FACULTY OF ARTS

OSTRAVA UNIVERSITY

ESSENTIALS
of
SOCIOLINGUISTICS

Petra Jesensk

OSTRAVA
2010

Author: PaedDr. Petra Jesensk, PhD.

Reviewers: PhDr. Miroslav ern, PhD.
Professor doc. PhDr.Eva Homolov, PhD.
PaedDr. Alena Kamrov, PhD.
PhDr. Radoslav Pavlk, PhD.
Proofreading: Mgr. Arnot Hrn

ISBN 978-80-7368-799-1

Contents
F O R E W O R D ..................................................................................................................................................... 6

1 W H A T I S S O C I O L I N G U I S T I C S ? ...................................................................................................... 7
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5

S O C I O L O G Y ............................................................................................................................................ 7
L I N G U I S T I C S ......................................................................................................................................... 7
S O C I O L I N G U I S T I C S T H E S O C I A L S T U D Y O F L A N G U A G E ................................................. 8
B A S I C N O T I O N S ................................................................................................................................. 11
S O C I O L I N G U I S T I C R E S E A R C H M E T H O D S ................................................................................. 19

2 H I S T O R Y A N D C U R R E N T S T A T E O F S O C I O L I N G U I S T I C S ........................................ 22
2 . 1 B E G I N N I N G S O F S O C I O L I N G U I S T I C S ......................................................................................... 22
2 . 2 M O D E R N S O C I O L I N G U I S T I C S A N D S O C I O L I N G U I S T S .......................................................... 27
3 B A S I C T A S K S S O L V E D B Y S O C I O L I N G U I S T I C S .............................................................. 37
3 . 1 L A N G U A G E A N D A G E ....................................................................................................................... 44
3 . 2 L A N G U A G E A N D G E N D E R ............................................................................................................... 45
3 . 2 . 1 T w o f o l d p e r c e p t i o n o f f e m a l e s a n d m a l e s ................................................................ 48
3 . 2 . 2 S o c i a l f a c t o r s .......................................................................................................................... 52
3 . 2 . 3 W o m e n s l a n g u a g e ................................................................................................................ 53
3 . 2 . 4 G e n d e r s t u d y i n S l o v a k i a a n d C z e c h i a ...................................................................... 55
3 . 3 L A N G U A G E A N D E T H N I C B A C K G R O U N D .................................................................................. 56
3 . 4 L A N G U A G E A N D P O L I T I C S ............................................................................................................. 61
3 . 4 . 1 N e w s p e a k .................................................................................................................................... 62
3 . 4 . 2 D o u b l e s p e a k ............................................................................................................................. 63
3 . 4 . 3 E u r o s p e a k .................................................................................................................................. 64
3 . 4 . 4 P C .................................................................................................................................................. 65
3.4.4.1
3.4.4.2
3.4.4.3
3.4.4.4

D e f i n i t i o n o f P . C . i n d i c t i o n a r i e s a n d o n t h e I n t e r n e t ........................................... 66
T w o L e v e l s o f P C ......................................................................................................................... 69
A f f i r m a t i v e A c t i o n ...................................................................................................................... 71
C o n c l u s i o n a n d p o l i t i c a l l y c o r r e c t f a i r y t a l e s ............................................................ 71

3 . 4 . 5 T e c h n o s p e a k ............................................................................................................................. 73
3 . 5 D I G L O S S I A A N D B I L I N G U A L I S M ................................................................................................. 74
3 . 6 S A B I R , P I D G I N , C R E O L E , ............................................................................................................... 79
3.7 STRATIFICATION OF THE SLOVAK NATIONAL LANGUAGE IN COMPARISON TO THE
E N G L I S H L A N G U A G E ................................................................................................................................ 82
3 . 8 L A N G U A G E C H A N G E A N D I T S S O C I O L I N G U I S T I C E X P L I C A T I O N .................................... 84
3 . 9 L A N G U A G E P L A N N I N G .................................................................................................................... 95
4 B O R D E R S O F S O C I O L I N G U I S T I C S .......................................................................................... 101
4 . 1 S O C I O L I N G U I S T I C S I N T H E C O N T E X T O F O T H E R L I N G U I S T I C D I S C I P L I N E S ........... 101
4 . 2 S O C I O L I N G U I S T I C S I N T H E C O N T E X T O F O T H E R S C I E N C E S .......................................... 103
BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................................................... 105
ELECTRONIC SOURCES ................................................................................................................................. 108
RECOMMENDED MATERIALS ...................................................................................................................... 109
APPENDICES .................................................................................................................................................... 112
INDEX OF LINGUISTIC TERMS..................................................................................................................... 115
INDEX OF PERSONALITIES ........................................................................................................................... 117

Abbreviations
CALD

Cambridge Advanced Learners Dictionary

LDAL

Longman Dictionary of Applied Linguistics

OCEL

The Oxford Companion to the English Language

(the) UK

The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

(the) US

The United States of America

List of pictures
Picture 1
Picture 2

Slavomr Ondrejovi
The common core of English

List of tables
Table

Methods

Table

A. Ros s s U us a g e vs N o n- U u s ag e i n t er m s of voc a b u lar y

Table

Variables of National Language

Table

Factors Influencing Speaking Abilities of an Individual

Table

UKs Age Structure (2001)

Table

Ethnic Groups in the UK (Census 2001)

Table

Common Politeness or so-called PC Language

Table

(Over) PC Language or Misunderstanding of what PC Language is

Table

Automotive T erminology in English

List of appendices

Appendix A

Some component disciplines of sociolinguistics (Pavlk, 2006)

Appendix B

Jana Valdrov: Je politika politik? O genderov strnce veejnho projevu (2009)

Acknowledgements

The author is deeply and immensely grateful to her following colleagues:

Professor doc. PhDr. Eva Homolov, PhD. for her practical pieces of advice,
critical remarks, positive outlook on life, and a great sense of humour everytime we
have a chat;

PaedDr. Zuzana Bariakov, PhD. for her support and patience with me;

Mgr. Lujza Urbancov, PhD. for her constant support and inspiration;

Bc. Anna Straovcov for her invaluable technical help and constant help;

PhDr. Kamil Doviak, CSc. for his support and useful advice everytime needed;

Mgr. Arnot Hrn for his careful proofreading.

All four reviewers of this short guide book, professor doc. PhDr. Eva Homolov,
PhD. in Bansk Bystrica, PaedDr. Alena Kamrov, PhD. in Preov, PhDr.
Radoslav Pavlk, PhD. in Bratislava, and PhDr. Miroslav ern, PhD. in Ostrava for
all their invaluable pieces of advice and constructive criticism.

My special thanks belongs to the Faculty of Arts, Ostrava University in Ostrava (the
Czech Republic) which kindly agreed to publish this book.

Petra Jesensk (jesenska@fhv.umb.sk)

Summer 2010

Foreword
This book is intended as an introduction to basic sociolinguistic topics for the firstyear graduate students of the English language at Faculties of Arts and Education.
There are many general sociolinguistic textbooks written by English native speakers
for the general public, but almost none has been written by a Slovak for Slovak
readers (Pavlks publication is an exception).

It was not an easy task to write a book on essentials of sociolinguistics. The science
of sociolinguistics has been developing very fast, so it is not simple to cover most of
its achievements. The other reason is the choice of relevant topics and notions which
should not be neglected.

My aim was, in a comprehensive way, to introduce and explain elementary notions,

tasks, and problems that current sociolinguistics is interested in. However, it is not
possible without looking back on the history of this branch of linguistics.

The book consists of four main chapters. The first chapter shows relations between
sociology and linguistics resulting in sociolinguistics, and introduces basic
terminology and research methods. The second chapter concentrates on significant
personalities and their achievements in the course of history. The third chapter
focuses on the basic tasks of sociolinguistics and on the stratification of language
due to social factors (age, gender, etc.). The last chapter attracts readers attention
to the borderlines of sociolinguistics and its overlap between other linguistic and nonlinguistic disciplines.

A book of this extent cannot bring new ideas or new solutions to sociolinguistic
problems. Its goal is to help students comprehend basic sociolinguistic terminology,
relations between terms introduced, and understand different approaches applied in
this specific branch of linguistics. However, this book provides numerous references
to various publications, articles, essays, textbooks, films, etc. that students can use
for their own good.

1 What is sociolinguistics?
This chapter explains several basic relations between scientific disciplines: between
sociology (1.1) and linguistics (1.2), between linguistics and sociolinguistics (1.3), and
between sociology and sociolinguistics.

1.1 Sociology
Sociology is a science that emerged in the 1930s and 1940s and it was the very first
time when social phenomena were researched by means of scientific methods. The
founder of and pioneer in sociology was a French philosopher August Comte (1798
1857) who used the term sociology for the very first time in 1839 (ern, 1996).
Sociology is the science studying stratification of human society and patterns of
social behaviour in terms of society, culture, ethnicity, education, gender and
sexuality, crime and punishment, etc.

Sociology of language is the study of language policy and planning (3.9), language
change (3.8), language birth, maintenance, language shift (3.5) and death, pidgins
(3.6) and creoles (3.6), monolingualism, language choice in bilingual (3.5) or
multilingual nations, diglossia (3.5), etc.
Sociology provides some research methods which have been found useful in
sociolinguistic investigation (1.5). On the other hand, sociolinguistics (1.3) has
developed methods which were found useful in sociological research.

1.2 Linguistics
The term linguistics first appeared around 1850s and comes from French linguistique,
Latin lingua (tongue, language). Linguistics is the systematic study of language the
aim of which is to look at language objectively, as a human phenomenon, and to
account for languages as they are rather than to prescribe rules of correctness in
their use. It therefore has a twofold aim: to uncover general principles underlying
human language, and to provide reliable descriptions of individual languages.
Structural linguistics studies the structures of language its sounds (phonetics
and phonology), grammar (morphology and syntax), wordstock and word-formation

(lexicology), and the choice of expressive means and stylistic devices (stylistics).
Other branches of linguistics were founded, for example semantics (i. e. the study of
meaning of words and other units of language). Those branches of linguistics have
been useful for decades, but they cannot provide answers to all questions that
investigators ask.
That was the reason why new interdisciplinary branches of linguistics
appeared in the second half of the 20th century, such as biological linguistics,
cognitive linguistics, educational linguistics, philosophical linguistics, pragmatics,
psycholinguistics,

neurolinguistics,

sociolinguistics,

statistical

linguistics,

theolinguistics and many others. We can simply cover all these interdisciplinary
branches of linguistics with the term applied linguistics.
The term applied linguistics appeared around 1940s and refers to the
application of linguistics to the study and improvement of language teaching and
learning, language planning, communication between groups, speech therapy and
the management of language handicap, systems of communications, translating and
interpreting, and lexicography. The bulk of the work of applied linguists today has
related to language teaching and language learning and especially English as
a foreign second language. The term owes its origin to US language-teaching
programmes during and after the Second World War, largely based on Leonard
Bloomfield1s Outline Guide for the Practical Study of Foreign Languages (1942),
which was influenced by the early, mainly European, advocates of the Direct Method,
in particular Henry Sweet2. In Britain, a School of Applied Linguistics was established
by J. C. Catford3 at the University of Edinburgh in 1956, and the Center for Applied
Linguistics was set up in Washington, DC, under Charles Ferguson (see 2.2) in 1959.
Similar institutes have since been set up in various parts of the world.

1.3 Sociolinguistics the social study of language

The term sociolinguistics was first used in 1952 and the real sociolinguistic research
was done in 1964 (Dolnk, 2009). Although this discipline was formed in the late

Leonard Bloomfield (1887 1949) an American structural linguist

Henry Sweet (1845 1912) an English philologist, phonetician and grammarian
3
J.C. Catford (1917 2009) a Scot phonetician and teacher
2

1950s, there were initial problems with terminology it used to be called sociology of
language (see 1.1), social linguistics, anthropological linguistics, etc.
Sociolinguistics can simply be defined as the study of language in relation to
society (Hudson, 1996:1 4) or in other words as the field that studies the relation
between language and society, between the uses of language and the social
structures in which the users of language live (Spolsky, 1998:3). Sociolinguistics is a
branch of study that assumes that our human society is made up of many related
patterns and behaviours, some of which are (happen to be) linguistic. In other words,
sociolinguistics is the study of language in relation to social factors, that is, social
class, educational level and type of education, age, gender4, ethnic origin, etc. (LDAL,
1985:262). At the moment, there are major English-language journals5 devoted to
research publications and a number of introductory textbooks (as the one you are
holding in your hands).
There is a long tradition in the study of dialects and in the general study of the
relations between word-meaning and culture. What is new is the widespread interest
in sociolinguistics and the realisation that it can throw much light both on the nature
of language and on the nature of society, although it cannot provide answers to all
questions concerning linguistics. Like other subjects, sociolinguistics is partly
empirical and partly theoretical it works with terms such as language (an abstract
concept for a body of knowledge or rules), speech (actual utterances), speaker
(interlocutor), addressee6, topic and so on these are all terms that other branches
of linguistics work with as well. Personal experience is a rich source of information on
language in relation to society. The armchair7 approach, if applied to personal
experience alone, is dangerous for two reasons: first, we may be seriously wrong in
the way we interpret our own experience, because many of us are not aware of
a range of variations in speech, and secondly, personal experience is a very limited
base from which to generalise about language in society, since it does not take
account of all the other societies where things are arranged very differently.

In LDAL the term sex was used but PJ changed it to gender for the sake of terminological appropriateness.
For instance: Language in Society, Language Variation and Change, International Journal of the Sociology of
Language, Language Problems and Language Planning.
6
Speaker and addressee are both called komunikant in Slovak.
7
A person who claims to know a lot about a subject without having direct experience of it.
5

The main goal of sociolinguistics is to map linguistic variation on social conditions.

The mapping helps us understand both synchronic variation (variation at a single point
of time) and also diachronic variation (variation over time) or language change
(Spolsky, 1998). However, linguists sometimes differ as to what they include under
sociolinguistics.

Many

would

include

the

detailed

study

of

interpersonal

communication, also called micro-sociolinguistics (e.g. speech acts, sequencing of

utterances, sociolect). Such areas as the study of language choice in bilingual or
multilingual communities, language planning, language attitudes, etc. may be included
under macro-sociolinguistics, or they are considered as being part of the sociology
of language or the social psychology of language (LDAL). As one can see,
sociolinguistics has developed its terminology which is important to explain (see the
following subchapter 1.4).

Pavlk (2006) distinguishes sociolinguistics proper (see App. A) which consists of

three components: social linguistics, situational linguistics, and geographical
linguistics. This large-scale approach to the study of language and society (Pavlk,
2006:29) can be defined as a study of linguistic features and issues related to all
aspects of social life (Pavlk, 2006). Gramley Ptzold (2002) assert that
sociolinguistics proper studies the languages used by various groups based on
gender, age, class, region or on something else. They say that this particular type of
sociolinguistics examines group identities within societies according to these criteria
and how variation in pronunciation, grammar, lexis or pragmatics (communicative
strategies or speech acts) correlates with such groups (Gramley Ptzold,
2002:10). They call this the internal perspective, which they believe to be more of
one prestige, while the external perspective (i. e. sociology of language) is more
a matter of language policy.

All in all, we can say that sociolinguistics of all types is concerned with language as
a social phenomenon. Some aspects of this subject may be more sociological in
emphasis, others may be more linguistic. It is characteristic of all work in
sociolinguistics, however, that it focuses on English and other languages as they are
used by ordinary human beings to communicate with one another and to develop and
maintain social relationships (OCEL, 1996).

10

Sociolinguistics has close links to another interdisciplinary branch, psycholinguistics

(see 3.6 and 4.2), but it has relations with other sciences too (see 4.1 and 4.2).
Further reading on sociolinguistic approach towards language:
http://www.equark.sk/index.php?cl=article&iid=1441&tname=toprint (27/04/10): Nazeranie na jazyk a
svet (interview with prof. S. Ondrejovi, the head of J SAV); Spolsky (1998:3-7)

1.4 Basic notions

Lect (as a term) first appeared in the 1960s. This term is extracted from dialect
(ultimately from Greek lekts capable of being spoken). This is a sociolinguistic
term for a speech variety (see below). It is used relatively little on its own but often
occurs in combination, as in idiolect, acrolect, basilect, dialect, mesolect, cryptolect
(private language), sociolect (see below).
Acrolect8 (1960s from Greek kros top, tip, and -lect as in dialect) is
considered:

the most prestigious variety of a language, such as standard (see

below) British English with an RP accent in England (see also 3.5),
acrolect is also called High language or H-variety (see 3.5),

the variety of language in a post-creole continuum closest to the

standard or superstrate language, e.g. in Jamaica a local variety of
standard English.

Mesolect9 (1960s from Greek msos middle, and -lect as in dialect) is the
variety of language in a post-creole continuum intermediate between basilect (see
below) and acrolect, often retaining semantic and syntactic features not found in the
acrolect and tending to vary from speaker to speaker, such as between standard
Jamaican English and Jamaican Creole.
Basilect10 (1960s from Greek bsis lowest step, and -lect as in dialect) is
considered:

the least prestigious variety of a language called the Low or L-variety

(see 3.5), such as Gutter Glasgow in Scotland and Brooklyn in New
York City,

vonkajia vrstva (jazyka) v slovenine chpan ako kodifikovan, prp. hovor. variant, spisovn aj tandardn
forma jazyka
9
medzivrstva irieho geografickho a/alebo socilneho okolia (regiolekt, technolekt, sociolekt a pod.)
10
jadrov vrstva (jazyka rodiny a zkeho okruhu priateov a znmych) patria sem sociolekty malch skupn,
dialekty, mestsk nreia a pod. (Ondrejovi, 2008)

11

the variety of language in a post-creole continuum most different from

the standard or superstrate language, e.g. Jamaican Creole as
opposed to standard English (compare OCEL, 1996 and/or Ondrejovi,
2008:32-33).

Sociolect is a significant term in sociolinguistics and it refers to a variety of

a language (a social dialect) used by people belonging to a particular social class.
The term is a blend (socio- + dialect) that first appeared in the 1970s. The speakers
of a sociolect usually share a similar socioeconomic and/or educational background.
Sociolects may be classed as high11 (in status) or low (in status). For example
(LDAL, 1985):
He and I were going there. (higher sociolect)
Im n me was goin there. (lower sociolect)

The sociolect with the highest status in a country often becomes the standard
variety (LDAL, 1985). The difference between one sociolect and another can be
investigated by analysing the recorded speech of large samples of speakers from
various social backgrounds. The differences are referred to as sociolectal variation or
sociolectal dialectical variation12.

Language dominance is greater ability in, or greater importance of, one language
than another. This phenomenon can be viewed from two perspectives: from the point
of view of an individual or a country. First, for an individual this means that a person
who speaks more than one language or dialect considers that s/he knows one of the
languages better than the other(s) and/or uses it more frequently and with greater
ease. The dominant language may be her/his native13 language or may have been
acquired later in life at school or a place of employment. Second, for a country or
region where more than one language or dialect is used, language dominance
means that one of them is more important than the other(s). A language may become
the dominant language because it has more prestige (higher status) in the country, is
favoured by the government, and/or has the largest number of speakers.

11

On diglossia see 3.5

Available source on this topic (examples of sociolects) see Krko-Imrichov-Odalo (2006) or Odalo (1997)
13
Native language should not be confused with national language (see 3.7).
12

12

National language is a language which is considered to be the main language of

a nation. For example, Slovak is the national language of Slovakia. A government
may declare a particular language or dialect to be the national language of a nation.
Usually, the national language is also the official language, i.e. the language used in
government and courts of law, and for official business. However, in multilingual
nations, there may be more than one official language, and in such cases the term
official language is often used rather than national language. For example, the
Republic of Singapore had four official languages: English, Chinese (Mandarin),
Malay, and Tamil.
Variety14 is a term that comes into English from Latin varietas/varietatis diversity in
the 16th century (from varius speckled, diverse). OCEL (1996:988) characterises it
as a distinct form of a language for example, American English, Legal English,
Working-class English, Computer English, BBC English, Black English, Liturgical
English, Chicago English, etc. In fact, there are two basic dimensions of language
distinguished in relation of language and society:
a) horizontal dimension, i.e. regional dialects (geographical varieties),
b) vertical

dimension,

i.e.

social

dialects

(social

stratification

and

corresponding language variants).

OCEL (1996), however asserts the following types of varieties:
1) User-related varieties, associated with particular people and often places
such as Black English (English spoken by blacks, especially by African-Americans in
the US) and Canadian English (English used in Canada: either all such English or
only the standard form).
2) Use-related varieties, associated with function, such as legal English (the
language of courts, contracts, etc.) and literary English (the typical usage of literary
texts, conversations, etc.). In this sense, the term variety is conceptually close to
register and in practice is a synonym of usage, as in legal usage, literary usage etc.

Users and uses of English can be characterized in terms of variation in region,

society, style, and medium:

14

Compare to variable (see 3.)

