’ and [hit] is the English word ‘heat’ (not hit!)

Next week…

 We’ll explore regional and social variation

 We’ll talk about assignment 1

This week’s readings:

Wardhaugh & Fuller Ch 1 and Ch 2

Next week’s readings:

Wardhaugh & Fuller pp. 62‐74 and Ch 6

Wolfram & Schilling‐Estes (2006)

Oliver et al (2002)

APG5043 Language in Society 社科 assignment 代写

References

Bucholtz, M. & Hall, K. (2004). Language and identity. In A. Duranti (Ed.), A companion to linguistic

anthropology (pp. 369–394). Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Cameron, D. (1995). Verbal hygiene. London: Routledge.

Eckert, Penelope (2000). Language variation as social practice. Oxford: Blackwell.

Heller, Monica (2006). Linguistic minorities and modernity: A sociolinguistic ethnography (2nd

ed.). London: Continuum

Lee, Jackie (2002). Attitudes towards disputable usages among Australian teachers and students.

Australian Review of Applied linguistics, 21, 109‐29.

Mendoza‐Denton, N. (2002). Language and identity. In J. K. Chambers, P. Trudgill & N. Schilling‐

Estes (Eds.), The handbook of language variation and change (pp. 475–499). Malden, MA:

Blackwell.

Wardhaugh, R. & Fuller, J.M. (2015). An introduction to sociolinguistics (7th ed.), Malden, MA:

Wiley Blackwell.

APG5043 Language in Society 社科 assignment 代写