13

a) regional variation is defined in terms of such characteristics as

phonological, grammatical, and lexical features, as when AmE is contrasted with BrE.
The American scholar Braj B. Kachru (1985) proposed a model15 consisting of three
concentric circles: inner, outer, and expanding (see Jesensk, 2007:63),
b) social variation represents differences of ethnicity, class, and caste, as in
Black English and Chicano English16 in the US, Anglo-Indian English in India, and
Hiberno-English in Ireland,
c) stylistic variation is defined in terms of situation and participants (such as
formal versus informal usage, colloquial versus literary usage) and function (as with
business English and the restricted variety known as Seaspeak),
d) variation according to medium is defined in terms of writing, speech, and
the use of sign language for the deaf (where there are, for example, differences
between American and British practices). [All examples and definitions in the part
about variety taken from OCEL (1996:988-989).]
Further reading on varieties of English: Quirk, R.-Greenbaum, S. 1996. A University Grammar of
English. Harlow: Longman, Chapter 1: Varieties of English, pp 1 9. ISBN 0-582-55207-9
Further reading on English regional dialects in the UK: Gramley- Ptzold (2002:227-245); McKayHornberger (1996:151-194); Upton-Widdowson (2006:1-9); Wilkinson (1995:35, 53-59), Yule
(1993:180-182)
Further reading on urban British English: Gramley- Ptzold (2002:245-249)

Standard variety (also standard dialect, standard language, standard) is the variety
of a language which has the highest status (i.e. prestige) in a community or nation
and which is usually based on the speech and writing of educated native speakers of
the language.
A standard is generally:
a) used in the news media and in literature;
b) described in dictionaries and grammars;

15

The Kachrus model became the basis for the classification of English use in the word.
Chicano English (also Mexican-American English) is the English spoken by Chicanos or Mexican-Americans.
The term covers both English learned as a second language by people of Mexican-American heritage and the
native English of speakers of Mexican-American background, both bilinguals and those who no longer speak
Spanish. (OCEL, 1996:190) It is quite difficult to describe both groups properly, but differences from other
varieties may be seen as follows: interference from Spanish, learning errors that have become established,
contact with other dialects of English, and independent developments. (OCEL, 1996:190) See also Glossary
16

14

c) taught in schools and taught to non-native speakers when they learn the
language as a foreign language.
Sometimes it is the educated variety spoken in the political or cultural centre of
a country, for example, the standard variety of French is based on educated Parisian
French. The standard variety of British English is Standard British English and the
standard variety of American English is known as Standard American English.
A standard variety may show some variation in pronunciation according to the part of
the country where it is spoken, e.g. Standard British English in Scotland, Wales, and
Southern England. Standard English is sometimes used as a cover term for all the
national standard varieties of English. These national standard varieties have
differences in spelling, vocabulary, grammar, and particularly pronunciation, but there
is a common core of the language. This makes it possible for educated native
speakers of the various national standard varieties of English to communicate with
one another (LDAL, 1985). A typical standard will have passed through the four
following processes:

selection (a particular variety must have been selected),

acceptance (the variety has to be accepted by the relevant, i. e. educated,

population, in fact, as the national language),

elaboration of function (ability to use the selected variety in all the functions
associated with central government and with writing),

codification (an academy must have written dictionaries and grammar books
to fix the variety, so that everyone agrees on what is correct)17.

The Standard English of an English-speaking country can be defined as a

minority variety18 (identified mainly by its orthography, grammar, and vocabulary)
which carries the most prestige and is most widely understood.
For further reading see:
Hudson (1996:33); Gramley Ptzold (2002:225-312); Wilkinson (1995);
Jesensk, P. 2002. Are British and American English Two Different Languages? In: Teria a
prax prpravy uiteov anglickho jazyka, Bansk Bystrica: FHV KAA, pp 28-36, ISBN 808055-691-1;

17

Compare Gramley Ptzold, 2000:4 7

Only few people use standard. Most people prefer a variety of regional English, or an admixture of standard
and regional Englishes.
18

15

Kachru, B.K. 2000. American English and other Englishes. In: Landmarks of American
Language and Linguistics. Volume 2. Washington, D.C.:US Dep. of State pp 272 291. No
ISBN
Labov, W. 2000. The Logic of Nonstandard English. In: Landmarks of American Language
and Linguistics. Volume 2. Washington, D.C.:US Dep. of State, pp 260 270. No ISBN

Received pronunciation (RP)19 is the type of British standard English pronunciation

which has been regarded as the prestige variety and which shows no regional
variation. It has often been popularly referred to as the so-called BBC English
because it was until recently the standard pronunciation used by most British
Broadcasting Corporation newsreaders. RP differs from Standard American English
pronunciation in various ways. For example, it uses the phoneme // where most
Americans would use another phoneme, as in hot /hO:t/ pronounced /ha:t/. Speakers
of RP do not have an /r/ sound before a consonant, though most Americans do, as in
farm /fa:m/ they say /farm/.

Speech variety is a term sometimes used instead of dialect, sociolect, pidgin,

creole20, etc. because it is considered more neutral than such terms. It may also be
used for different varieties of one language, for example British English, American
English, Canadian English, Indian English, Australian English.
Lingua franca21 (17th century) is the term from Italian, language of the Franks (the
plural is usually lingua francas) and it was originally a name for the mixed language,
based on Italian and Occitan (Southern French), used for trading and military
purposes in the Mediterranean in the Middle Ages. Nowadays we perceive this semitechnical term for any additional (often compromise) language adopted by speakers
of different languages, as a common medium of communication for any purposes and
at any level. A lingua franca may be either fully-fledged language (Latin in the Roman
Empire) or a pidgin or creole (Tok Pisin in Papua New Guinea, Kio in Sierra Leone).
A language may become somewhat reduced if it is widespread as a lingua franca
(Swahili in East Africa). French served widely in Europe as the lingua franca of
diplomacy in the 18th and 19th centuries, and English now serves as a lingua franca in
many countries with linguistically diverse populations (such as India and Nigeria) and
19

See 4.1
For terms pidgin and creole see Glossary
21
See also 3.6
20

16

for many purposes (as with restricted22 variety Seaspeak, used by the worlds
merchant marine). Consider the role of Latin in Europe in the Middle Ages and
English in the world today.

Sociolinguists study the behaviour of bilinguals (see 3.5), investigating the way in
which they switch from language to another depending on social context.
Speakers in all human societies possess large verbal repertoires, which may include
different languages, different dialects, and different (less or more formal) styles.
Varieties of language will be selected from this repertoire depending on features of
the social context, such as the formality of the situation and the topic of conversation.
Stylistic variation occurs in all English-speaking communities, signalled for the most
part by vocabulary, for example one might say somewhat foolish or rather silly or a bit
daft depending on who one is talking to, what one is talking about, the situation one
is in, and the impression one wants to create. Some English-speaking communities,
like many Scots and members of overseas Caribbean communities, are bidialectal,
having access to more than one dialect as well as different styles. (OCEL, 1996)
Further reading: Romaine (1994:48-64).

Language contact means contact between different languages, especially when at

least one of them is influenced by the contact. This influence typically takes place
when the languages are spoken in the same or adjoining regions and when there is
a high degree of communication between the people speaking them. The influence
may affect phonetics, syntax, semantics, or communicative strategies such as
address forms and greetings. This phenomenon occurs or has occurred in areas of
considerable immigration such as the USA, Latin America, Australia and parts of
Africa, as well as in language border areas such as parts of India (pidgin is an
example of a contact language).
Further reading: McKayHornberger (1996:47-65, 195-214); GramleyPtzold (2004:335-347);
Romaine (1994:33-48, 162-189).

Accent, dialect, region, and class are other important notions (not only) in (English)
sociolinguistics. The relationship between accent and dialect, on the one hand, and
social class background on the other, is an issue of considerable sociolinguistic
22

On restricted and elaborated code(s) see 3.5

17

importance. For example, dialects and accents of British English vary both
geographically and socially. The high status of RP (compare above) is traditionally
associated with the British upper class and the public schools (i.e. a group of private
boarding-schools), and, although often associated with southern England, it shows
no regional variation. The further one goes down the social scale, however, the more
regional differences come into play, with lower-class or broad accents having many
regional features. One of the major advances of modern sociolinguistics has been the
introduction of quantitative techniques, following the lead of the American
sociolinguist William Labov (see 2.2), which enables investigators to measure exactly
and gain detailed insight into the nature of the relationship between language and
social class.
In a sociolinguistic study in Bradford, Yorkshire, Malcolm Petyt showed that the
percentage of hs dropped by speakers correlated closely with social class as
measured by factors such as occupation and income. While lower working-class
speakers on average dropped 93% of all hs in words like house, upper working-class
speakers dropped 67%, lower middle-class speakers 28%, and upper middle-class
speakers only 12%. This study provides information about the source of some of the
language attitudes mentioned above. H-dropping is widely regarded in Britain as
wrong. Teachers and parents have often tried to remove this feature from childrens
speech, sometimes claiming that since the h appears in the spelling it must be wrong
to omit it in speech. This is obviously a rationalization: no one makes this claim about
the h of hour, or the k of knee. The real reason for this condemnation of h-dropping is
its correlation with social class and its low social status (OCEL, 1996).
For further reading on language policy, planning and attitudes (puristic and sociolinguistic
approaches) in Slovakia see:
Discussion series of Juraj Dolnk, Jn Findra, Anton Kret, Jlius Lomenk, Slavo Ondrejovi
and others in Literrny (dvoj)tdennk (2001-2006);
Masr, Ivan. 1994. Aj slovenina potrebuje zkonn ochranu. In: Kultra slova, No. 3, Martin:
Matica slovensk, 138-145 pp. ISSN 0023-5202;
Jesensk, Petra. (2007). Anglicizmy v dennej tlai zo sociolingvistickho aspektu. Bratislava:
J SAV, 53 96 pp. [Dizertan prca];
Ondrejovi (2008:213-255);
tulajterov, Alena. 2005. K problematike adaptcie novch anglicizmov v systme
slovenskho jazyka. In: Teria a prax prpravy uiteov anglickho jazyka 3. Bansk Bystrica:
UMB FHV, 89-106 pp. ISBN 80-8083-148-3

18

1.5 Sociolinguistic research methods

Basically, there are two approaches towards language diachronic and synchronic. If
we examine language and its changes in the course of time, we say that we apply a
diachronic approach. Many languages have historical documents dating back
hundreds or even thousands of years. It is possible to trace the development of
language units thanks to those documents. The point is that this kind of approach
revealed particular laws according to which modern languages in Europe and Asia
have developed. Moreover, these laws can be compared to laws working in natural
sciences. Some linguists (e.g. Neogrammarians) believed that this (historical)
approach towards language was the only possible way how to study human language,
because they believed that this approach (and its methods) was scientific (i.e. exact
and precise) more than synchronic approach, which is the study of language at a
certain moment of time, usually at the present stage of development. With the
appearance of linguistic structuralism, the synchronic study of languages was given a
scientific dimension and proved to be of the same scientific value as historical
linguistics. Moreover, the structuralist synchronic approach is able to examine
languages without historical documents in a scientific way (Svoboda Hrehovk,
2006).

In their research, sociolinguists apply a plethora of methods to different subjects that

all have in common one thing: language and its use in various social contexts. The
most common is observation, although, the most difficult task by observing is to
observe the way people speak without realizing them being observed. Another nut to
crack is what Labov labelled as observers paradox how can we observe people
when they are not being observed (Spolsky, 1998:8)? The point is that we need to
observe a dynamic phenomenon in its natural setting if we want to collect natural
speech samples. For example, in biology one common way of studying frogs is by
dissecting them, but unfortunately, a dead frog does not do very much. It is the same
with observing in sociolinguistics. If we want to get a sample from a frog, we do not
have to kill it. How to get a natural speech? This is the methodological problem as well
as ethical. The samples must be recorded on a tape or any other form of record (for
example CD). When speakers find they are being recorded they become too selfconscious and try to make their speech much clearer and more standard in order to

19

sound better. Anyway, they do no longer sound natural, they start pretending in the
presence of a tape-recorder.

Table 1 Basic research methods

Clandestine

C oll ect ing dat a s ecretl y.

recording

Sociolinguistic
interview

Technique of a recorded
conversation intended to
collect speech samples.

(developed by W.
Labov)

Non-intrusive
responses

Ethnographic
observation

A research technique
involving asking
strangers short nonpersonal questions.

The recording of natural

speech events by
a participant-observer.

+ effective way of data collection;

ethical problems,
disturbing sound of tape in the
past, now permission is asked,
anxiety about being recorded
+ effective,
+ natural,
+ flexible,
+ now it is one of the most
common
techniques
for
gathering samples of language;
difficult to relax,
formality as an investigator is
slightly formal (they speak to
strangers),
time-consuming (to collect and
analyse the data),
expensive in effort (to collect
and analyse the data),
number of various people
studied is limited,
speakers are aware of being
studied which causes the socalled observers paradox (i.e.
experiment and its results are
influenced by the presence of the
observer/investigator/researcher)
+ avoidance of observers
paradox,
+ speakers are relaxed for they
do not know they are studied,
+ flexible;
analysis of data can be quite
subjective
+ natural;
data collected this way are not
always open to statistical
analysis

+ means advantages and refers to disadvantages of methods

20

Other research methods:

Questionnaire is mainly used by social psychologists who ask people questions
about their beliefs, their behaviours and so on (Spolsky, 1998). The advantage of this
method lies in various ways that psychologists can ask the same question in order to
get valid information. Another advantage is that great number of people can be
addressed this way. However, there are also a few disadvantages, for example of the
direct way questionnaires ask the clear questions that people might tell you what they
think you want to know, but not what they really think. Another minus point of this
method is that questionnaires are prepared in advance in written form and
investigators cannot later change it if they find that they left out an issue that could be
interesting for their research. Questionnaires are suitable for gathering demographic
data about age, work experience, attitudes towards language, study or something
else, etc.

Observation (also mentioned in table 1 above) in general refers to gathering data by

watching and storing it. There are more kinds of observation (see Pavlk, 2006:7981). This method has its positive and negative points. The advantage of this method
lies in its simplicity, availability, and its discretion (because people who are observed
do not need to know they are observed). On the other hand, the minus point is that
an observer can overlook something important or can be in favour of or biased
against a particular linguistic variety, which may influence analysis and interpreting of
research results in positive or negative way (Pavlk, 2006).

Bell suggested a set of eight principles which he thought sociolinguistic investigators

should have followed:
1. The cumulative principle suggests that sociolinguistic researchers can (and
should) draw on information and knowledge of other scientific disciplines, not
only of linguistics.
2 . The uninformation principle suggests there is no clear line between
synchronic and diachronic approaches, because the linguistic processes that
we observe today are the same as those which have operated in the past.
3 . The principle of convergence means that the value of new data for
confirming or interpreting old findings is directly proportional to the differences
in the ways in which the new data are gathered; particularly useful are
21

linguistic data gathered through procedures needed in other areas of scientific

investigation (Wardhaugh, 1994:18-19).
4 . The principle of subordinate shift suggests that speakers of subordinate (i.
e. non-standard) variety of language shift toward or away from the
superordinate (i. e. standard) variety when responding to researchers who can
collect useful data concerning norms, non/standard, varieties, etc.
5 . The principle of style-shifting suggests that no speaker of language speaks
the same way in all circumstances; speakers change their style for different
reasons.
6 . The principle of attention suggests that the more aware the speakers are of
what they say, the more formal their style usually is.
7 . The vernacular principle suggests that the style which is the most common
among speakers is the vernacular, because this is a spoken style when the
least conscious attention is being paid to speech (Wardhaugh, 1994:19).
8 . The principle of formality suggests that sometimes it is difficult to differ
genuine vernacular from vernacular used in context when speakers are very
well aware of what they say and how they say it (Wardhaugh, 1994:18-19).
Further reading: ern (1996:399-401); Pavlk (2006:56-99); Spolsky (1998:8-13), Wardhaugh
(1994:17-20, 150-159)

2 History and current state of sociolinguistics

Sociolinguistics, as any other branch of science, cannot exist or develop itself without
researchers, scientists, and investigators. That is why we present the short
chronological survey presenting achievements of Founding fathers and their works
(2.1) and modern sociolinguists (2.2) in the following subchapters.

2.1 Beginnings of sociolinguistics

The 19th century raised language awareness and attention on standard forms thanks
to the compilation of dictionaries, grammars, spelling books, and pronunciation
manuals in the second half of the 18th century (Crystal, 1996:86). This resulted, for
example, in the 19th century fiction novels whose authors experimented with the

22

language they were trying to find new techniques of expression for the range of
diverse voices which the genre of novel permitted (Crystal, 1996).

It was not only writers who noticed changes in the perception of language. Scholars,
such as linguists, historians, philosophers, and thinkers found out that there were
particular structures, principles, and rules that exist within language. A special
attention was focused on national and exotic languages. Those thinkers wanted to
find out something behind language and many of them focused on relationship(s)
between language and human society. They did not know (and they could not) that
they began something that would be called sociolinguistics in the next century.

The term sociolinguistics is a blend of socio- (referring to society and sociology)

and linguistics and first appeared in the 1930s (OCEL, 1996). Founding fathers of
this branch of linguistics can be considered the following: Humboldt, Schuchardt,
Boas, Meillet, Sapir, Whorf, Paulny (in Slovakia) and many others. We present the
above-mentioned linguists and their works in chronological order in this subchapter.

Wilhelm von Humboldt (1767 1835), a versatile personality, a German lawyer,

linguist, writer23, diplomat24, philosopher, scholar, and thinker25, the predecessor of
modern linguistics (or typology of languages) because he tried to classify languages
according to their structure which he called energeia (Greek for active force)26, the
force that drives the language users to employ its means according to their mental
and cultural needs. Humboldt viewed language as inborn quality of human beings.
He says that the interaction of language, thought, and culture is relevant for the
emergence of a nation. The spirit of the respective nation (Volksgeist) is decisive for
the structure and the development of the respective language (Svoboda
Hrehovk, 2006:86). The language and thought (thinking) are two inseparable
mutually-linked phenomena. One of his contributions was the focus on living
languages, which was not a common approach at that time.

23

His close friends were the writers Schiller and Goethe.

in Rome, Vienna, and later in London
25
Founder of university in Berlin in 1810
26
He does not viewed language as ergon (Greek a product). He considered language a process and creation. He
perceived language to be an organism (Organismus or Sprachbau) that develops spontaneously and the language
users create a nation.
24

23

One of his key works is the third volume of ber die Kawisprache auf der Insel
Java (1836 1840) it is the introduction of this particular work that is relevant, ber
die Vershiedenheit des menschlichen Sprachbaus und ihren Eifluss auf die geistige
Entwicklung des Menschengeschlechts. Complete edition of his works was named
Gesammelte Werke (1903 1936) and was published in 17 volumes27.

Hugo Schuchardt (1842 1928), an Austrian linguist focusing on French, Basque

and other languages, introduced thoughts about social origin of language, mixing of
languages, etc. He covered in detail a plethora of linguistic topics and was
considered one of the greatest linguists ever. He thought of language as a product of
an individual speaker. According to him, social and experiential background, cultural
level, age, etc. were all factors having direct influence upon the speakers language
and an impact on the individual style of a speaker, getting generalized while being
imitated by others. His most important works are: Gegen die Junggrammatiker
(1885), Die Welt Weltschprache und Weltschprachen (1894), Sachen und Wrter
(1912), Einfhrung ins Baskische (1923)28.

Franz Boas (1856 1942) an American ethnographer/ethnolinguist and linguist,

called the Father of American Anthropology29 who influenced such linguistic
personalities as Sapir or Gumperz. Boas is considered a direct predecessor of
language relativity theory. He also introduced empirical methods of research into
ethnology30 and anthropology31.

Antoine Meillet (1866 1936), a French linguist, significant representative of

Indoeuropean comparing and contrasting linguistics. He did not see any sense in
seeking (reconstructing) proto-language because it is an impossible thing to do. What
is useful is the comparison to other languages and finding concords between them.
He viewed language as a complex of various styles dependent on social environment
(so-called social borrowings). Significant works are: Introduction ltude

27

More on Humboldt in ern (1996:94-96, 445-447), Encyklopdia jazykovedy (1993), Svoboda-Hrehovk

(2006:85-86)
28
Facts taken from Encyklopdia jazykovedy (1993:382)
29
For further reading see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franz_Boas (13/04/10)
30
the comparative and historical study of different societies and cultures
31
the study of the human race, its culture and society and its physical development

24

comparative des languaes indoeuropennes (1903), Les dialectes indoeuropennes

(1908, 1922).

Edward Sapir (1884 1939) an American linguist and anthropologist, founder of

descriptivism (i.e. American structuralism), student and disciple of F. Boas (see
above), independently on Saussure found out that language is an organized structure
(system). One of his famous works is Language. An Introduction to the Study of
Speech (1921).

Benjamin Lee Whorf (1897 1941) an American linguist particularly well-known

for his linguistic relativity Tudory (i.e. the hypothesis that particular type of language
influences thought, later known as the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis). He became one of
the most influential linguists of his time. His works were focused on the Hopi
language, Nahuatl dialects, Maya hieroglyphic writing, and he was the very first who
tried to reconstruct the Uto-Aztecan language. He strongly believed that different
linguistic systems could affect the thought structures and habitual behaviour of its
language users. His most famous works are: The Phonetic Value of Certain
Characters in Maya Writing (1933) and Loan-words in Ancient Mexico (1943).

Eugen Pauliny (1912 Zvolen 1983 Bratislava) a famous and influential Slovak
dialectologist and sociolinguist32 who organised a significant research on language
practice in Slovak urban areas in the 1960s. The research brought relevant (and
surprising) output, so that a conservative wing of Slovak linguists was worried about
the misuse of its results. He also dedicated his research to the history of the Slovak
language and its prestigious standard form (spisovn slovenina), particularly of its
pronunciation. Some of his works: Nreie ztopovch osd na hornej Orave (1947),
Dejiny spisovnej sloveniny (1948, 1983), Fonolgia spisovnej sloveniny (1961) and
many others.
Prague Linguistic Circle (PLC33) gave rise to the modern linguistics as such and
influenced next generations of linguists in (former) Czechoslovakia but also abroad in
the functional way they perceived language.
32
33

He did not considered himself a sociolinguist. This term was not used at that time at all.
Later on became known abroad as The Prague School of Linguistics.

25

PLC began their Prague meetings in autumn 1926 and they elaborated on a new
concept in linguistics. Their ideas strongly influenced modern linguistic thoughts.
The scopes of their interest were: distinctive features of phones and phonemes
(Jakobson), morphophonemics (relation between grammar and sounds), stylistic
variation, language planning and cultivation (Mathesius and Havrnek), extralinguistic
factors included in linguistic research (e.g. social environment, discourse analysis,
communicative competence).
Prague school publicly formulated their principles in The Hague in 1928 when the
1st International Congress of Linguistics was held. Their ideas were introduced in
written form a year later. The best-known personalities were:

Czechs (so-called PLC founding fathers): Vilm Mathesius (1882 1945),

Josef Vachek (1909 1996), Bohuslav Havrnek (1893 1978), Jan
Mukaovsk (1891 1975) and many others,

Russians: Nikolai S. Trubetzkoy (1890 1938), Roman O. Jakobson34 (1896

1982), and Sergei O. Karcevsky (1885 1955),

Slovak disciples who believed in and followed the ideas of PLC were Eugen
Pauliny (see above), tefan Peciar (1912 1989), and Jn Horeck (1920) in
particular.

PLC diverted from Neogrammarians atomistic approach towards language. On the

contrary, members of PLC perceived language as an interrelated system where
various functions were at work.
FSP (Functional Sentence Perspective) is one of the most relevant
contributions of PLC to the world linguistics. This linguistic analysis is based on the
way information is distributed (positioned) in sentences (discourse), i. e. the known
information (theme) and new information (rheme).

34

According to Encyklopdia jazykovedy (1993) the most significant personality of the the 20th century
linguistics. His workplaces were Moscow (where he established Linguistic circle in 1915), Brno (where he
worked between years 1920 and 1939), then he left for Boston (MTI) in the US (ecape in order to save his life).
Further reading on Jakobson: Encyklopdia jazykovedy (1993:200-201); ern (1996:157-159)

26

2.2 Modern sociolinguistics and sociolinguists

It is rather difficult to name all significant personalities who contributed to the modern
sociolinguistics in the English-speaking countries, in Slovakia or Czechia. We present
at least twenty-five of them in chronological order.

Jn Horeck (1920 Stupava 2006 Stupava) a Slovak linguist (who won several
awards) focused

on semantics,

terminology,

grammar,

stylistics,

language

stratification and language cultivation. His key works include: Zklady slovenskej
terminolgie (1956), Spolonos a jazyk (1982), however, he published nearly 30
monographs on linguistics.35 There was a conference lovek a jeho jazyk36 held in
Smolenice (January 20 22, 2010) dedicated to professor Horecks work. His
bibliography consists of nearly 2,000 papers and many of them are pioneering and
innovatory in various linguistic branches.

Charles A. Ferguson (19211998) an American linguist, who noticed the

importance of the relationship between language and national development. He was
one of the founders of modern sociolinguistics. He contributed to sociolinguistics and
linguistics by introducing the term diglossia (see 3.5) presented in the article Word in
1959. He helped to found the Center for Applied Linguistics in the US (1.2).

John Gumperz (1922) a well-known American linguist, anthropologist and

academic who (in co-operation with his colleague Dell Hymes) developed a new
sociolinguistic method called interactional sociolinguistics (for more detail click on the
web page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interactional_sociolinguistics, 13/04/10). His
works include Language and Social Identity (1982), Rethinking Linguistic Relativity
(1996, co-editor).

Alan Strode Campbell Ross (1923 1980) a British linguist, who began the most
famous debate on the relation between the English language and social class, in the

35

More on prof. J. Horeck, Dr.Sc.s achievements and contributions can be found, for example at the following
web page: http://www.juls.savba.sk/dokumenty/horecky-nekrolog.html (30/4/10) necrologue written by S.
Ondrejovi.
36
More on the conference http://www.sav.sk/index.php?lang=sk&charset=&doc=services-news&news_no=3057
(3/5/2010)

27

moment he published the article Linguistic class-indicators in present-day English in

1954. In this article he distinguished U (i.e. upper-class) usage from Non-U (i.e.
other kinds of) usage in terms of its distinctive pronunciation, vocabulary, and written
language conventions. Some of his research findings are presented in the following
table:

Table 2 A. Rosss U usage vs Non-U usage in terms of vocabulary

U

Non-U

Non-U

bike

cycle

rich

wealthy

graveyard

cemetery

vegetables

greens

lavatory or loo

toilet

ill (in bed)

sick (in bed)

looking-glass

I was sick on the I was ill on the boat.

boat.
dinner (in the middle Theyve a very nice
They have a lovely
of the day)
house.
home.

lunch(eon)

mirror

His other works include How to pronounce it (1970) or Don't say it (1973).

Zdenk (Denny) Salzmann (1925 Prague) an American linguist and anthropologist

who emigrated from Czechoslovakia to the US in 1947. His key work is considered
Language, Culture & Society: An Introduction to Linguistic Anthropology (1993)37. He
conducted research into the language of Arapaho Amerindians. He is a versatile
investigator: he conducted research on linguistic and cultural anthropology, folklore,
folk art, speech of Amerindians, etc.

Joshua Fishman (1926) an American linguist researching language related to

ethnicity, language planning, bilingual education, and medical anthropology. Some of
his works are Reversing language Shift: Theory and Practice of Assistance to
Threatened Languages (1991), which also became the Winner of the British
Association of Applied Linguistics prize for Best Book of the Year, and Can
Threatened Languages Be Saved? (2000).

37

Translated by Z. Hlavsa, J, Hlavsov, and V. atavov and published in 1997, titled Jazyk, kultura a
spolenost. vod do lingvistick antropologie.

28

Petr Sgall (1926 esk Budjovice) a Czech expert in general linguistics (who won
several awards), but his research interest also included the so-called obecn
etina (see 3.5). His main areas of teaching and research included typology of
languages, computational linguistics, and sociolinguistics. His main works:
Generative description of language and the Czech Declension (in Czech, 1967),
Language in its multifarious aspects (2006).

William Labov (1927) one of the most famous American sociolinguist and
dialectologist working at the University of Pennsylvania as a professor of linguistics.
He combined the synchronic and diachronic approaches. His linguistic contribution
represents the 1960s research into English varieties spoken in New York City, when
he pioneered new research methods of speech groups. In his one-day long
investigation he asked nearly 300 workers about the product situated on the fourth
floor38. He pretended not to understand the very first answer and let the assistants
repeat their answers. Thus, he could record four possible non-/uses of r-sound (two
unmarked and two emphatic). Labovs research showed that the pronunciation of
the American r-sound is a sociologically relevant phenomenon (prestigious in social
class stratification). In the statistics of more than 1,000 possible occurrences of r, he
could show the distribution of r-sounds according to the department stores, the age
and sex of assistants, etc. (Svoboda-Hrehovk, 2006:141). Labov repeated the
same investigation twenty-four years later (1986) and his results confirmed that the
use of the r-sound was increasing.
His crucial works: The Social Stratification of English in New York City (1966,
2006), The Study of Non-Standard English (1969), Sociolinguistic Patterns (1972),
Language in the Inner City (1972), Principles of Linguistic Change, Volumes I and II
(1996, 2001).

Dell Hathaway Hymes (1927 2009) an American sociolinguist, anthropologist,

and folklorist whose work dealt mostly with languages of the Pacific Northwest. He
was one of the first to call the fourth subfield of anthropology linguistic anthropology
instead of anthropological linguistics. His terminological shift draws attention to the

38

Long before this investigation of New Yorkers speech, he carried out a preliminary survey (1962) of the
pronunciation of r-sound among the assistants at three NY department stores: an expensive one (Saks), one in
the middle (Macys), and a cheap one (Klein) [(Svoboda Hrehovk, 2006:141)].

29

fields grounding in anthropology rather than in what, by that time, had already
become an autonomous discipline (linguistics). He was strongly influenced by many
linguists, mostly by Boas and Sapir of the Americanist Tradition and Jakobson and
other linguists of the Prague Linguistic Circle. He was one of the first sociolinguists
who pioneered the connection between speech and human relations and human
understandings of the world. Hymes analysed folklore and oral narrative focusing on
poetic structures within speech. This anthropological method became known as
ethnopoetics. This approach towards the study of language is generally known as
ethnography of speaking or ethnography of communication because it is based on
the actual observation of speech.
Hymes argues that understanding narratives leads to a fuller understanding of
the language itself and those fields informed by storytelling, in which he includes
ethnopoetics, sociolinguistics, psycholinguistics, rhetoric, semiotics, pragmatics,
narrative inquiry and literary criticism. Hymes introduced an acronym SPEAKING
which is supposed to function as a particular formula for various factors that he finds
relevant to research of speech:
a) S stands for Setting and Scene setting covers time and place (particular
and concrete circumstances in which speech is uttered) while scene refers to the
abstract psychological setting,
b) P for the Participants who fill particular social roles, participants can be of
several combinations (speaker listener39, sender receiver40, or adressor
addressee41),
c) E for Ends refers to expected outcome between participants (see above),
d) A for Act sequence refers to the actual form and content of an utterance
(what and how it is uttered, the relationship to the topic, etc.),
e) K for Key refers to the tone, manner (spirit) in which a particular utterance
is produced (and so it can be e.g. serious, light-hearted, mocking, ironic or
some other),
f) I for Instrumentalities refers to the medium (or channel) chosen, and so
the discourse can be uttered (oral), written (print, electronic), or other (e.g.

39

As in a dialogue.
As in a telephone message or call.
41
As in a classroom where a teacher (an addressor) interacts with learners (the addressees), or as in a political
speech where an adressor (a politician) talks to the addressees (i.e. the audience).
40

30

telegraphic), instrumentalities also refer to the actual forms that are chosen
(dialect, sociolect, code, register, etc.),
g) N for Norms of interaction and interpretation refers to the specific
behaviours and properties that attach to speaking and the way they are
perceived by those who do not share them Wardhaugh (1994) mentions
loudness, silence, gaze return, etc.,
h) G for Genre refers to specific (marked) ways (e.g. poems, riddles,
proverbs, lectures, etc.) in casual speech.
Wardhaugh (1994) points out that Hymes SPEAKING formula offers us a useful
reminder that talk is a complex activity, and that any particular bit of talk is actually
a piece of skilled work42 (Wardhaugh, 1994:247). Speakers and listeners must work
to see that nothing goes wrong. However, if something does go wrong (whether
speaking or listening), going-wrong is possible to describe in terms of neglect of
some of the communicative factors mentioned above.
The most important works written by Hymes include Language in Culture and
Society (1964), Foundations in Sociolinguistics (1974) on origin, sources, and
development of sociolinguistics as a branch of linguistic science, and Now I Know
Only So Far: Essays in Ethnopoetics (2003)43.

Bernard Spolsky (1932) a born New Zealander, a sociolinguist focusing on issues

such as language change and language maintenance, language policy, educational
linguistics, language attitudes and identity, and applied linguistics. His key works
include Sociolinguistics (1998) and Language Policy (2004).
Ralph W. Fasold (1940) an American expert in language policy, language
maintenance and shift, syntax and sociolinguistics of Ebonics44. Sociolinguistics of
Society (Language in Society) published in 1984 and The Sociolinguistics of
Language: Introduction to Sociolinguistics (Language in Society) published in 1990
are considered his key works.

42

Italics P.J.
Information taken from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dell_Hymes (25/06/10), Crystal (2006), and Spolsky
(1998).
44
The term Ebonics refers to Black English Vernacular (BEV) and African-American Vernacular English
(AAVE) that have been used to refer to language spoken by a majority of US citizens of Black African
background, consisting of a range of socially stratified urban and rural dialects.
43

31

Marie Krmov (1940 Brno)

a Czech (socio)linguist whose research interest

covers such areas as urban language, language cultivation, stratification, and

language planning. Selection of her works includes: Nejen lexikum45 (1999), Jazyk
spojujc46 (2000), Nad mluvou msta Brna (zdroje mluvy stav vvoj)47 published
in 2001, Psan podoba sociolektu48 (2004). Her latest monograph is titled Integrace
v jazycch Jazyky v integraci (2010).

Walt Wolfram (1941) an American dialectologist and sociolinguist whose research

interests are: African American English, language variation, dialect awareness, etc.
His recent work: American English: Dialects and Variation (with Natalie SchillingEstes, 2006).

Ronald Wardhaugh (not found) a prolific American linguist. His significant works
are the following: An Introduction to Sociolinguistics (1986), Languages in
Competition (1987) Proper English: Myths and Misunderstandings about Language
(1998).
Robin Tolmach Lakoff49 (1942) an American sociolinguist focusing on the relation
between language and power, expressions of politeness, womens language,
pragmatics, etc. Her famous works are Language and Womans Place (1975),
Talking Power (1990), The Language War (2000). Lakoff developed what she calls
the Politeness Principle she introduces three maxims usually followed in
discourse (namely dont impose, give the receiver options, and make the receiver
feel good. She says that these maxims are the most important in discourse. Not
keeping these three maxims equals disobeying the politeness principle50.

Juraj Dolnk (1942 Irsa, Hungary) a representative of Slovak (socio)linguistics

focusing on areas such as current Slovak language and its lexicology, general
45

In: Bosk, J. (Ed.): Internacionalizcia v sasnch slovanskch jazykoch: za a proti. Zbornk refertov
z medzinrodnho vedeckho sympzia konanho v Bratislave 9. 11. 10. 1997. Veda: Bratislava 1999, pp. 3844
46
In: Buzssyov, K. (ed.). lovek a jeho jazyk. Jazyk jako fenomn kultry. Bratislava: Veda 2000, pp.23-30
47
In: Ondrejovi, S. (ed.). Mesto a jeho jazyk. Bratislava: Veda 2000, pp. 67-74
48
In: Misloviov, S. (ed.). Jazyk v komunikcii. Medzinrodn sbornk venovan Jnu Boskovi. Bratislava:
Jazykovedn stav udovta tra, 2004, pp. 54-62
49
Once married to Georgie Lakoff (a cognitive linguist) do not confuse these.
50
Information taken from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robin_Lakoff (20/05/10)

32

linguistics, and language cultivation and stratification. His major works include the
following: Lexiklna smantika (1990), Zklady lingvistiky (1999), Spisovn
slovenina a jej pouvatelia (2000) in co-operation with J. Mlacek and P. igo,
Lexikolgia (2003). He holds lectures on linguistics in Slovakia and Germany (he is
capable of holding lectures in several languages, Slovak, German, and English
included).

Peter Trudgill (1943) an English (British) sociolinguist, dialectologist and

academic. His works: The Dialects of England (1990), Introducing Language and
Society (1992), Language Myths (with Laurie Bauer, 1998), New-Dialect Formation:
The Inevitability of Colonial Englishes (2004). His main areas of interest include
English dialects, Standard English and its characteristics, mutual relation between
language and society.
Slavo Ondrejovi51 (1946 Luenec) a prestigious, prolific, and versatile Slovak
sociolinguist and linguist, since 199952 the head of Jazykovedn stav udovta tra
Slovenskej akadme vied. Subjects of his interest are: general linguistics,
sociolinguistics, lexical and syntactic semantics (Medzi slovesom a vetou, 1989),
phonetics and pronunciation, lexicography. His works include Sociolingvistick
apircie slovenskej jazykovedy53 (1994a), Medzi jazykom mesta a jazykom vidieka54
(1999c), Spomienka na sociolingvistu Jozefa Murnskeho55 (1999d), O postojoch
k internacionalizmom56 (1999f), Jazyk, veda o jazyku, societa (sociolingvistick
etudy) published in 2008. He very often cooperates with a polyglot Viktor Krupa and
this cooperations results are for example: Ak regulcia vvinu jazyka je hriech?57
(1998a) or Jazykov mty58 (2005). S. Ondrejovi also translates linguistic studies
from German language into Slovak (e.g. W. von Kempelens work Mechanizmus

51

See the photograph on your left.

prof. PhDr. Slavomr Ondrejovi, DrSc director of the Linguistic Institute of . tr, Slovak Academy of
Sciences (J SAV) between 1999-2009 (prof. PhDr. Pavol igo, CSc. since 2010)
53
In: Slovensk pohady, 114, No 4, 1994a, pp. 128-131
54
In: Nreia a nrodn jazyk. Ed. A. Ferenkov. Bratislava: Veda, 1999c, pp. 113 120
55
In: Slovensk re, 64, 1999d, pp. 122 124
56
In: Internacionalizcia v sasnch slovanskch jazykoch: za a proti. Ed. J. Bosk. Bratislava: Veda, 1999f,
pp. 83 87
57
Krupa, V. Ondrejovi, S. In: Slovensk pohady, 114, 1998a, No 9, pp. 23 33
58
Krupa, V. Ondrejovi, S. In: Mty nae slovensk. Ed. E.Kekovi E. Mannov E. Krekoviov.Bratislava:
Academic Electronic Press, pp. 62 70
52

33

udskej rei, 1990, and W. von Humboldts work O rozmanitosti stavby udskch
jazykov a jej vplyve na duchovn rozvoj udskho rodu, 2000).

Suzanne Romaine (1952) an English (British) sociolinguist. The subjects of her

research interest are: linguistic anthropology, historical linguistics, sociolinguistics
(e.g. problems of societal multilingualism, linguistic diversity, language change,
language acquisition, and language contact in the broadest sense). Other areas of
interest include corpus linguistics, language and gender, literacy, and bilingual
education. Her works include: Socio-historical Linguistics. Its Status and Methodology
(1982), Pidgin and Creole Languages (1988), Bilingualism (1989), Language in
Society. An Introduction to Sociolinguistics (1994), Communicating Gender (1999),
Vanishing Voices. The Extinction of the World's Languages (2000).

Jana Valdrov (1955 Moravsk Tebov)

a Czech linguist and sociolinguist

(providing her own web page http://www.valdrova.cz/59 where the list of her gender
oriented works can be found; see also App. B). She concentrates on German
grammar, sociolinguistics, pragmatics, gender linguistics, and gender in teaching and
learning process. Her key monographs on gender include Gender a spolenost.
Vysokokolsk uebnice pro nesociologick smry magisterskch a bakalskch
studi (2006), Jazyk a sociln status. Pragmatika oznaovn en v jazyce veejnho
projevu. esko-nmeck srovnn (2009). Studies on sexist language include
Sexismus v nmeckm jazyce a situace u ns60 (1996), The Image of Women in the
Czech Media and Its Impact on Female Identity61 (2001), Reklama a rovnost pohlav.
Kauzy a genderov analza62 (2003), Genderov kompetence nebo genderov
slepota? Role vyuujcch pi utven genderov identity ky a k63 (2005),
Komunikace mezi vyuujcmi a studujcmi64 (2007).

59

See also guidelines www.msmt.cz or http://www.msmt.cz/uploads/Skupina_6/Gender_prirucka_korektura.pdf

(22/04/10)
60
In: ena - jazyk - literatura. Sbornk z mezinrodn konference. PF UJEP, st nad Labem 1996
61
In: Kosmas, Czechoslovak and Central European Journal, Volume 15, Number 1, Fall 2001, Texas A&M
University, USA, ISSN 1056-005X, pp. 73-86
62
Available: http://www.obcan.ecn.cz/index.shtml?apc=rj--1-138377&s=p (22/04/10).
63
In: Inovativn tendence v kurikulu studijnho oboru "Uitelstv nmeckho jazyka pro zkladn koly". Sbornk
konference. MU Brno, 2005:68-72. ISBN 80-210-3697-4
64
In: Smetkov, Irena (ed.): Pruka pro genderov citliv veden kol. OPS Praha, pp. 23-28. ISBN 978-8087110-01-0

34

Mira Nblkov (1956 Martin) a Slovak (socio)linguist focusing on the relations

between

lexical

semantics

and

word-formation

processes,

lexicography,

and currently on sociolinguistics, especially on the relations and linguistic contacts

between Slovak and Czech languages. Her recent monograph, titled Slovenina a
etina v kontakte. Pokraovanie prbehu (2008), professionally explains birth and
life of some language myths (e.g. many Czechs believe that drevokocr is a Slovak
word for a squirrel).
Vladimr Patr65 (1959 Bansk Bystrica) a prestigious Slovak sociolinguist
teaching and influencing many young generations of Slovak students in Bansk
Bystrica and elsewhere. Some of his works are: monograph Interdisciplinrne
koopercie (2002); scientific studies Kulturologick aspekty jazykovej komunikcie v
elektronickom prostred66 or Textov model v multimedilnom prostred67.

Radoslav Pavlk (1972 Martin) a Slovak sociophonetician, representative of

younger

generation

dealing

with

English

phonetics,

socio-phonetics

and

sociolinguistics. He teaches several branches of linguistic disciplines at Comenius

University, Bratislava (Faculty of Education). His most significant work by now can be
considered Elements of Sociolinguistics (2006). His other works include A Theoretical
Introduction to English Phonetics and Phonology (2003), Z problematiky defincie
pojmov asimilcia a koartikulcia68 (2009). He provides his own web pages69 where
the complete list of his publications, interests of research, and other useful
information can be found.

Lujza Urbancov (1973 Zvolen) a Slovak linguist and sociolinguist, representative

of young generation aiming at research of urban language. Some of her contributions
include Niekoko poznmok k rei najstarej genercie v meste Zvolen70 (2000),
65

His biography and the complete lists of scientific publications and works od prose are all available on the web
page http://www.osobnosti.sk/osobnost_tlac.php?ID=1809 (27/04/10).
66
In:Sasn jazykov komunikcia v interdiscipinrnych svislostiach. Contemporary Language
Communication with Interdisciplinary Connections. 5th International Conference on Communication in Bansk
Bystrica in 2003, September, 3rd 4th. Ed.V.Patr. Bansk Bystrica: Univerzita Mateja Bela, 2004, pp. 56 65
67
In: Analytick sondy do textu 1. Zbornk prspevkov z vedeckej konferencie 20/11/2003 in Bansk Bystrica.
Ed. I. Sedlk. Bansk Bystrica: Univerzita Mateja Bela Filologick fakulta, 2004, pp. 5 16.
68
In: Jazykovedn asopis, ro. 60, . 1, 2009, pp. 35 56
69
http://sites.google.com/site/radoslavpavlik44/ (22/03/10)
70
In: Jazykov komunikcia v 21. storo. Ed. J. Klinckov. Bansk Bystrica: Fakulta humanitnch vied
Univerzity Mateja Bela, 2000, pp. 278-281. ISBN 80-8055-464-1

35

Staria genercia vo vskumoch jazyka mesta71 (2004) or Rodov pecifik

komunikcie vo verejnej komunikanej sfre72 (2004), Faktor asu vo vskume
jazyka obyvateov mesta73 (2005). Her dissertation focuses on urban speech of
Zvolen: Mestsk re vo Zvolene (Urban Speech in Zvolen, 2006). Major areas of her
research are distinctive gender communication, urban language, and other
sociolinguistic issues.

Viktor Elk (1974, birthplace not found) a young Czech (socio)linguist teaching at
Charles University in Prague, Institute of Linguistics and Finno-Ugric Studies, Faculty
of Philosophy and Arts. His major research interests are the Romani language,
language contact, and linguistic typology. He wrote several papers74 on the structural
typology, history, dialectology, and sociolinguistics of Romani and some of these
have been published in international journals. It is interesting to mention that since
1996 he has carried out linguistic fieldwork on Romani, focusing on the undescribed
Romani dialects of Southern Slovakia. Since 2003 he has been working as the
regional coordinator, for the Czech Republic and Slovakia, of an international project
that resulted in grammatical documentation of over 50 distinct Romani varieties of the
region. He was the principal organizer of the 7th International Conference on Romani
Linguistics, held in Prague in 2007. He published the monograph Markedness and
language change: The Romani sample (2006) in co-operation with Yaron Matras.
Further reading on linguistic personalities: Encyklopdia jazykovedy. (Ed. Jozef Mistrk, 1993) and
ern (1996)
Further reading on sociolinguistics and ethnolinguistics: ern (1996:389-410)
Further reading on Prague school: ern (1996:147-164), SvobodaHrehovk (2006:100-110),
tekauer (1993:105-110)
Further reading on sociolinguists achievements in research of urban language: Ondrejovi
(2008:234-241), Urbancov (Mestsk re vo Zvolene, 2006), Sociolinguistica Slovaca
Examples of sociolinguistic articles (research results, descriptions, etc.): Sasn jazykov
komunikcia v interdiscipinrnych svislostiach. Contemporary Language Communication with
Interdisciplinary Connections. 5th International Conference on Communication in Bansk Bystrica 2003,
September, 3rd 4th. Ed. V. Patr. Bansk Bystrica: Univerzita Mateja Bela, 2004, 510 pp. ISBN 808055-979-1

71

In: Sasn jazykov komunikcia v interdisciplinrnych svislostiach. Ed. Vladimr Patr. Bansk Bystrica:
Univerzita Mateja Bela, 2004, pp. 179-186. ISBN 80-8055-979-1
72
In: Sfry eny. Ed: S. Oenov-trbov. Bansk Bystrica : Fakulta humanitnch vied Univerzity Mateja
Bela, Sociologick stav AV R, 2004, pp. 207-216. ISBN 80-8083-000-2
73
In: as v jazyce a literatue. st nad Labem : Univerzita J. E. Purkyn, 2005, pp. 173-178. ISBN 80-7044716-8
74
The complete list of his works is available: http://ulug.ff.cuni.cz/lingvistika/elsik/veda/publikac.php (30/4/10).

36

3 Basic tasks solved by sociolinguistics

The term linguistic variety generally refers to an identifiable language system which is
used in particular geographical or social situations and has its own linguistic norms75.
So for example, the variety of English spoken in Birmingham, England will differ from
that spoken in Birmingham, Alabama. Within a geographical region there may also be
varieties based on social class or occupation. Similarly, the variety of English used in
casual conversations will differ from that used in academic writing (see terminology in
1.4).

One must distinguish a variant (see 1.4) from a variable. The term variable is
a linguistic item which has identifiable variants (Wardhaugh, 1984:139) or various
forms. The different forms of the variable may be related to differences in style or to
differences in the socio-economic background, education, age, or sex of the speakers
(see sociolect in 1.4). There are variables in the phonology, morphology, lexicon, and
syntax of a language.
Examples of variables in English include:
a) the ng variable as in coming. In careful formal speech it often occurs as [I] in
[kmI], but in informal or local (regional) speech it often occurs as [kmn]
written comn.
b) the marker on verb forms for 3rd person singular present tense, as in He works
here, which is a variable because in some non-standard and some new
varieties of English a variant without the ending may occur, as in He work here.
Linguistic rules which try to account for these variables in language are referred to
as variable rules (LDAL, 1985).

QuirkGreenbaum (1996:1 9) distinguish six kinds of varieties in the common

core of English (nucleus which is realized only in the different forms of the language
that we actually hear or read) which are interrelated. The common core (nucleus)
dominates all the varieties and it means that however remote a variety may be, it has
running through it a set of grammatical and other characteristics that are common to

75

Standard practice speech communities can differ in regard to the linguistic norms being followed. These
norms can involve grammar, pronunciation, vocabulary, and the appropriate social use of language.

37

all. Each variety class is related equally to others and points to each of the other
variety classes.

The following diagram shows variety classes and their varieties within each of them
according to Quirk and Greenbaum.

Picture 2 The common core of English

The common core of English

Region: R1, R2, R3, R4, ...
Education and social standing: E1, E2, E3, E4, ...
Subject matter: S1, S2, S3, S4, ...
Medium: M1, M2, M3, M4, ...
Attitude: A1, A2, A3, A4, ...
Interference: I1, I2, I3, I4, ...

Explanation of Picture 2: There are six variety classes within English (region,
education and social standing, subject mater, medium, attitude, and interference) and
there are varieties within each variety, for example in the regional variety we can find
varieties R1, R2, R3, R4, etc., in the variety of education and social standing we can
find varieties E1, E2, E3, E4, ..., etc. However, common core is dominant in all varieties,
which means that whatever remote a variety may be, it has running through it a set of
grammatical and other characteristics that are common to all (QuirkGreenbaum,
1996:1) variety classes which are explained into detail below.
Regional variation varieties according to a region are usually called dialects.
There are many dialects of English in the British English. This variation seems to be
realised predominantly in pronunciation (phonology), i. e. we can recognise a different

38

dialect from speakers pronunciation even before we notice that their vocabulary is
also distinctive.
Education and social standing we can observe a particular polarity of educated
and uneducated speech. Educated speech usually moves away from dialectal usage
to a form of English that cuts across dialectal boundaries. However, uneducated
speech is very often identified with the regional dialect. For example, the usage of the
double negative in the following sentence: I dont want no cake. is outlawed from all
educated English by the prescriptive grammar tradition, but uneducated speakers use
it very often. The language used by educated speakers is called standard (see 1.4)
and uneducated speech is called substandard.
Varieties according to subject matter these are referred to as speakers registers
or repertoire of varieties which speakers switch to. Most typically, the switch involves
turning to the particular set of lexical items (terms, expressions, etc.) habitually used
for handling the subject in question, such as law, cookery, football, etc. However, the
use of a specific variety of one class often presupposes the use of a specific variety of
another. For example, a well-formed legal sentence presupposes an educated variety
of English.
Varieties according to medium we recognise two forms of language spoken
and written. Usage of one of these is based on two factors: the first is situation and the
other is the impossibility of transition of speech into writing. Situational factor
influences the choice of medium, for example, the choice of a written medium
presumes the absence of a person to whom the piece of language is addressed. The
second factor influences the choice of medium in such a way that we cannot transmit
all items of speech into writing (orthography), for example, stress, rhythm, intonation,
gestures, etc. This is the reason why the writer of message must write their message
explicitly and precisely in order to avoid misunderstandings.
Varieties according to attitude these are usually called stylistic varieties. The
common core represents the neutral (i. e. unmarked) variety of English. We can
distinguish formal speech from informal speech, which can be depicted on an abstract
axis as follows: formal speech neutral speech informal speech. Both formal and
informal speeches are considered stylistically marked.
Varieties according to interference these varieties are different from those
discussed above. This phenomenon refers to the influence of mother tongue (its
pronunciation, grammar, syntactic structures, and lexicon) upon a foreign language.
39

For example, Slovak beginners of the English language tend to say I know you for
years., and thus applying Slovak grammatical rules to the English utterance (or
sentence respectively). However, there are many kinds of interference varieties
phonological, morphological, syntactical, stylistic, lexical, and combinations of these.

There are relationships between the variety classes presented above and also in
picture 2. All varieties are mutually interrelated, but there are limitations to this. We
know that writing is an educated art, and that is why we do not expect to find other
than educated Standard English in this medium (i. e. in newspapers, publications,
etc.). Attitudinal varieties are quite independent of other varieties, for example, it is
possible to be formal or informal in political debate. However, informal speech can
cause embarrassment when a student uses informal or casual speech when talking to
an archbishop. This phenomenon is called authority gap or seniority gap.
The important thing to be remembered is that the common core constitutes the
major part of any variety of English. The other significant thing which was expressed
only implicitly is that there are varieties within each variety. For example, we can utter
or write He stayed a week. or He stayed for a week., or Had I known or If I had known.
Certainly, different choice of lexical items or different organisation of a sentence can
cause a shift from formal to informal, standard to substandard (or non-standard) or
vice versa (QuirkGreenbaum, 1996).

According to ern (1996, p 395) we recognize three types of varieties of national

language.

Table 3 Varieties of National Language

Local dialects or the so-called patois76, however, there are
many varieties within most dialects (e. g. there might have
been differences between two neighbouring villages). The
1 Geographical varieties

standard language has developed from a dialect which had

the greatest cultural and economic significance within
a speech community.

76

The form of a language spoken by people in a particular area which is different from the standard language of
the country (the local patois).

40

Sociolects referring to the social structure of inhabitants

2 Social varieties

within society. Terms slang and jargon are the most

common. Black English is a variety of American English.
Refer to the social situation in which a discourse is made.

3 Functional contextual
varieties

Functional styles (in/formal, academic, colloquial, intimate,

etc.) and medium (spoken/written) are important.

Pavlk (2006:63), however, recognizes sociolinguistic varieties of the following

types: linguistic, social, situational, and geographical.
In linguistic variables he recognises the following types (Pavlk , 2006:64):

phonetic variables,

phonological variables,

morphological variables,

lexical variables,

syntactic variables.

Following Labovs classification Pavlk (2006:65) further classifies linguistic

variables into indicators, markers, and stereotypes.
In social variables he recognizes (Pavlk, 2006:66): social class, age, gender,
race, ethnicity, culture, and nation.
In situational variables Pavlk (2006:67) distinguishes: medium, field, genre,
style, role relationship, and setting.
In geographical variables Pavlk (2006:68) distinguishes: a town, a city, a valley,
a country, etc., and a village. He admits that the above-mentioned may have
variants such as northern part, southern part, eastern part (ibid.) and so on.

ern in his Djiny lingvistiky (1996:396) also distinguishes five main factors
influencing speaking abilities of an individual:

41

Table 4 Factors (variables) Influencing Speaking Abilities of an Individual

Language of young people differs from language of older ones mostly in

1 Age

presenting innovations, tendencies to language changes and shifts are

more marked in young generations (coinages, neologisms, clippings,
foreign words, etc.). Older people are more linguistically conservative.

2 Sex

Generally, female language is more conservative than male language.

Phonetic form is different, too.

3 Ethnical
background

Already mentioned Black English as a variety of American English.

4 Social and

A parallel between the language of an individual and the language of the

economic

whole speech community cannot be made, however, there are particular

standing

differences among social class members.

There is an important polarity of uneducated and educated speech in

which the former can be identified with the regional dialect most
completely and the latter moves away from dialectal usage to standard
English.
National standards of English are:
5 Education

a) British and American English,

b) Scottish English,
c) Irish English,
d) Canadian English,
e) South Africa, Australia and New Zealand.
If there were two individuals of the same age, sex, ethnical background
and socio-economic standing, the differences in their language could be
caused by their individual intellectual level or by the duration of their
formal or informal education.

Each individual may use several varieties in regard to the situation, environment,
topic, other interlocutors of discourse and so on. Each individual may also combine
some (or all) varieties, and so create idiolect. The term idiolect was first used in the
42

1940s and its initial part has roots in Greek dios (personal), while its final part refers
to -lect as in dialect. Idiolect may be studied in its wider and narrower sense. In its
widest sense, it is the unique way each individual communicates. For example,
idiolect refers to the individual choice of utterances and the way a particular individual
interprets the utterances made by others. In a narrower sense, an idiolect may
include those features, either in speech or writing, which distinguish one individual
from others, such as voice, quality, pitch, and speech rhythm. The use of particular
regional dialect and/or sociolect can also be indicators of an idiolect (LDAL, 1985).
Put it in other words, idiolect is very often characterised as the language special to an
individual and may be described as a personal dialect (OCEL, 1996) consisting of
vocabulary common to most speakers of the personss speech community, however,
it reflects a persons gender, age, class, education, region, etc. Idiolect is not fixed, it
is very dynamic and thus changing according to time, place, situation, etc. (Gramley
Ptzold, 2002).

To summarise the basic tasks of sociolinguistics:

Finding relationship between the stratification of language and social

strata/factors (age, gender, class, ethnicity, etc.),

Defining linguistic norms in terms of standard and in terms of other varieties of

language (1.4, 3.5),

Defining variables (e.g. variables of national language presented in table 3)

and their varieties (3.1, 3.2, 3.3, and 3.4) observed on language,

ern (1996) defines three types of variables of national language:

geographical, social, and functional contextual variables (see table 3), while
Pavlk (2006) distinguishes four types of sociolinguistic variables: linguistic,
social, situational, and geographical,

Expressions of diglossia (3.5) and bilingualism (3.6),

Studying and practicing language planning (3.9),

Examining language change (3.8).

43

3.1 Language and age

There are various types of age-based varieties one may see within a population.
They are: vernacular of a subgroup with membership typically characterized by a
specific age range, age-graded variety, and indications of linguistic change in
progress.77
One example of subgroup vernacular is the speech of street youth. Just as street
youth dress differently from the norm, they also often have their own language.
The reasons for this are the following:

to enhance their own cultural identity,

to identify with each other,

to exclude others, and

to invoke feelings of fear or admiration from the outside world. Strictly

speaking, this is not truly age-based, since it does not apply to all individuals
of that age bracket within the community.

Age variety is a stable variety which varies within a population based on age. That is,
speakers of a particular age will use a specific linguistic form in successive
generations. This is relatively rare. People tend to use linguistic forms that were
prevalent when they reached adulthood. Therefore, in the case of linguistic change in
progress, one would expect to see variety over a broader range of ages.
Further reading: Pavlk (2006:109-118); Romaine (1994:80); ThomasWareing (2000:99-116).

Modern British society is an ageing society due to the rapid increase in life
expectancy and the decline in the birth rate. This progress (of lifespan) is partly
due to improvements in health care and living standards. Furthermore, there have not
been any events like those of World Wars I & II impacting on this phenomenon. In
2001, the average life expectancy was 80 years for females and 74 years for males
(Pickardov, 2005:52).

77

The following information taken from the web page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociolinguistics#Traditional_sociolinguistic_interview (14/11/2008)

44

According to the ONS78, on average, the UKs ethnic minorities have a much
younger age profile than the white population. Thus, the average age for the white
population surveyed in the 1997 1999 period was 37 years, but only 26 years for
ethnic minorities (ibid.).

Pickardov (2005) points out that the Census 2001 revealed a big increase in the
number of the old people with 1.1 million people over 85, compared with 0.9 million
in 1991 (an increase represents 22%) and just 0.2 million in 1951 (i.e. forty years
ago). In fact, those aged 85 and over now represent nearly 2% of the total population
of the UK.

Table 5 UKs Age Structure (2001)

Age group

% of population

number in millions

under 16

20.2

11.9

females 16 59
males 16 64
females 60+
males 65+
all

61.3

36.1

18.3

10.8

100

58.8

all females

51.4

30.2

all males

48.6

28.6

Source: Office for National Statistics, Census 2001 (Pickardov, 2005:56)

Note: In 2001 the official state retirement age in the UK was 60 to 65 years for females and 65 years for males.

3.2 Language and gender

Modern authors (Gramley Ptzold, 2002:209212; ThomasWareing, 2000:66)
distinguish between sex and gender, when they say that sex refers to biological
category which is usually fixed before birth and gender, they say, refers to social
category, which is associated with certain behaviour (ibid.). They set an example
with a bicycle. A bicycle illustrates the difference between the two: bike saddles
designed for women are usually wider that saddles for men, because women have a
wider pelvic girdle this is a sex difference. Bikes without a crossbar (so riders can
wear skirts) are designed in response to a gender difference, since there is no

78

Office for National Statistics (in the UK)

45

biological reason why (in some cultures) women wear skirts and men do not (a
gender difference).

The term gender appears in English in the 14th century and comes from Old French
gendre (Modern French genre), from Latin genus/generis, translating Greek gnos
kind. Everyone knows that today it is a grammatical distinction, in which such parts of
speech as nouns, adjectives, and determiners are marked as masculine and feminine
(as in French and Spanish), or masculine, feminine, and neuter (as in Czech,
German, Greek, Latin, and Slovak). In such languages, these parts of speech when
being used together must agree in gender, i.e. the feminine endings in the Latin
phrases illae feminae bonae (nominative: those good women), masculine endings in
illi viri boni (nominative: those good men) and neuter endings in illa oppida bona
(nominative: those good towns). Distinctions in grammatical gender match some but
not all natural gender distionctions and extend them to many items which have no
natural gender, for example, Slovak kniha, a book (feminine). There can sometimes
be considerable discrepancies between grammatical and natural gender, for example
Slovak dieva (girl) and diea (child), and German das Mdchen (the girl) and das
Kind (the child) are all neuter.

In English, grammatical distinctions of gender are mainly confined to the third-person

singular pronouns, personal, reflexive, and possessive (she/her/hers/herself versus
he/him/his/himself). The term non-personal, rather than neuter, is usually preferred
for it/its/itself. A contrast of personal and non-personal is also found with the relative
pronouns who/whom versus which. She/her is widely used to refer to a ship or other
means of transport (e.g. She runs well before the wind.), to a country (e.g. England
will never forget those who gave up their lives for her.), and sometimes to machines
(e.g. She sounds rough, maybe the engine needs tuning.) A baby or young child
(especially when the sex is not known) is sometimes referred to as it (As one charity
advertisement says: You dont have to hit a child to abuse it.) Plural they/them is
genderless in English (compare German Sie/Ihnen/ihr/euch and Slovak ony/oni/ich),
being used for people and things. Its use with singular reference for people (e.g. Ask
anybody and theyll tell you.), a historically well-established usage which operates
against strict rules of concord, is common, especially in spoken language, but
arouses controversy and is considered a solecism by purists (see 2.1). The use of
46

singular they-pronouns dates from the 16th century and is increasingly acceptable in
informal British and American English, and is increasingly common with dual gender
nouns such as speaker, teacher, or student. Singular usage occasionally includes
themself, a form that dates from the 15th century but has always been rare (e.g. as in
the Times, 9 Sept. 1987 I think somebody should immediately address themself to
this problem). If singular they continues to gain acceptance, themself may also
become common, much as yourself became common with singular you in the 17th
century.

Some natural-gender distinctions between pairs of nouns show a derivational

relationship (e.g. bride/bridegroom, hero/heroine), but most have no morphological
connection (father/mother, uncle/aunt, mare/stallion). Some feminine endings are
criticised as pejorative and sexist (see 3.2.1 below), especially by feminists (e.g.
authoress, poetess, usherette, stewardess appear to be more disliked than actress,
waitress, etc.). In recent years, conscious attempts have been made to use the
unmarked or masculine term for both sexes: with little difficulty in such statements as
Emily Dickinson is a great poet, more controversially in Shes a waiter/steward. Such
awkward usages are often avoided by neutral or unisex terms like flight attendant.
There seems as yet to be no move to abolish such titles as princess, duchess,
countess. Where terms exist that include -man (as in chairman), non-sexist
alternatives like chairperson or chair79 are considered controversial and unstable,
especially in the UK, although they are making some headway in the US.
What is a sexist language? It is such a language that presents stereotypes80 of men
and women, sometimes to the disadvantage of both, but usually to the disadvantage
of women (see App.B). Sexist language represents women and men unequally, as if
members of one sex were somehow less completely human, less complex, and had
fewer rights than members of the other sex.

Sexist language can be discussed in two ways:

1) as the extent to which the English language system is inherently sexist,
2) as the extent to which some ways of using language are sexist.
79
80

Compare the following pairs: policeman policewoman, postman postwoman, salesman saleswoman
For stereotypes see for example Jesensk (2009:17-22)

47

To consider the first approach (1), one of the things we look for is symmetry versus
asymmetry in the English lexis (vocabulary). Example (2) indicates the ambiguity of
the term Man/man. The word Man is used generically for men, women, boys and
girls, while man is used meaning men only, not girls, women or boys (compare
Jesensk, 2009:28-30, Poynton,1990: 50-51, tulajterov, 2007:59-62).

(1) generic

horse

(2) generic

Man

female

mare

female

woman

male

stallion

male

man

young

foal (either sex)

young

child

young female

filly

young female

girl

young male

colt

young male

boy

Further reading:
(1994:99-133)

81

FromkinRodmanHyams (2007:447-451); Jesensk (2009:32-33 ), Romaine

3.2.1 Twofold perception of females and males

Society perceives females and males differently because our expectations and
gender roles are (still) different. These facts reflect in our language, i.e. in the choice
of our expressions and stylistic devices.
How could we compare and contrast the perception of males and females in (ancient,
modern) society? One can perfectly see that females are perceived so to say in
a much worse light than males. This proves society to be more critical to females
than to males. Different criteria are set for either gender, higher for females and lower
for males. This creates two moral codes one for females (this code is more strict
and conservative), the other for males (this code, however, is more flexible and
dynamic).
This twofold vision of either gender can be clearly observed in the (mass) media, and
not only in the tabloids such as Sun but also in the so-called quality paper such as
Daily Telegraph. McKay

Hornberger (1996:228) present one story in two

newspapers:
81

Perception of females in bilingual (Slovak-English) dictionaries

48

Extract from article 1)

A man who suffered head injuries when attacked by two men who broke into his home in
Beckenham, Kent, early yesterday, was pinned down82 on the bed by intruders who took it in
turns to rape his wife. (Daily Telegraph)
Extract from article 2)
A terrified 19-stone83 husband was forced to lie next to his wife as two men raped her
yesterday. (Sun)

We ask the following questions:

a) What happened?
b) What did we learn about wife? What did we learn about her husband from either
article?
We can see that both articles (in Daily Telegraph and Sun) present (interpret) the
reports as representing rape as a crime against a man rather than against a woman.
This is done by a number of linguistic features functioning at the same time:
a) the experience of the husband is emphasized and foregrounded, because he
is the first person to be mentioned, the grammatical subject of the main
clause, and the subject of the verbs suffered and was forced. (McKay
Hornberger, 1996:228). Let us ask who does suffer and who is forced in fact,
b) the woman is referred to as his wife we do not know her first name, initials,
occupation or anything else, in fact, the only information we get about her is
that she is somebodys wife and that she was raped,
c) the rape is mentioned third as if less important than mans head injuries and
the violation of his home (ibid.)
d) we learn more about the man than about the woman who was attacked, even
the house in the first extract belonged to a man (not to both partners, or their
family).
Analysis of these articles shows that we need to look beyond lexical choice to see
and understand who is really represented as doing what, to whom, under what
circumstances, and with what consequences(ibid.). Poynton (1990) comes to the
same conclusion when asserting that power(lessness) is observable on the clause

82

pin somebody down (phrasal verb) = to stop someone from escaping by surrounding them and shooting at
them if they try to ecape; keep by force
83
Stone is a unit of weight equal to 6.35 kilograms (or 14 pounds).

49

level. This Australian author thinks that the most obvious issues to investigate are the
following:

the frequency of women compared to men in the role of agent (i.e. the
doer, the one who acts),

the nature of the process involved,

the nature of what is at the receiving end of the doing of agents,

what kinds of agents involved in what kinds of processes get deleted

(Poynton, 1990:62).

Gender bias is a term from sociology and womens studies for bias associated with
sexual roles in society and gender terms in language. It extends the grammatical
term gender to cover language-related differences in the behaviour of women and
men and in perceptions of that behaviour. Such perceptions are expressed through
casual stereotyping, as in: Well, shes supposed to be back by now but shes
probably stopped off somewhere to gossip. You know how women are. There are
many such generalizations, for example, that the tone of womens voices is or should
be soft and feminine, while mens tones are or should be deep and masculine, that in
female gatherings (so-called hen parties), voices are shrill or cackling, that womens
intonation is often (like that of children) whining and nagging. In contrast, many men
are said to sound gruff, speak roughly, and have hard, even harsh voices, and at
times bark out commands (OCEL, 1996).

Women and men have been stereotyped as using language in the following ways,
among others:

women tend to use such words as adorable, cute, lovely sweet in

describing people and objects and such vocatives as my dear, darling,
sweetie,

men tend to be more direct, less inclined to show their feelings, and
more likely to call a spade a spade. Tradition also requires them to be
laconic (e.g. expressed in sayings such as men of few words or the
strong, silent type),

women have often engaged in an overflow of adjectives and adverbs,

found in an extreme form in the usage of society women between the
world wars (e.g. My dear, its just too simply wonderful to see you!),
50

women are often eager to talk about feelings and emotions in a way
thought of as gushing, while many men are almost tongue-tied in such
matters,

women frequently use so, such and quite as intensifiers (its been so
nice to see you again), or as qualifiers (hes so helpful, its such a
shame he cant be here),

women are considered to be more polite, using phrases such as could

you please, and more concerned about correct and proper grammar
and pronunciation,

in conversations, women are believed to be insecure and hedging (as

shown by tags such as do you? or isnt it?, and qualifiers such as I
think) and overbearing, talking and interrupting more than men do (on
this compare Poynton, 1990:66-75) however, subsequent research
has cast some doubt on this proposition (i.e. using tags by women more
often than by men has not been proved),

womens delicate sensibilities, especially in the middle classes, have

traditionally kept them from using obscene or blasphemous language,
and restricted its use by men in their presence,

women are more likely to use polite euphemisms for topics such as
death and sex,

men typically talk about important, worldy topics such as politics,

sports, and war, whereas womens talk is trivial and usually gossip
(OCEL, 1996).

Such stereotypes associated with womens speech tend to be viewed negatively

even by many women. This generally negative judgement of womens styles of
speech appears to be linked to lower social status in relation to men, but the question
is whether lower (social) status leads to negative opinions or certain speech
characteristics lead to lower status. For example, a high rate of tag questions such as
isnt it? is believed to be more typical of women than men, but it is also common
among lower-status men speaking to higher-status men. Indeed, much language that
is currently characterized as female may be more general, and may represent the
language that any lower-status person might use in the circumstances.

51

One problem in assessing gender-linked speech patterns is that mens

speech is typically taken as the norm against which womens speech is ignored. For
example, the filters on older traditional spectrographs, used to analyse physical
properties of speech such as pitch, were based on male voice ranges, consequently,
womens average higher-pitched voices84 could not be clearly displayed and were
not studied by most researchers. Related to gender-linked speech patterns is a
variety of speech sometimes used for identification and communication by some
homosexual men. It is characterized in part by higher pitch, elongation of words,
increased nasality, and specialized vocabulary, such as queen (any male
homosexual,

or

one

considered

flamboyant

or

effeminate)

and

butch

(stereotypically or exaggeratedly masculine in appearance or behaviour), and the use

of female pronouns to refer to men (OCEL, 1996).

3.2.2 Social factors

Many factors affect language patterns, including topic, socio-economic class,
degree of familiarity of the speakers, age, status, ethnicity, and degree of
identification with mainstream social values. Both women and men often behave
differently in same-sex and mixed-sex groups. When in mixed-sex groups, men tend
to interrupt women and an interesting fact is that men with higher (social) status do
this more often, men have (take) more turns at speaking, and they speak more
(longer) when taking those turns. However, in the same-sex groups, participation is
more

balanced;

in

situations

such

as

formal,

male-dominated

business

conversations, it is closely related to rank and status. In addition, some speech and
gender stereotypes are partly true: men do appear to use strong words such as
damn and shit more often and more publicly. Women, however, may also use them,
especially with other women, and especially younger women in North America and
Britain. Women may also express strong emotions by means of euphemisms (such
minced oaths as darn for damn and shoot for shit), whereas men may use stronger
words with less apparent emotion.

84

a result of generally smaller vocal cords

52

Recent studies suggest that in many situations, women seem to be more concerned
about using educated language as a means of social mobility than men. The fact that
so many teachers of especially younger children are women may also make their role
as language correctors more salient. This factor varies greatly with location, social
class, and level of education, for example, many more British working-class men than
women seem to use non-standard language as a badge of identity. Sometimes
stereotyped behaviour appears to be gender-linked in terms of frequency, but other
interpretations of its significance are possible, for example, tag questions such as
istnt it? may indicate hesitancy, insecurity, or defence, but could also encourage
conversation, in a non-aggressive way inviting the listener to respond. Such a
strategy might be linked to womens greater use of minimal responses, such as
mmhm, which indicate active listening, encouragement, or agreement. Both
strategies can be characterized by hostile men as nagging or pushing, if they are
interpreted as inappropriate insertions in their conversation turn. Mens typically
louder voices, less frequent uses of minimal responses, and greater use of
obscenities can be seen as means of manipulating and dominating conversations
(OCEL, 1996).

Women are believed to be the minority in society. However, the gender ratio of
females and males in the UK is approximately 100:106. It means that there are more
females (51.4%) than males (48.6%). In the past, the ratio of women and men
showed males slightly outnumbering females at ages up to the late forties, after
which females became the majority. However, in the last twenty years this cross-over
point has lowered so that by 2001, for all age groups from 21 upwards females are
now in the majority in the UK. That means that there are fewer males than females at
all ages over 21 (Pickardov, 2005:48).

3.2.3 Womens language

The American sociolinguist Robin Lakoff in her most famous work, Language and
Woman's Place (1975), introduced many new ideas about womens speech
(language) that are now considered quite common. In the above-mentioned

53

publication, she proposed that womens speech can be distinguished from that of
men in many ways:

Hedges: Phrases like sort of, kind of, it seems like, using modals (could,
would, might, must, tec.), modal adverbs (probably, possibly, certainly), using
interpersonal metaphors (I think, I suppose I might be able to),

Empty adjectives: divine, adorable, gorgeous, etc.,

(Super-)Polite forms (politeness markers): Would you mind Is it o.k

if?if its not too much to ask, please, thanks, I was wondering if you could
possibly just do me a small favour, if you wouldnt mind.

Women apologize more: I'm sorry, but I think that,

Women speak less frequently,

Women usually avoid coarse language or expletives85,

Hyper-correct grammar and pronunciation: Use of prestige grammar and

clear articulation,

Indirect requests: Wow I'm so thirsty. really asking for a drink,

Speak in italics: Use tone to emphasis certain words, e.g., so, very, quite86.

Further reading on language and gender:

Gramley Ptzold (2002:209-222); Hudson (1996:102-105); McKayHornberger (1996:218-269);
Poynton (1990); Romaine (1994:99-132); ThomasWareing (2000:65-82); Wardhaugh (1994:312-325)
More on stereotypes: ern (1996:446-450, Od neostrch vraz k rasismu); ern, J.Hole, J.
2004. Smiotika. Praha: Portl, 370pp. ISBN 80-7178-832-5
87

88

89

More on gender stereotypes: Jesensk (2009); tulajterov (2007); www.aspekt.sk ;

90
www.europrofem.org/;www.genderonline.cz/,http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0nIXUjzyMe0
(16/02/10)
On sex differences in evaluation see: Jesensk, P. 2003. Prospech posluchov 1. ronka
anglickho jazyka z hadiska sexovch diferenci. In: Teria a prax prpravy uiteov anglickho jazyka
2. Bansk Bystrica: FHV KAA, pp 90-96. ISBN 80-8055-838-8

85

swear words
taken from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robin_Lakoff; 21/04/10; compare also to Poynton, 1990:69-75
87
Gender stereotypes in English studentscourse books are discussed (and other topics, e.g. usage of generic
masculine).
88
Sociological and linguistic aspects of gender sensitive language in Slovak and English languages are
discussed.
89
Not only stereotypes but gender studies in general, terminology, discussions, (non-)fiction and much more.
90
Gender stereotypes as presented in various mass media (advertisement, film etc.).
86

54

3.2.4 Gender study in Slovakia and Czechia

Where can one study gender studies? Is it possible in Slovakia and the Czech
Republic? The truth is that sociolinguistics cannot be studied as a single academic
programme in Slovakia or Czechia. However, there are more academic places if you
are interested in gender studies: one in Bratislava, one in Preov, and the other two
in the Czech Republic (Prague and Brno).
Faculty of Humanities in Prague (Charles University) offers the study of this
subject at the Department of Gender Studies (i.e. Katedra genderovch studi)91. One
of the initiators and founders of gender studies in Czechia was Jiina iklov (1935
Prague), a sociologist and a journalist.
In Slovakia, one can study this programme at Preov University at the
Department of Social Work, Faculty of Arts. The academic programme is called
Feminizmus a rodov tdi.
In fact, there are three centres of gender studies, in Bratislava (Comenius
University)92, Brno (Masaryk University)93, and Prague (Charles University).
However, Slovak students have no possibility to study gender issues in terms
of linguistics at language departments. Fortunately, there is a gender library
(Kninica EQ ruov a modr svet94) available at the Department of Slovak
Language and Literature, Faculty of Humanities, Matej Bel University, Bansk
Bytrica.
When you click on http://www.fhs.cuni.cz/gender/veda.html (27/04/10) you will
find detailed web pages of the Department of Gender Studies at Prague Charless
University, Faculty of Humanities (CZ). One can find not only personalities doing
research in this branch, but also a list of publications aiming at gender and womens
status in society. When you click on http://gender.ff.cuni.cz/ (27/04/10) you will find
web pages of the Gender Studies Centre working at the same university, Faculty of
Arts.
There is Centrum rodovch tdi (Gender Studies Centre) at Comenius
University, Faculty of Arts, Bratislava, Slovakia, too. This research and educational
centre was founded in 2001 and focuses mainly on research and teaching activities
91

More information: http://www.fhs.cuni.cz/gender/ (20/05/10)

More information: http://genderstudies.fphil.uniba.sk/ (20/05/10)
93
More information: http://www.gendercentrum.unas.cz/web/ (20/05/10)
94
The list of publications on gender available here: http://www.fhv.umb.sk/app/index.php?ID=517 (20/05/10)
92

55

in the field of feminist theories and gender studies. The subjects of its interest are the
issues of gender identity, gender-specific differences, and symbols which structure
the relationships between females and males in a fundamental way and cause
inequality between them as well as topics on feminist epistemology, methodology of
feminist research and women in science. More information can be found on
http://genderstudies.fphil.uniba.sk/95 (27/04/10).

3.3 Language and ethnic background

This chapter explores the use of language in the context of ethnicity and how
language may be used to represent ethnicity. We will also examine how different
groups use their language as a significant marker of their ethnic identity. Before
discussing the issues, we have to define ethnicity first. The term ethnicity evokes
racial or cultural associations this is only partially true. The term itself is derived from
Greek ethnos (nation) and nation is often defined as a community which has
a common history, cultural tradition and language (ThomasWareing, 2000:84;
compare definition of ethnicity in Pavlk, 2006:130). An individual may have more than
one ethnic label, ranging from those they choose to those that are decided for them.

There are two related concepts used when discussing ethnic groupings ethnic
majority and ethnic minority. The ethnic majority usually refers to the dominant
ethnic groups that hold social and political power in nations, while the ethnic minority
refers to groups which have nearly no power. The cultural affiliations of the ethnic
majority96 become dominant (primary) because this is an influential group that has
power to enforce them through the institutions they (have) establish(ed). People
perceive the things that have been shaped by the beliefs of the ethnic majority as the
norm, and everything else is considered strange, weird, and atypical. And thus the
terms ethnic and ethnicity are usually used to refer to anything which is not part of the
mainstream culture, i.e. digress from the normal culture. Members of majority (us)
are considered insiders and members of ethnic minority (them) may be considered
outsiders. However, a higher number of the ethnic majority does not necessarily

95
96

or on the following address: Centrum rodovch tdi, Filozofick fakulta UK, Gondova 2, 818 01 Bratislava
I.e. its way of life, its language use, religious beliefs, etc.

56

mean that they have social and political power. For example, in the 16th to the 19th
centuries many European countries colonised West Indian islands, setting up sugar
plantations cultivated by imported African slaves. Each island had a few large
plantations, each home to a European planter, who had perhaps been accompanied
by his (her) immediate family, and about 5060 slaves. Thus, in most islands, African
slaves actually outnumbered their European masters. According to Watts (In:
ThomasWareing, 2000) it has been estimated that in 1684 in Barbados97, there were
19,508 British citizens but 62,136 African slaves. The point is that this numerically
larger group of slaves had no actual power and hardly any social rights. They were in
fact an ethnic minority not only socially, but also politically. One may notice that the
cultural and historical dissimilarities between ethnic groups can be expressed in terms
of differences of race and/or nationality. The Europeans and Africans were distinct
from each other not only in terms of where they came from, their religious beliefs, their
cultural practices (way of life) and the language they spoke, but also in terms of their
racial characteristics. Therefore in this case we could label the ethnic majority as
Europeans, whites or white Europeans, and the ethnic minority as Africans, blacks, or
black Africans. Because labels of black and white are explicitly racial ones, using them
can sometimes direct people into thinking of ethnic differences as being equivalent to
racial differences.

Because our ethnic identity includes various characteristics about ourselves, we can
often simultaneously be part of different ethnic groupings. Thus, for example, in
modern Britain, we could say that on one level there are three major long-established
ethnic groups, i.e. the English, the Scots and the Welsh. Although all three are termed
British, they also have separate ethnic identities and differ from one another in terms
of their histories and cultural practices.

The fact that people can have multiple layers of ethnic identity was neatly illustrated
on a 1997 advertisement on BBC Radio 1 for a helpline for victims of racial
harassment. It took the form first of two men, one English, the other Scottish, arguing
in a pub. The two traded insults based on the others individual ethnic identity. A third
man (with an East Indian accent) then intervened and the Englishman and Scotsman

97

an island colonized by Britain at that time

57

then claimed their solidarity as real British, turning on the member of the British East
Indian minority group. A Frenchman then waded into the foray, which caused the
Englishman, Scotsman and East Indian to claim solidarity as British and to carry on a
well-established tradition of hostility with France. An American then stepped in,
causing the Frenchman and the British to merge into Europeans. The sketch ended
with the appearance of a Martian, which then united the rest as Earth humans.

Because the concept of ethnic identity incorporates so many characteristics, its

definition is not clear-cut or uniform. Individuals can have multiple layers of ethnic
identity, each of which can be encoded in an ethnic label (Thomas Wareing, 2000).

Thomas Wareing (2000:87) give an illustration of an ethnically biased language

quoting the British and American press (see below):

President Bill Clinton has denied having oral sex with work experience girl Monica
Lewinsky, who visited him 37 times, and of lying about it under oath. He claims
Monicas a friend of his black secretary, Betty Currie. (Daily Mail, 12 March, 1998)

Finally, 23 months after the murder, a 21 year old black inmate in Michigan told a
cellmate: I killed Sal Mineo. (National Enquirer, 3 March, 1998)

Why do we quote the above-mentioned extracts? Of the five people mentioned in

these extracts, the ethnicity of only two is mentioned: that of the black secretary
and that of the black inmate. The ethnicity of the others is unmarked, since they
are the norm, and the outside nature of the minority black group is made distinctive
by the use of a label that emphasises their difference from the mainstream, in a
context where it is irrelevant. When ethnic labels encode and convey negative
attitudes held by the speaker, the effect of their use in marked contexts can be farreaching.
In the UK, the Census of Population (known as the Census) is normally held every
ten years. The last one was held on April 29th, 2001 and so the next one is due in
2011. The Census is a count of all people and households in the UK. It provides
statistical information on the country as a whole, down to small areas enabling the

58

planning and funding of public services, including education, health and transport.
For example, the 2001 Census revealed that for the first time there are more people
over 60 than under 16, which has important implications for public spending. Results
also interest researchers and businesses. The 2001Census was conducted by the
Office for National Statistics (ONS), which released most of the data towards the end
of 2002 (Pickardov, 2005). According to the ONS, ethnic minorities tend to live in
England, with just 3% of them living in Scotland, Ireland or Wales. Fewest of all live in
Scotland, where just 1.7% of people answered in the 2001 Census that they
belonged to a minority ethnic group. According to the ONS, most non-white people
are concentrated in urban areas, particularly in Southern England. Nearly half live in
London where they represent more than a quarter of all residents.
The 1991 Census was the first to ask people living in the UK about their ethnic
group and origin respectively. The 2001 Census (see table 6) found out that 7.6% of
the UKs population was non-white. More than half of those people who said they
were non-white were born in the UK (Pickardov, 2005:56).

In the UK, several ethnic groups can be recognised today:

1) Whites (of western culture as Anglo-Saxon or Celtic origins, or of eastern
culture as, for example, immigrants from central Europe Czechs, Poles,
Slovaks, and others),
2) Blacks (having their roots in the US, Africa or the Caribbean),
3) Asians (Chinese, Indians98, Pakistanis, etc.).
Although it seems that the UK is a kind of multicultural society, the opposite is true99
(compare to the table 6 below):

Table 6 Ethnic Groups in the UK (Census 2001)

Ethnic group

% TP

% EMP

1) White

92.2

N/A

2) Mixed

0.8

11.0

98

i.e. people coming from India (should not be confused with Amerindians)
Many authors (e.g. quoted Pickardov, 2005, but also many others) consider the UK a multi-ethnic and multicultural society. They believe that the main ethnic groups are English, Scottish, Irish, Welsh, West Indian, Indian
and Pakistani.
99

59

3) Asian or Asian British

3.9

50.2

Including Indian (from the South Asian sub-continent)

1.7

21.7

including Pakistani (from the South Asian sub-continent)

1.3

16.7

including Bangladeshi (from the South Asian sub-continent)

0.5

6.1

including other Asian

0.4

5.7

4) Black or Black British

2.0

27.1

including Black Caribbean (West Indians from the

Caribbean)
including Black Africans (from Africa)

1.0

13.6

0.9

12.0

including other Black

0.1

1.5

5) Chinese or Chinese British (from China and other South-East

Asian countries)
6) Other (including Europeans especially from central and Eastern
Europe, including Jews; respondents did not tick the White box)
Not stated

0.3

4.2

0.6

7.4

0.2

N/A

All minority ethnic population

7.6

100

Source: Office for National Statistics (ONS), Census 2001 (Pickardov, 2005:60)
Explanations: % TP Number of persons who declared they belonged to that ethnic group as % of the total
population of the UK; % EMP Percentage of Ethnic Minority Population; N/A Not Applicable.

In the years 2001 and 2002, minority groups were more likely to live in England
than in Wales or Scotland. In England, they made up 9% of the total population
compared with only 2% in both Scotland and Wales. Most non-white inhabitants
live in urban areas. Half live in the South-East of England, with more than 50% of
the black British citizens and 40% of Indians in London. There are large
concentrations of Asians in the Midlands (Pickardov, 2005).

Asian households tend to be larger than those from other ethnic groups. This is
partially due to extended families living together and higher birth rates. Bangladeshis
have the largest households100. However, people from minority ethnic groups are
more likely to live in low-income households than white people. In 2000 2001, 60%
of Bangladeshis were in low-income households. Moreover, it is this ethnic group (i.e.
Bangladeshis) who have the highest unemployment rate at over 20%, while whites
enjoy the lowest at under 5%. What is interesting about ethnic groups is that Indian

100

Pickardov (2005:58) asserts that in spring 2002 Bangladeshi households contained an average of 4.7 people
followed by Pakistani at 4.2 people.

60

children have the best GCSE101 results at school of all ethnic groups (Pickardov,
2005:58).

Curry, Jiobu and Schwirian (In: Pavlk, 2006:130-131) identify the following ethnic
groups in the US:
a) White Americans (WASPs, non-WASPs102, and Jews103),
b) Native Americans (Amerindians, i.e. the original settlers of the US),
c) African Americans (having their roots in African countries or the Caribbean),
d) Hispanic Americans (Mexican Americans, so-called Chicanos, Puerto Rican
Americans, and Cuban Americans),
e) Asian

Americans

(Chinese

Americans,

Japanese

Americans,

and

Vietnamese Americans).
In the Slovak Republic we can observe the co-existence of Slovak majority with the
minorities such as, Hungarians (or Magyars), Romanies (Gypsies104), Rusyns
(Ruthenians), Poles, Czechs, and Asians105 (Vietnamese, Chinese, and Koreans).
Further reading: Pavlk (2006:130-139); ThomasWareing (2000:83-98); Yule (1993:192-193).

3.4 Language and politics

Politicians usually tend to manipulate their voters (electorate), and that is why they
hardly ever hesitate to use euphemisms, jargon, foreign expressions, inflated words,
etc. The following subchapters focus on different techniques and approaches of this
kind of manipulation. Five approaches appear in chronological order: newspeak
(3.4.1), doublespeak (3.4.2), eurospeak (3.4.3), P.C. (3.4.4), and technospeak
(3.4.5). We will also show that not all of them are used to hide true meanings of
words.
101

General Certificate of Secondary Education (Veobecn certifikt o stredokolskom vzdelan) (after three
years of secondary education) a two-year course leading to a single subject examination. Pupils must follow
Mathematics, English Language, a Science and a modern foreign language (these are the only four obligatory
subjects). Exam papers are marked by independent examinaton boards which attribute a grade expressed by a
letter ranging from A
to G, where A
(starred A) is the top grade.If pupils pass enough GCSEs, they are
eligible for other A-level courses. The GCSE replaced the O-Level and CSE exams in 1988.
102
This classification seems to be done in terms of values rather than ethnicity.
103
It is very interesting that Jews create a single subcategory.
104
In modern Slovak the term Rmovia (Romanies) is preferred due to its neutral connotations.
105
Pavlk (2006:131) also mentions Jews as a single minority, however, we do not consider Jews being
ethnically differnt from the Slovaks. While Hungarians, Gypsies, and Asians all speak their mother tongues,
Jewish population scarcely ever use(s) Hebrew or Jidish.

61

The term -speak/speak, whether used as a single word or a headword in

a compound, is often used pejoratively and facetiously for the style of a group or
occupation, often regardless of whether it is spoken or written. In a compound that
contains -speak, the first element indicates either the situation in which the style
occurs (e.g. adspeak: advertising) or what the user thinks of it (e.g. doublespeak:
a jargon intended to mislead). There are three orthographic forms:

Solid, such as for example Aussiespeak, computerspeak, Femspeak,

healthspeak,

lawspeak,

modernspeak,

moneyspeak,

nukespeak,

pensionspeak, tycoonspeak, unionspeak. The first element is monosyllabic

like new, often clipping of a longer word: bizspeak, Russpeak.

Hyphenated as in gay-speak, golf-speak, management-speak, oblique-speak,

Pentagon-speak. In this case, the first element is phrasal: Hitch-Hikers-Guideto-the-Galaxy-speak, medical and social work speak, Twentieth century era
speak, Womenslibspeak.

Open, such as for example art speak, estate-agent speak, mandarin speak,
political speak.

Occasionally, blending occurs, as in bureaucraspeak, litcritspeak, politspeak,

Shakespeak. Such usages generally occur in social and literary criticism (OCEL,
1996).

3.4.1 Newspeak
In 1946 George Orwell wrote an essay on Politics and the English Language seeking
explanation of decadence of the English language and fighting the half-conscious
belief that language is a natural growth and not an instrument which we shape for our
own purposes.106

Political correctness has its roots in the so-called newspeak, firstly used by Orwell
in his novel Nineteen Eighty-Four (1949), as the big brothers official language in
Oceania meant to keep the power of thought police in Ingsoc (English socialism), and
to destroy oldspeak (standard English language) and oldthink. The aim of the
106

http://www.newspeakdictionary.com/ns_frames.html

62

Orwells newspeak was to reduce the number of words in the English language in
order to reduce the thoughts and ideas of people that were considered dangerous for
a totalitarian regime.

CALD describes newspeak /nju:spi:k/ US /nu:-/ noun [U] as a language used by

politicians and government officials which is intentionally difficult to understand or
which does not mean what it seems to mean and is therefore likely to confuse or
deceive people107.

3.4.2 Doublespeak
What would you imagine under negative patient care outcome108? It means nothing
else but that the patient died. This was a concrete example of doublespeak use.
CALD refers to doublespeak as double-talk and defines it as follows: language that
has no real meaning or has more than one meaning and is intended to hide the
truth, for example He accused the ambassador of diplomatic double-talk.

In his bestselling book Doublespeak (1940), William Lutz asserts that doublespeak
is not a mere accident or a slip of the tongue. On the contrary, he says that it is a
deliberate and calculated misuse of language109. Lutz provides characteristics typical
of doublespeak because according to him it:

misleads,

distorts reality,

pretends to communicate,

makes the bad seem good,

avoids or shifts responsibility,

makes the negative appear positive,

creates a false verbal map of the world,

limits, conceals, corrupts, and prevents thought,

makes the unpleasant appear attractive or tolerable,

creates incongruity between reality and what is said or not said (ibid.).

107

More about newspeak can be found on the Internet http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspeak

Example taken from http://www.damronplanet.com/doublespeak/examples.htm (3/2/10)
109
http://www.damronplanet.com/doublespeak/examples.htm (3/2/10)
108

63

Doublespeak destroys human communication, corrupts our mind, and erodes truth
and trust. Lutz says that it is only through clear language that we have any hope of
defining, debating, and deciding the issues of public policy that confront us (ibid.).
Experts dealing with this issue say that unclear and furled language can be detected
when asking the following five simple questions: 1) Who is saying what to whom? 2)
Under what conditions? 3) Under what circumstances? 4) With what intent? 5) With
what results? When answering the previous questions we can see the context of the
whole discourse which means that our chances to understand the situation
increases.

3.4.3 Eurospeak
It is believed that a good command of eurojargon can significantly help you to take
part in any of the EU-granted projects. Euroregister was invented by euroclerks,
and the European Information Association published a 350-page dictionary called
Eurojargon in February 2004. It is a dictionary of abbreviations, acronyms, sobriquets
(nicknames) and terminology used in the European Unions agencies, institutions,
schemes, projects and programmes. There are more than 5, 200 entries in the
dictionary. There are words like ERASMUS, LEONARDO, SOCRATES and
acronyms such as CAP or NOW. Eurocrats use them without further explanation and,
for the person who is not an insider, it is usually difficult to get the point.

Eurodocuments use words of European origin: co-operation, identity, flexibility,

implementation, innovation, integration, negotiation, subsidiarity, summit, zone, and
so on. There is also a special group of words combining with the prefix Euro- or euro, for example eurocheque, europhile, eurosceptic, eurocentric, etc.

Eurocrat is a kind of pun on the word bureaucrat and denotes one of the thousands
of EU citizens working for EU institutions (e.g. the Council, the Commission, the
Parliament, etc.). Euroland is a nickname for the EU member states that have
adopted the euro as their currency. The euro area (sometimes called the euro zone)
includes Austria, Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy,
Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal, Slovakia, and Spain. Other countries are
going to become part of this euro area sooner or later.

64

What are the reasons for using eurospeak? The Czech Senator, Miroslav kaloud
(2005), has claimed that there are at least four main reasons for this phenomenon
(see Jesensk, 2008 or kaloud, 2005).

What exactly is eurospeak? Lorang (2005) states: Linguisten verstehen darunter den
zunehmenden Einfluss des Englischen auf andere europische Sprachen.
(Linguists understand by this the increasing influence of English on other European
languages.) However, he does not consider eurospeak in the same way as the
above-mentioned Czech politician kaloud. I also disagree with Lorang eurospeak
and euro-English are two different terms having different concepts.

As we have shown, language is a strong and important instrument for presenting

(Euro)politics, and enforcing the Eurocrats wishes but, at the same time, it may
become the source of many conflicts. The EU, in its cunning way, takes sovereignty
out of the hands of the national states in an increasingly large number of cases. The
use (or abuse) of language plays an important part in this process.
Further reading on eurospeak:
Jesensk (2008),
Novkov, D. 2010. Lingvistick aspekty v zjednotenej Eurpe vo svetle eurospeaku. Bansk
Bystrica, FHV UMB, 92pp. [Diploma theses; supervisor P. Jesensk]
Jesensk, P. 2010. Pr poznmok k zkladnm rtm eurospeaku. In: Teria a prax prpravy
uiteov anglickho jazyka 8. Bansk Bystrica: UMB FHV (in print).

3.4.4 PC
Once I asked my third-year students studying English language at Matej Bel University
in Bansk Bystrica whether they had ever heard about political correctness, but they
looked at me as if I came from the planet Mars. On the other hand, they knew what
personal computer was.

Nearly every young child nowadays knows PC and if you ask them what it is, they will
answer a bit irritated but without any hesitation: Personal computer, how come you
don`t know?! But is it just that?
/pi: 'si:/ may bear many meanings simply because these four phonemes are
polysemantic, so p.c. can stand for:

65

 post card,
the abbreviation of percentage,
P.C. in British English stands for police constable, i.e. a policeman of the lowest
rank and its female counterpart is W.P.C., the woman police constable.
PC can mean personal computer and/or a small computer that is used by one
person at a time, in business or at home (Longman, 2001:1041),
PC is also described as Politically Correct but what is that and do we need it?
What is all the fuss about?

3.4.4.1 Definition of P.C. in dictionaries and on the Internet

Britannica Dictionary110 characterizes political correctness as conformity to a belief
that language and practices which could offend political sensibilities should be
eliminated. Longman (1993, p. 1018) says that politically correct means to be
correct according to a set of liberal opinions, e.g. that black people and women
should have equal chances to get jobs, education, etc. We have to be careful with
the language as far as liberal means left-winged, communist or socialist Oxford
Encyclopedia English assumes that PC is conforming to a prevailing body of liberal
opinion, especially in avoiding language, behaviour, etc., which might conceivably be
regarded as discriminatory or pejorative to racial or cultural minorities or as reflecting
implicit assumptions111. Bloomsbury Good Word Guides attitude is much more
critical to PC that presents a more positive image of negative or undesirable qualities
such as dishonesty or failure, with the substitution of such euphemisms as ethically
disoriented for dishonest and deficiency achievement for failure. Of American origin,
PC is often regarded in Britain as unacceptable interference with English usage and
the natural development of the English language.112 Hutchinson Encyclopedia
depicts PC as:
Shorthand term for a set of liberal attitudes about education and society, and the terminology
associated with them. To be politically correct is to be sensitive to unconscious racism and sexism and
to display environmental awareness. However, the real or alleged enforcement of PC speech codes at

110

http://www.britannica.com/dictionary
http://www.heritage.org/Research/PoliticalPhilosophy/HL337.cfm
112
http://www.bloomsbury.com/dictionary
111

66

more than 130 US Universities by 1991 attracted derision and was criticized as a form of thoughtpolicing.

113

I think that Macmillan Encyclopedia (2001) summarizes it in a right way claiming that
political correctness is simply
a concept, originating in the USA, based on the observation that language contains words and
phrases that express such prejudices as racism, sexism, and hostility to homosexuals; to avoid the
slightest risk of giving offence, it is argued, extreme care must be taken to avoid all such phrases.
Most reasonable people would accept that such words as nigger, yid,

114

and pansy

115

are

offensive and should not be used. However, the extremes of PC can easily lend themselves to ridicule
(e.g. by insisting on such terms as humankind and differently abled, to replace the traditional mankind
and disabled). The term is now widely used in a pejorative sense to indicate overzealous liberal
attitudes in general.

The truth is that (usually American) PC nowadays sees everything in terms of

gender, race, class or age and everyone who refuses to see the world through
these lenses is branded with a hateful name. So for example, Shakespeare is judged
by the current criteria of the 21st century and is called a misogynist116 because, they
say, he does not render women with respect in his plays. Unfortunately, those who
say that forget and completely ignore Shakespeares plays in which female
characters are morally and intellectually superior to their male counterparts. The
keepers of PC demand that people see only certain things in certain ways and this
makes PC a powerful form of censorship, a pervasive form of anti-intellectual
thought-control, an ugly form of racism, and a hypocritical form of absolutism.

Here are two different tables they differ in content: Table 7 shows the short twocolumn list of words that are considered impolite and can offend black people or
other minorities. The other column points out expressions that are viewed as
politically correct.
The second table (table 8) shows the absurdity of misusing PC in any kind of way.

113

http://www.encyclopedia.com
Jew(ish); derogatory; /jid/
115
A word abusing gay; pansy /'pnzi/
116
/mi'sodZinist/ = the one who hates women
114

67

Table 7 Common Politeness or so-called PC Language

Non-PC language

PC-language

colored
old, aged people
mankind
steward/stewardess
chairman
problematic(al) children

African-American
senior citizen
human race, humankind
flight attendant
chair, chairperson
children at risk

Table 8 (Over) PC Language or Misunderstanding of what PC Language is

Non-PC language

PC-Language

broken home

dysfunctional family

ghetto

economically disadvantaged area

unemployed

in orderly transition between career changes

jobless

unwaged

postman

postperson

blind people

unsighted, persons with visual impairments

deaf

acoustically deprived

disabled

differently abled

handicapped (old-fashioned)

disadvantaged, challenged (in some way)

housewife

domestic engineer

rheumatic

orthopaedically unstable

ugly

person who washes cars

aesthetically challenged,
cosmetically different,
visually challenging
vehicle appearance specialist

watching a girl walk by

street harassment

fat

small

horizontally challenged,
enlarged physical condition caused by
a completely natural genetically-induced
hormone imbalance
vertically challenged

old

chronologically gifted

clumsy

uniquely co-ordinated

shoplifter

non-traditional shopper

history

herstory

personality

perdaughterality

68

evil

morally different

drunk

sobriety deprived

fireman

firefighter

failure

deferred117 success

foreign food

ethnic cuisine

crazy

emotionally different

Table 8 depicts pseudo-polite expressions that sound more like an offensive

language newly invented in order to mock and/or harm/hurt other individuals
feelings.

3.4.4.2 Two Levels of PC

Political correctness is seen at two parallel levels: one is deep-seated, an ideology
that can pervade academic studies in history, in literature, in philosophy, psychology
and sociology; and the other is skin-deep, a matter of choosing ones words
carefully. There were the so-called speech codes (obligatory observances of
recommended words) until recently in some American universities. This is the sort of
popular understanding of PC; the deeper reading, with its intellectual consequences
perhaps invites a distinctive term correctitude (instead of correctness). Now it must
be crystal clear that Political correctitude (or Ideological purity) breeds campus wars,
infects the curriculum and sometimes wrecks careers, so it might be compared to the
witch hunt or communist hunt in the 1950s in the USA.

Political correctness relates to a number of societal sins, or inadmissible -isms, and

deals with dos and donts, so thus, we have:
racism you can say black people but Afro-American or Afro-Caribbean is more
acceptable;
sexism avoid using history and use herstory instead (but one cannot take this
particular example seriously);
ageism our grandparents are not old age pensioners because the are senior
citizens;

117

defer = postpone

69

 ableism do not dare to call anyone handicapped, choose saying that they are
in some way challenged.

Professor W. Nash of Nottingham University distinguishes two sorts of PC -isms:

a) Primary -isms
It seems that following these recommendations makes you not just share the feelings
of others but you will feel virtuous on your own account as well. However, the primary
-isms are still racism and sexism because they reflect current conflicts in society,
struggles for recognition and rights by people hitherto neglected or oppressed.
A primary -ism reflects a will to do justice, although, one can argue that good will can
have peculiar results. Overconsciousness of racism leads to a sometimes absurd
delicacy about using the word black, as in blackball, black economy, blacklisted,
blackmail or blackleg; overconsciousness of sexism leads to the censorship of the
word man, even in compounds and familiar idioms.

b) Secondary -isms
Other -isms are secondary and they reveal a disposition to feel good: while the
feeling good is in the imagination of the speaker; the sensitivities of the sufferers are
rarely as acute as those of the people who pity them. I do not know that the blind
people feel any better for being called the unsighted; that the deaf cherish the phrase
acoustically deprived; that the handicapped read into that word connotations of cap in
hand; that the person in a wheelchair wants to be called disadvantaged, or the
disabled differently abled; that we improve the lot of the jobless by describing them
as unwaged or in orderly transition between career changes (more examples can be
found in table 8). These things are not expressions and phrases of Political
Correctness but foolish euphemisms bringing no comfort and showing little respect
for the oppressed ridiculing them in contrary (Nash, 2003:43). Nash says: Let us
love one another; and let us not be too disposed to be offended by a casual word,
when each days newspaper tells of the same fresh outbreak of the Cain-andableism which is ravaging this planet. (ibid.)
An absurd example of PC in practice was noticed in the USA in 1999 when a
six-year-old school boy was found guilty of sexual harassment after giving a girl
classmate a kiss on the cheek (Jones, 2001:49) in the school corridor.
70

3.4.4.3 Affirmative Action

Affirmative action is an expression mainly used in American English and depicts the
policy of positive discrimination by employees (Macmillan, 2002:23). For those who
have not heard the expression positive discrimination it must be remarked that it is
the practice of giving special benefits to people from a group that was treated in an
unfair way in the past. (Macmillan, 2002:1097)

Although the US is well-known for being a country of unlimited possibilities, it is also

known as the country of strange individuals, so only there could happen that a
retired eighty-two-year-old doctor had claimed $ 1million because, as she said, a
health board had denied her a job on the grounds of age.

All these strange cases show plain absurdity of exaggerated PC and

misunderstanding of its concept that has shown its dark side to its users.

3.4.4.4 Conclusion and politically correct fairy tales

Political correctness can be described in many different ways and from different
points of view. There is no single definition of PC. Some characterize PC as a sort of
philosophy of believing in increasing tolerance for diversity of cultures, race, gender,
ideology and alternative lifestyles. PC is the only social and morally acceptable
outlook. Anyone who disagrees with this philosophy is bigoted, biased, sexist, and/or
close-minded.118 As you can see, this attitude is ironical rather than serious, which is
not surprising because in the course of 1990s PC became more or less misused in
order to find someone to blame for segregation, racism, sexism etc.
The momentum of this movement came largely from the political left, and from
the intense debates taking place on college and university campuses. Although there
is no defensible ground on which to disagree with its spirit, this movement has been
derided as a form of thought police for its demands of adherence to a party line119. In
any case, it is important to find a compromise and choose between expressions of
political correctness and foolish euphemisms.

118
119

For more information click http://www-personal.um d.umich.edu/~nhughes/htmedocs/pc.html (PC Primer)

http://www.artlex.com/Artl_ex/Pm.htm

71

PC was meant to change our language, behaviour and the entire way of
thinking in the positive sort of way but it turns out that all well meant things might go
wrong some day if you take them too seriously.
We should not be afraid to use polite words common politeness has nothing
to do with hypocritical or evasive thinking. Let us finish this contribution with the
professor Nashs words:
Ordinary politeness is a gesture, a more or less automatic response to experience; Political
Correctness is a stance, implying a control of experience. In the doctrine of PC, everything is politics,
meaning the struggle for power, or, in the current jargon, empowerment; and all political relationships
are defined in language deemed to be correct (for which, read obligatory) or incorrect (meaning
inadmissible). (Nash, 2003:43)

An example of a politically correct fairy tale120 by John Hawkins

Hawkins asks: Are you sick and tired of those conservative fairy tales? Are you an
American liberal or someone from Europe who thinks those fairy tales teach values
that no longer need to be promoted in today's world? He comes to our rescue with
his Politically Correct Fairy Tales!

We have decided to offer our reader five

politically correct fairy tales by this author. He gives a reader an interesting and
striking moral at the end of each story.

Politically correct fairy tale Hansel and Gretel

Hansel and Gretel were lost in the woods when they came upon a house made of
1.......................... An old witch invited them in and then captured both of them
intending 2......................... them. Gretel had a chance to save both of them by
pushing the old woman in an oven but she decided that it would be wrong not to
respect the witch's 3.......................... So Gretel and her brother allowed themselves
to be cooked and eaten. The witch was so happy with the children's actions that she
invited all of her witch 4......................... to the area. Soon thereafter, they ate every
5......................... in a hundred mile radius. Soon the whole area was filled with
6......................... but child eating witches and all the witches were very happy!

120

All taken from the webpage http://rightwingnews.com/humor/tale.php (15/11/06)

72

The Moral of the Story: You must respect the culture of others, even at your own
expense!

TASK: There are six expressions missing in the story. Here is the list of them. Put
them in to make the story complete: child, cultural traditions, candy and cake, friends,
nothing, to eat
Further reading:
Orwell, George. 1946, 1950, 1992. Politics and the English Language In: Horizon (April 1946),
Shooting an Elephant and Other Essays (1950), The Norton Reader (Eighth edition, 1992, pp
417 428);
Thomas Wareing (2000:31-48).

3.4.5 Technospeak
This blend of technology and Newspeak first appeared in the 1980s. It refers to an
informal term for a prose style used by high-technology industries, their associated
media, and the marketing and publicity groups that surround them. There are at least
ten identifying features of technospeak:
1 The use of letter symbols, initialisms, and acronyms (e.g. PTT121, LISA122, RAM,
ROM, VOX123);
2 Number-and-letter groups (e.g. Windows 97),
3 Blends (e.g. SELECTaCOM, Versatel),
4 Vogue usages (e.g. info, mega),
5 Compounds (e.g. lookalike, pressbutton),
6 Fixed phrases (e.g. hard disc, Random Access),
7 Word-play(e.g. LISA lookalike, VisiOn),
8 Novel orthography (e.g. SELECTaCOM, VisiCorp),
9 Heavy pre-modification (e.g. Advanced Videotech Bike-to-Bike Intercom, LISA
lookalike systems),
10 A generally dense presentation. The style invites parody: Megaforce is a movie
for mini-minds set at maxi-gullibility and zero-taste (Montreal Gazette, 29 June
1982).
121

press-to-talk
local integrated software architecture
123
voice-activated-mode
122

73

3.5 Diglossia and bilingualism

The term diglossia was first used in English by Charles Ferguson in 1958 as
a Latinization of the French diglossie, from Greek diglssos (with two tongues).
The term diglossia is defined as a situation when two distinct varieties of the
same language are used, side by side, for two different sets of purposes. This means
that one of these varieties is preferred in different linguistic and situational contexts.
The varieties are called H (High variety or H-variety) and L (Low variety or L-variety),
the first being a standard variety used for high purposes and the second often for a
low spoken vernacular. The most important hallmark of diglossia is specialisation, H
(more prestigious) being appropriate in one set of situations, L (less prestigious) in
another: reading a newspaper aloud in H, but discussing its contents in L. Functions
generally reserved for H include sermons, political speeches, university lectures, and
news broadcasts, while those reserved for L include everyday conversations,
instructions to servants, and folk literature. H is preferred in formal discourse (in
official uses, scientific style, for literary purposes, etc.), while L is used in casual
speech (usually in vernacular style or for informal speech used in the family, with
friends, when shopping, etc.). An example of diglossia can be found in the German
speaking part of Switzerland, where H is a form of standard German (Hochdeutsch)
and L is called Schwyzerttsch, which is a range of regional Swiss dialects. Other
example can be seen in Czechia, where H is represented by the so-called spisovn
etina, while L is called obecn etina or sometimes also mluven etina (i.e.
spoken Czech).

The varieties differ not only in phonology, grammar, and vocabulary, but also with
respect to function, prestige, literary heritage, acquisition, standardisation, and
stability. H is learned through schooling (i.e. never at home) and is related to
institutions outside the home. On the other hand, L is typically acquired at home as
a mother tongue and continues to be so used throughout life. Its main uses are
familial and familiar. The separate domains in which H and L are acquired provide
them with separate systems of support. Diglossic societies are marked not only by
this compartmentalisation of varieties, but also by restriction of access, especially to
H. Entry to formal institutions such as school and government requires knowledge of
H. In England, from medieval times until the 18th century, Latin played an H role

74

while English was L; in Scotland, from the 17th until the 20th century, the H role was
usually played by local standard English, the L role by varieties of Scots. In some
English-speaking Caribbean and West African countries, the H role is played by local
standard English, the L role by English-based creoles in the Caribbean and
vernacular languages and English-based creoles in West Africa.
The extent to which these functions are compartmentalised can be illustrated
by the importance attached by community members to using the right variety in the
appropriate context. An outsider who learns to speak L and then uses it in a formal
speech risks being ridiculed. Members of a community generally regard H as superior
to L in a number of respects; in some cases, H is regarded as the only real version
of a particular language, to the extent that people claim that they do not speak L at
all. Sometimes, the alleged superiority is avowed for religious and/or literary reasons:
the fact that classical Arabic is the language of the Quran124 endows it with special
significance, as the language of the King James Bible, created in England,
recommended itself to Scots as high religious style. In other cases, a long literary and
scriptural tradition backs the H variety, as with Sanskrit in India. There is also
a strong tradition of formal grammatical study and standardisation associated with H
varieties: for example, Latin and school English (OCEL, 1996).

Code-switching is a change by a speaker (or writer) from one language variety to

another one (or from one language to the other). This can be conscious or
unconscious. If code-switching is done deliberately, it is because of a stylistic or
some other effect. This happens between sentences, i.e. intersententially or even
within sentences, i.e. intrasententially (Svoboda Hrehovk, 2006).
A special case of code-switching is turns in conversations in which one
speaker uses one variant (one language) and the speaker uses another variant
(another language), which was the case in former Czechoslovakia when, for
example, a Slovak was talking to a Czech, each speaking their mother tongue.
A special type of code-switching is called language shift, which is a change
from the use of one language to the use of another language. The occurrence of this
phenomenon is typical of migrant population, for example when people migrate to
another country where the main (i.e. official) language is different, as in the case of

124

the Koran

75

immigrants to the UK, US, Canada, or Australia from non-English-speaking countries.

Language shift may be actively encouraged by official government policy (see 3.9),
for example by restricting the number of languages used as media of instruction. It
may also occur because another language, usually the main language of the region,
is needed for employment opportunities and wider communication. Language shift
should not be confused with language change (LDAL, 1985).

In the context of prestigious and less prestigious language varieties two terms must be
mentioned elaborated and restricted code. The British sociologist Basil Bernstein
(1924 2000) introduced them in the 1960s, and they refer to two varieties (or codes)
of language use. Bernstein saw this as part of general theory of the nature of social
systems and social rules. The elaborated code was said to be used in relatively
formal, educated situations, permitting people to be reasonably creative in their
expression and to use a range of linguistic alternatives. It was thought to be
characterised by a fairly high proportion of such features as subordinate clauses,
adjectives, the pronoun I, and passives. By contrast, the restricted code was thought
to be used in relatively informal situations, stressing the speakers membership of a
group, relying on context for its meaningfulness, and lacking stylistic range.
Linguistically it is highly predictable, with a fairly high proportion of pronouns, tag
questions, and the use of gestures and intonation to convey the meaning. The attempt
to correlate these codes with certain types of social class background, and their role in
educational settings (such as whether children who are used to restricted code would
succeed in schools where elaborated code is the norm) brought the theory
considerable publicity and controversy (OCEL, 1996). However, this theory was
criticised for its lack of evidence and empirical research.

The term bilingualism comes from Latin bi- (two), lingua (tongue), and -alism (as in
nationalism), and first appeared around 1870s.
The term bilingualism refers to the use of at least two languages either by an
individual or by a group of speakers, such as the inhabitants of a particular region or
a nation.
Psycholinguistics is a science that also deals with bilingualism, but it is
interested in bilingualism of an individual (who is able to speak both languages
perfectly); while sociolinguistics focuses its attention to bilingualism of the whole
76

speech community or nation. Sociolinguistics understands bilingualism as the capacity

to make alternate (and sometimes mixed) use of two languages, in contrast to
monolingualism (or unilingualism) and multilingualism (OCEL, 1996). In the social
context of languages like English, especially in England and the US, the traditional
tendency has been to consider the possession and use of one language the norm.
Bilingualism, however, is at least as common as monolingualism; about half the
worldd population is bilingual and kinds of bilingualism are probably present in every
country of the world. The capacity to function in two or more languages has been
closely researched in recent years and is often discussed in terms of such categories,
scales, and dichotomies as:
a) individual and societal bilingualism,
b) balanced bilingualism,
c) compound and coordinate bilingualism,
d) additive and subtractive bilingualism.
Each of the above-mentioned categories is discussed into more detail in the following
lines (see below).

a) Individual and societal bilingualism what is the difference?

Some countries are officially and institutionally bilingual, such as Canada (with
English and French), but many Canadians are not bilingual in these languages. In
proportion to population size, probably more French Canadians learn and use
English than English Canadians learn and use French, but large numbers of both
communities function only in their mother tongue. In other countries, such as India,
there is a high degree of individual bilingualism, the average person knowing and
using two or more languages. The bulk of the population lives in linguistic states, in
which one language dominates (such as Gujarati in Gujarat, Marathi in Maharashtra)
but many other languages are in daily use.

b) Balanced bilingualism what is it?

A balanced bilingual is an individual who speaks, reads, or understands two
languages equally well. However, a bilingual person usually has a better knowledge
of one language than of the other. Bilinguals can, for example, be able to read and
write in only one language, use each language in different types of situations (e.g.
one language at home and the other at work), or use each language for different
77

communicative purposes (one language for talking about school life and the other for
talking about personal feelings). Thus, individuals may be bilingual to various
degrees depending on such factors as circumstances of acquisition, opportunities for
use of the other language, aptitude, and motivation. A passive bilingual, however,
may be able to understand another language without being able to speak it well or
even at all. Degree of proficiency is also related to the functions a language is used
for. Individuals who do not have the opportunity to use a language for particular
purposes may not develop full proficiency in it. Passive bilingualism was common for
example in former Czechoslovakia it was common and natural for Slovaks to watch
Czech programmes (or dubbed into Czech) and this has been common for Slovaks
till nowadays (not so for young Czechs anymore).
Bilinguals are rarely equally fluent about all topics in all contexts. In each
situation, there may be pressures of various kinds (administrative, cultural, economic,
political, and religious) which influence the individual towards one language rather
than the other. The extent to which bilinguals are able or need to keep their
languages separate depends on many factors. In many cases, they may more or less
freely mix elements of both and frequently switch between them (see code-switching
in 3.5).
Typical bilingualism is observed in southern Slovakia, where both Slovak and
Hungarian are spoken by Hungarian minority. Another example is the Province of
Quebec in Canada, where both English and French are spoken; and part of Wales,
where both English and Welsh are spoken (LDAL).

c) Compound and coordinate bilingualism what is the difference?

Two kinds of bilingualism are associated with how languages are learned. In
compound bilingualism, they are learned in the same context and are more or less
interdependent. Thus, some researchers maintain that a child who acquired both
French and English in the home would know both French livre and English book, but
would probably have one mental representation and one meaning for both. In
coordinate bilingualism, however, the languages are learned separately and are
more or less independent. In such cases, they are believed to be independently stored
and represented in the brain, so that livre and book in such circumstances would not
be so readily associated. The compound bilingual is therefore thought to have one set

78

of meanings with two linguistic systems tied to them, and the coordinate bilingual two
sets of meanings and linguistic systems.
Many early studies of bilingualism in the 1920s and 1930s claimed that
bilingualism had negative effects on childrens development. Most of these studies
were based on immigrant and/or ethnic minority populations, especially in the US,
where other factors (such as low social status and lack of familiarity with testing
procedures and the language of tests) may have affected the investigators
perceptions of the abilities of the children tested. Many of the groups tested were in
the process of shifting from their own to a more dominant language, which posed a
threat to their bilingualism. More recent research, particularly in Canada from the late
1950s onwards, has claimed that bilingualism is an advantage which fosters cognitive
flexibility and creative thinking.

d) Additive and subtractive bilingualism what is the difference?

Additive bilingualism refers to cases in which bilinguals learn a second language
without adverse effects on any language already known, and bilingualism acquired
under these circumstances is believed to have positive effects on mental
development. Subtractive bilingualism refers to cases in which the acquisition of a
second language interferes with the development of a first language. This kind of
bilingualism often obtains when children from minority groups attend school in the
second language and are not given the opportunity to develop their native-language
skills. It is believed to have negative effects on mental development and has been
common in the Highlands in Scotland, among the Maori of New Zealand, and among
Hispanics in the US. It is likely that the nature of the relationship between bilingualism
and intelligence is variable, depending on circumstances such as the context of
acquisition and use.
Further reading: Pavlk (2006:133-137)

3.6 Sabir, pidgin, creole,

Sabir (1860s from Portuguese sabir to know) was a name for the original lingua
franca (see 1.4), the earliest known pidgin (see below) based on a European
language. Its vocabulary is drawn mainly from the southern Romance languages, and
it was used from the time of the Crusades (11th13th centuries) until the beginning of
79

the 20th century for communication among Europeans, Turks, Arabs, and others in the
Levant, and is believed by some scholars to have served as a base for the
development of Atlantic and other pidgin languages first used by Portuguese sailors
and traders and later by the British, Dutch, French, and Spanish.

Pidgin as a term appeared around 1870s, and it is believed to come from the Chinese
pronunciation of the word business rendered as pigeon. Etymologically, there appears
to have been only one pidgin: Pidgin English, also known as Business English, PidginEnglish, pidgin-English, Pigeon English, Pigeon-English, bigeon, pidgeon, pidjin,
pidjun. This was a trade jargon used from the 17th century onward between the British
and Chinese in such ports as Canton. Sociolinguists in particular use the term to
describe a phenomenon whose study has greatly increased since the Second World
War. For them, a pidgin is a marginal language which arises to fulfil certain restricted
communicative functions among groups with no common language. Thus, pidgin may
be defined as a lingua franca that is not the mother tongue of anyone using it. It has
simplified grammar and restricted, often polyglot, vocabulary. In sociolinguistic terms,
there have been many pidgins and the process known as pidginisation is seen as
liable to occur anywhere under appropriate conditions. This process of simplification
and hybridisation involves reduction of linguistic resources and restriction of use to
such limited functions as trade. The term is also extended to refer to the early stages
of any instance of second-language acquisition when learners acquire a minimal form
of the target language often influenced by their own primary language.
Pidgin has its characteristic features. Pidgin is characterised by a small
vocabulary (a few hundred or thousand words) drawn largely from the superstrate
language (i. e. the language of the socially dominant group) together with reduction
of many grammatical features, such as inflectional morphology, as in Tok Pisin (in
Papua New Guinea) mi kam can mean I come, I am coming, and also I came. A
notable feature of pidgin is lack of grammatical complexity. Because they lack
redundancy, pidgins depend heavily on context for their interpretation. Most pidgins
have little or no inflectional morphology. Pidgin languages tend to have only a small
number of prepositions and they use them to mark a variety of grammatical relations
which in other languages would be expressed by a much greater number of
prepositions. However, pidgins are highly regular and have fewer exceptions than
many other languages, which makes them easier to learn. Another property is
80

multifunctionality: the same word can function in many ways. For example, in
English, the word ill functions as an adjective (as in he is ill or ill wind) and the
corresponding noun is illness, derived by a regular process of word-formation. In Tok
Pisin, however, the word sik can function as both noun and adjective: mi sik (I am ill)
or em i gat sik malaria (he has malaria).
Pidgin can be classified into four types according to their development: jargon,
stable pidgin, extended or expanded pidgin, and creole, each characterised by a
gradual increase in complexity. The last type is discussed below.

Creole
In sociolinguistic terms, creole languages have arisen through contact between
speakers of different languages. If a pidgin becomes creole (when it is nativised), we
say it is creolised, i.e. it is acquired as a first language by children, particularly in
urban areas. This is the stage of the above-mentioned Tok Pisin in Papua New
Guinea or Kriol in the Northern Territories of Australia. It is generally impossible to
identify structural features which distinguish expanded pidgins from emerging creoles,
since both exhibit increased structural complexity and share many features. The
difference lies more in social use than in form.
There are many English-based creoles. In West Africa, they include Aku in
Gambia, Krio in Sierra Leone, Kru English in Liberia, and Kamtok in Cameroon. In
North America, they include Afro-Seminole, Amerindian Pidgin English, and Gullah. It
has been argued that Black English (Vernacular) in the US has creole origins since it
shares many features with English-based creoles in the Caribbean. In the UK, British
Black English, spoken by immigrants from the Caribbean and their children, has
features inherited from Caribbean English Creole.
Typical features of European-based creoles include: subject-verb-object word
order, lack of a formal passive, absence of copula, adjectives may function as verbs,
no syntactic difference between questions and statements, etc.
Depending on the stage at which the process of creolisation occurs, different
types of structural expansion are necessary before the language can become
adequate. In the case of Jamaican Creole, it is thought that a rudimentary pidgin
creolised within a generation, then began to de-creolise towards general English. Tok
Pisin, however, first stabilised and expanded as a pidgin before it became creolised.
De-creolisation is a further development in which a creole gradually converges with
81

its superstrate, for example, in Hawaii and Jamaica, both creoles moving towards
standard English. Following the creolisation of a pidgin, a post-creole continuum
may develop when, after a period of relatively independent linguistic development, a
post-pidgin or post-creole variety comes under a period of renewed influence from the
so-called lexifier language125. De-creolisation may obscure the origins of a variety, as
in the case of American Black English.

Pidgin and creole languages were long neglected by the academic world, because
they were not regarded as real or fully-fledged languages, but their study is
currently regarded as significant for general linguistics as well as the study of such
languages as English. Linguists interested in language acquisition, language change,
and universal grammar have taken more notice of them. These languages have also
attracted the attention of sociolinguists, owing to the amount of variation among them,
and the study of such variation has had repercussions on the study of the totality of
languages like English, in which variety is as much the norm as uniformity.
Since pidgins and creoles are generally spoken in Third World countries, their role
and function are intimately connected with variety of political questions concerned with
national, social, and economic development and transition into post-colonial societies.
Some countries give official recognition to pidgin and creole languages, among them
Papua New Guinea and Haiti. Pidgin and creole languages also function as symbols
of solidarity in many parts of the world where their use is increasing. In Haiti, it is often
the case that to speak creole is to talk straight, while to speak French is synonymous
with duplicity.

3.7
Stratification
of
the
Slovak
comparison to the English language

national

language

in

Stratification of English language due to social factors (age, gender, ethnicity, etc.)
was discussed in the previous subchapters (3.1, 3.2, 3.3, and 3.4). However, there
are more criteria to analyse the language stratification. Pavlk (2006) notices the
criterion based on the relation between an individual and (what he calls) collective.
He agrees with prestigious Slovak linguists who distinguish four basic varieties of
Slovak:
125

the language from which they draw most of their vocabulary

82

Spisovn jazyk is a standard variety of the Slovak language used by

educated speakers in formal and official occasions; and this variety is
supposed to be used in newspapers and other mass media. Pavlk observes
that spisovn jazyk does not have to mean tandardn jazyk and that these
two terms are identical. The important thing to emphasise is that the English
language does not know the term spisovn jazyk or spisovnos.

tandardn jazyk is a variety spoken by educated speakers in informal

everyday situations. However, Trudgill perceives standard language a bit
differently, when he says that Standard English is a dialect. He also admits
that Standard English is simply one variety of English among many. Trudgill
sees it as a sub-variety of English. Sub-varieties of languages are usually
referred to as dialects, and languages are often described as consisting of
dialects. He also admits that Standard English is an unusual dialect in a
number of ways because it is used as the most prestigious dialect in the
English-speaking world from a social, intellectual and cultural point of view;
and it does not have an associated accent (Trudgill, 1999126).

Subtandardn jazyk is defined as a variety of the Slovak language used

by all speakers (i. e. from all social classes) in informal style and situations.
Typical features of this particular variety are: rather high degree of expressivity
and the use of individual and regional linguistic items (Pavlk, 2006:41).

Nreie is understood in terms of region, i.e. as a geographical variety of

language used mainly by older speakers in informal everyday situations
(Pavlk, 2006). However, many young people in Slovakia speak dialects,
especially those with lower education. The use of a particular regional dialect
can refer to local identity of its speakers.

The above-mentioned varieties of language often compete with each other and are
usually found in tension with the rest of varieties. This brings a kind of dynamism into
language, for example linguistic terms that used to be considered substandard
several years ago are becoming standard (or neutral) today.
Reading on varieties in contact: Pavlk (2006:42-46)
Reading on spisovn slovenina:

126

Taken from http://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/dick/SEtrudgill.htm

83

Jn Horeck. 2001. Kultivovanie sloveniny. Bratislava: SPJ pri SAV J. ISBN 80-9675749-0
Jn HoreckKlra BuzzssyovJn Bosk a kol. 1989. Dynamika slovnej zsoby sasnej
sloveniny. Bratislava: Veda.
Eugen Pauliny. 1983. Dejiny spisovnej sloveniny. Bratislava: SPN.

3.8 Language change and its sociolinguistic explication

The term language purism appears around the 18th century from French purisme
and refers to purity or correctness in language and style. This attitude towards
language is very often viewed as excessive and hyper-corrective. OCEL (1996:744)
asserts that purists (linguists or laypersons) may have specific plans for reforming
languages in such areas as spelling, vocabulary, and grammar: for example,
movements in English and German to get rid of foreign and especially Latinate
borrowings, replacing them with native words, including archaic and dialect usages.
This form of purism was dominant around the 16th and 19th centuries (OCEL, 1996).
Some replacing attempts were not practical and therefore remained unaccepted,
however, some worked out, for example the rhetorician John Earle (1890) credited
the 19th century movement with popularizing open-mindedness, seamy127, shaky,
and unknowable (OCEL, 1996:744).
Today we find purists very useful because they are considered reformers
whose plan is to root out presumed errors in grammar and usage and they offer what
they feel to be more appropriate (correct) alternatives (OCEL, 1996). There may be
felt certain tension between two complementary approaches: descriptivists
(sociolinguists) and purists (normativists, prescriptivists). Descriprivists describe
language as it is, i.e. objectively, accurately, systematically, and comprehensively
without any evaluating judgements. On the contrary, prescriptivists set out rules
(prescriptions) for how it should be used and for what should not be used
(proscriptions), based on norms derived from a particular model of grammar. For
English, such a grammar may prescribe as in It is I and proscribe me as in Its me.128
Both approaches, prescription and description, are essentially complementary (as
mentioned above), but have different priorities and sometimes are seen to be in
conflict.

127

unpleasant because of a connection with dishonesty, violence, and illegal sex (e.g. the seamy side of life)

128 From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Descriptive_linguistics (10/08/07), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_prescription (10/08/07)

84

Language change means change in a language which takes place over time. All
living languages have changed and continue to change. For example, in English,
changes which have recently been occurring include the following:
a) the distinction in pronunciation between words such as what and Watt is
disappearing,
b) hopefully may be used instead of I hope, we hope, it is to be hoped,
c) new words and expressions (i.e. neologisms129) are constantly entering the
language, for example drop-out, alternative society, culture shock (LDAL, 1985)130.
Large amounts of tape-recorded data131 can be used to plot the spread of
changes through the community and through the language. For example, Labov (2.2)
was able in the 1960s to show that in New York City the consonant r was being
reintroduced in the pronunciation of words like form and farm by comparing the
number of rs used by older speakers to the number used by younger speakers. He
was also able to show that this change was being spearheaded by speakers from the
lower middle class, probably because saying forrm rather than fawm is considered
prestigious (and therefore correct) in American society, and because speakers from
this class are more likely to be both socially ambitious and insecure about the worth
of their dialects (OCEL, 1996).

It is generally believed that English native speakers are far too open-minded towards
influences of other languages. However, there are moments in the history of the
English language that prove this untrue. The Society for Pure English was founded
in England in 1913132 by a number of writers and academics on the initiative of the
poet Robert Bridges (OCEL, 1996:865). The outbreak of the First World War
impeded its development, but between 1919 and 1946 carried on a campaign
against what is regarded as degenerate tendencies within the language, mainly
through a series of 66 Tracts, for many years printed and distributed by Oxford
University Press. The terms pure and tract indicate the quasi-missionary approach
adopted by Bridges and his associates. In Tract 21 (1925), which sets out the claims
of the Society, Bridges indicated that by pure he did not intend Teutonic (i.e.
129

For neologism see Glossary

Further reading on language change see Fasold (1990:226-235 [Variation and language change])
131
These data are obtained in such a way as to ensure as far as possible that speakers are speaking naturally (for
sociolinguistic methods see 1.5).
132
Marked by P. J.
130

85

Germanic), an interpretation associated with the 19th century reformer William

Barnes, who had advocated a return to undiluted Saxonism. Pure was deliberately
adopted as an assertive protest against that misappropriation of the term which
would condemn our historic practice (OCEL, 1996:865). Bridges considered that the
spread of English throughout the world was a condition over which we have no
control (ibid.), but one that entails a vast responsibility and imposes on our
humanity the duty to do what we can to make our current speech as good a means
as possible for the intercommunication of ideas (ibid.):
That we did not of our own will or intention put ourselves in this predicament cannot excuse our
neglect; nor in the exposure and trial that our language has to face can we honestly sustain our native
pride in it, if, shutting our eyes to its defects, we refuse to accommodate it to the obvious needs of
perspicuity and logical precision which are the essential virtues of any cultured speech. In certain
respects, the English language is in its present condition inferior to some of its rivals as a convenient
carrier of thought; and it would be a disgrace to us if we made no effort to bring it up to the mark
(OCEL, 1996:865).

Another term that is significant in sociolinguistic research is language attitudes and

expectations (see 3.9) which can influence second- or foreign-language learning.
The measurement of language attitudes provides information which may be very
helpful in language teaching and language planning (see above), too (LDAL, 1985).
LDAL (1985:155) defines language attitudes as the attitudes which speakers of
different languages or language varieties133 have towards each others languages or
to their own language. Gramley Ptzold assert that attitudes are anchored in
feelings of group solidarity or distance (Gramley Ptzold, 2002:3) and they add
that it is absolutely normal to identify with ones own group (ibid.). Expressions of
positive or negative feelings towards a language may reflect impressions of linguistic
difficulty or simplicity, ease or difficulty of learning, degree of importance, elegance,
social status, etc. What may be found interesting about this is that attitudes towards
a language may show what people feel about the speakers of that language.
Language attitudes of a different sort are the subject of the social psychology of
language. These attitudes are clearly social in origin, for example, speakers of the
prestigious British English accent known as RP (1.4) are often perceived to be more
competent and intelligent than speakers with regional accents, this view arising
133

accents, dialects, languages

86

simply from the high social status of RP. Similarly some accents of English are
regarded as being more or less aesthetically pleasing than others. This, too, can be
shown to be the result of the social connotations that different accent have for
listeners. Americans, for example, do not find the accent of the West Midlands of
England ugly, as many British people do, which has much to do with the fact that they
do not recognize these accents as being from the West Midlands (OCEL, 1996).

Lingua franca (see also 1.4 and 3.6) is a language used for communication between
different groups of people, each speaking a different language. It could be an
internationally used language of communication (as Latin used to be in Europe in the
past centuries or as English is nowadays). From Mistrks Encyklpedia jazykovedy
(1993:265) we learn that in the Middle Ages the term lingua franca was used to
denote a kind of Arabic language mixed with the features of another language(s)
mostly used in the Mediterranean harbours. The term came to cover all the so-called
hybrid languages in the course of time. Today the term auxiliary language is
sometimes used as a synonym for lingua franca (LDAL, 1985).

It is estimated that nearly 500 million people consider the English language their
mother tongue and another nearly 400 million speakers use it as their second
language. Hundreds of millions of interlocutors use English in tourism, during
business and political negotiations, in international academic and university
programmes and institutions, and in many other fields of the third sector, where
English is used as a lingua franca. The authors Krupa Genzor (1996:73) assert that
since the 1950s use of the English language in the world has increased by 40
percent and the accelerating process still continues. From the purely geographical
point of view, English is the most used (extended) language in the world.
English has become the inevitable means of communication in multilingual
society. India, a former British colony, boasts about 4,500 linguistic and ethnic
communities: Hindi, Bengali, Urdu and others are spoken beside the English
language (Krupa Genzor, 1996; Jesensk, 2007).
The strong influence of English language upon other (national) languages is
caused by the high use of the Internet and other sophisticated technologies on the
global scale.

87

In linguistic science and language teaching, we distinguish between EFL (English as

a Foreign Language) and ELF (English as a Lingua Franca).
EFL refers to the teaching of English to students whose first language is not
English and the official language of their country is not English either. It means that
pupils/students/learners usually learn/study English at schools. To complicate things
even more, another type of English should be mentioned here, namely ESL, which
means simply English as a Second Language. ESL refers to the teaching of English
to speakers of other languages who live in a country where English is an official or
significant language. In the context of our discussion, EFL and ESF are not
immediately relevant. We are mostly interested in ELF, because this is the only
variety that has to do with the global use of the English language.

The abbreviation ELF stands for English as a Lingua Franca. ELF has a number of
specific features. There is a pragmatic approach used in ELF teaching because, its
main goal is to make communication as effective and successful as possible.
However, it depends on the specific interlocutors. To put it simply: a native speaker of
English almost subconsciously adapts his or her way of speech (grammar,
vocabulary, diction and speed) to the level of their foreign listener (interlocutor).
When there are non-native interlocutors involved in the conversation, it is more
relevant to make the other interlocutor understand the contents of the discourse than
to speak perfect English. Some mistakes in pronunciation, such as non-use of the
phoneme schwa (@), can make English more easily comprehensible to foreign and/or
non-native speakers. On the other hand, there is one important fact to realize
a native speaker may (and surely will) make the most of his better command of the
language.
On the international scale, English (ELF) is widely spoken by experts and
scientists who are familiar with the discussed issues and terms connected to them.

In short, ELF is as diverse as its speakers are. We may talk of a considerably

simplified system of the language developed from the so-called language stripped
bare introduced in the 1930s by a British linguist, Charles Ogden, who named it Basic
English. BASIC is an acronym for British American Scientific International
Commercial. Ogden reduced its vocabulary to 600 nouns, 150 adjectives and 100
the so-called structural expressions (pronouns, prepositions and so on). In fact, it is
88

quite a reduced form of proper English grammar. Although Ogdens Basic English
has not become an international language, as the author wished, a similar language
has since his time become globally used ELF.

One of the basic features of the English language is its great ability to borrow lexical
units from an enormous number of languages. After many centuries of language and
cultural interactions it has developed into a language with a prevailing Germanic
grammar and a dominant Roman vocabulary (words having Old French, Latin or
Greek background) which makes up approximately 75 percent of the whole English
vocabulary. English has borrowed words from about 120 different languages. This
open-mindedness towards other language influences and impacts has also
contributed to its global dominance all over the world.

In the course of the centuries Latin, as the language of science, scholarship and
education, contributed to the development of several European languages which had
been existing simultaneously with it, although at the beginning they were considered
too outlandish or even vulgar. Latin created a solid ground for its new varieties and
later on the new languages. The analogy with English is obvious: nowadays there is
no single standard English. We know several kinds of standard Englishes (or
varieties of English) such as British, American, Australian, African and Indian (the
English spoken in India). Each of them has its own specific pronunciation,
morphological, grammatical, lexical, syntactic, stylistic and cultural features, although
the core of the lexicon is more or less the same.
Latin has been the language of the Roman Catholic Church, scholarship and
education in the course of the centuries, while English has reached its dominance
only recently and has usually been connected with the language of business and
diplomacy (superseding French). English is a secular language, and this fact is very
important in connection with the spread of English both in tourism and in the
worldwide communication of everyday life.

All attempts to create a single universal language have failed; however, taking 6, 000
languages134 into consideration, one has to admit that those attempts have their
134

To define the term language is a difficult task, and even to distinguish it from a dialect or dialects is very
complicated, because some languages are spread only by oral means. The demise of several languages, mostly in

89

justification. For example, there are about 400 languages and dialects spoken in
Papua New Guinea, while 18 million Amerindians speak 1, 200 different languages.
In Russian Dagestan there live about 1.5 million people speaking approximately 40
various languages. In the Russian peninsula of Cola there live only 1, 700 Saams
using their own language and alphabet (Jesensk, 2008). In Ghana, about 45
languages are spoken. In Nigeria, the country with the highest population density in
Africa, around 100 languages are spoken. People in Cameroon use about 170
languages and dialects. Mainly English and French were used as unifying and official
languages during the times of colonisation and imperial hegemony. Both languages,
English

and

French,

remain

official

in

a considerable

number

of

states

where considerations of language and politics are problematical (Jesensk, 2008).

Attempts to create the only artificial, logical, universal and/or international language
(a kind of international lingua franca) spoken on a global scale are as ancient as
a human society itself, considering the power potential that can manipulate a human
mind. Moreover, in the 20th century a certain doctor developed several artificial
languages some of which had a vocabulary of up to 10, 000 lexical units. Since
Francis Bacons time human society has chalked up approximately 700 attempts to
create an artificial language common to as many countries and societies as possible.

The first notable success was achieved when a German priest called Schleyer
introduced a world language known as volapk in 1879.
1

In 1907, the very first Esperanto textbook for Slovaks was published in the
town of Martin. The publication contributed to the increasing popularity of
Esperanto in Slovakia. It is believed that its father was a Polish doctor called
L. Zamenhof. Esperanto is very probably the most successful artificial
language in which congresses are held and into which literary works of art are
translated (for example, Sldkovis Detvan).

Esperanto was followed by Ido new elaborate version of Esperanto.

Interlingua (IALA135) was introduced by an American think tank in the years

1924 1951, and it was meant to supersede Latin. Interlingua is a set of

Asia and Oceania, is a continuous process that also influences a number of other languages in the world.
However, linguists have come to an agreement that there are around 6, 800 languages all around the world.
135
The International Association for an Artificial Language

90

10, 000 expressions adapted from Latin. The association believed in the
reabsorption of Latin into languages of the world that is why they introduced
its modernised form enriched by many expressions from living languages.
4

Basic English (1930s) is a simplified version of British and American English.

Its vocabulary has 850 words, necessary to make communication possible and
comprehensible. However, it is a paradox that a minimum number of words
limits the number of interlocutors, and even the easiest expressions are
described by means of a long set of lexical units. For example, instead of
a single word selfish the following description is necessary without thought for
others136. Another extreme case may be mentioned: a cut from the back end
of a male cow kept on the fire long enough137 describing nothing else than
beefsteak138 (Krupa Genzor, 1996:302).

New member countries (including Slovakia) entered the EU and the number of official
languages increased accordingly from 11 to 23. Although the Eurorepresentatives try
to enforce a symmetrical language model that could be applied on every
communicative occasion, it is obvious that their attempt is futile. Todays English
enjoys the significant position of a (neutral) working Eurolanguage, despite the fact
that its dominant status has been prompting lively discussion in political and other
circles of the society. Global English (i.e. its world use) is conditioned by historical
context

and

neutral

specifications

without

British,

American

or

Australian

cultural/political backgrounds or allusions. The term neutral English indicates

international English divested of regional varieties containing political, social and
cultural connotations. A formal form of international English prevails at universities,
and among scientists where English merely functions as a communicative-cognitive
language, because its aim is not to fulfil emotional or aesthetic functions. It is this
form of English that has been preferred in the language culture of the western world.
Although British colonialism laid the foundations for global English, international
English is the result of forming world culture (i.e. western culture), to which the
intensive influence of the U.S. also contributes, but the decisive influence upon the
use of international English has the language-cultural interaction among non-English-

136

bez myslenia na druhch

odrezok z chrbta konca samej kravy nechan na ohni dos dlho
138
hovdz reze
137

91

speaking interlocutors139. This fact eliminates both the British and the American
impact on other interlocutors. In Englishs favour, too, is the fact that non-native
speakers outnumber English native speakers. All around the world English is used as
a local/regional language fulfilling communicative-cognitive needs. On the other
hand, opponents (of the global use of English) say that

the neutrality of any

language is a pure unattainable ideal, because all languages bear certain items of
information about their users (i.e. speakers). Opponents also remind us that nonnative speakers are exposed to the influences of various varieties of standard British,
American and other less well-known varieties of the English language. Another
strong argument is that relying on the use of international English makes the native
speakers of English (predominantly Americans) dependent on the language abilities
of others. A suitable international English divested as far as possible of local shades
could be substituted for British/American English in the future. There is a high chance
of mixing both standard varieties140 together, thereby creating a supranational variety
of English superseding current varieties. According to David Crystal, a British linguist,
native speakers of English will be exposed to two standards of English one that will
be a part of their national and local identities, while the other will help them to keep in
touch with the rest of human society. Crystal does not discount bilingualism within the
English language.

The term international English usually indicates the British variety spoken in the
UK141 and the Commonwealth of Nations. It is named international English in order
to distinguish it from the American variety. The majority of native speakers use the
American variety, and the rest of native speakers consider the British variety a
standard. However, American English prevails in the world. The international
character of British English is dependent on three factors: 1) British English,
compared to American English, is a standard spoken in more countries over the
world; 2) many scientific works written outside the US follow Oxford rules; 3) this
variety is an official language of the United Nations and the European Union, and it
is also used for testing language skills and abilities by means of the International
English Language Testing System. The British variety of international English is

139

Non-English-speaking interlocutors means all interlocutors whose mother tongue is not English.
Standard British English/General American English
141
The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
140

92

installed in computers sold on the world markets. The most influential and also the
best-known organisations in which the British variety is spoken are the following: the
network of the UN organisations (UNESCO, UNICEF, etc.), WTO (the World Trade
Organisation), WHO (the World Health Organisation), OPEC (Organisation of
Petroleum Exporting Countries), Interpol (the International Police), Amnesty
International, and many others. What is typical of all the above-mentioned
organisations is the application of Oxford orthography (e.g.. using the suffix -ize in
verbs such as organize and recognize, but not analyse). Organisations following the
standard British variety of governmental documents (organise, recognise) are: NATO
(the North Atlantic Treaty Organization), the EU (the European Union), the OECD
(the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development), the Commonwealth
Secretary, Transparency International, Greenpeace and many others. The American
variety (e.g. the double use of suffix -se/-ze in verbs: defense, analyze) is typical of
documents issued by the U.S. government and also of the following organisations:
the IMF (the International Monetary Fund142), the World Bank, the Secretary of the
NAFTA organisation, and many others. Varieties of the English language amongst
English speakers using this language as their second or third language are being
extended by means of documents and a wide diapason of activities impinging upon
nearly all fields of human society in contact with the named organisations (Jesensk,
2008).

English words and phrases are spoken in national languages due to its global usage.
Such words and phrases are called anglicisms.
Anglicism has at least three basic meanings:
1) it is an expression from English used in other languages, such as tenis in
Slovak or le fairplay in French;
2) it can be a characteristic, quality, fashion, or fad143 deriving from England,
such as cricket or afternoon tea in Pakistan;
3) it can also be a feature of the English language spoken in England, such as the
working-class phrase feelin proper poorly (meaning feeling really ill).

142

It is a part of the United Nations which encourages international trade and gives financial help to poor
countries
143
fad = a style, activity or interest which is very popular for a short period of time (CALD, 2003)

93

Anglicism (see above) can be further divided into:

Briticism144/Britishism145 is a word, expression or phrase typical of English

as used in the UK (in Britain), particularly after the late 18th century, when
varieties of the language were established beyond the British Isles and,
especially in the case of American English, began to develop their own
standard and critical traditions.

Americanism146 expresses a usage or custom peculiar to, or common in the

US. The term refers primarily to English words and phrases that acquired a
new sense (e.g. bluff, corn, lumber147) or entered the language (e.g. OK,
raccoon, squash) in what is now the US, but also to features of pronunciation,
grammar, and sentence structure.
Scholars of English in the UK are as inclined to point out Americanisms as

their colleagues in the US are to point out Briticisms. Both terms apply to all aspects
of usage, but are most often applied to vocabulary: where government is often used
in the UK in the sense of Prime Minister (Premier) and Cabinet, the nearest US
equivalent is administration; while in British English school is generally restricted to
pre-university education, in American English it applies to any educational level.
Technological fields that developed independently in the two nations have often had
different terminologies, as in the automotive148 industry. Examples are given in table
10 below (OCEL, 1996).

Table 9 Automotive Terminology in English

British expression
Bonnet
Boot
bumper
dip switch

American expression
hood
trunk
fender
dimmer

British expression
dynamo
fascia
indicator
quarterlight

American expression
generator
dashboard
Blinker, turn signal
vent

Further reading:
Jesensk, P. 2004. Anglicizmy v kritickom tdennku Domino frum. In: Sasn jazykov
komunikcia v interdisciplinrnych svislostiach. Bansk Bystrica: FHV UMB, 2004, pp. 318
326. ISBN 80-8055-979-1
144

The term Briticism was coined by Richard Grant White from British adapted to Britic- and -ism (as in
Scotticism) in 1868 (OCEL, 1996).
145
The term Britishism emerged around 1890s.
146
The term Americanism emerged in the 18th century and was based on the term Scotticism. It was first used in
1781.
147
lumber = wood that has been prepared for building (CALD, 2003)
148
automotive = relating to road vehicles (CALD, 2003)

94

Jesensk, P. 2002. Are British and American English Two Different Languages? In: Teria a
prax prpravy uiteov anglickho jazyka (zbornk Katedry anglistiky a amerikanistiky FHV
UMB). Bansk Bystrica: FHV UMB, 2002, pp 28 36. ISBN 80-8055-691-1
Jesensk, P. 2008. EUROSPEAK and ELF English as a Current Global Lingua Franca. In:
Topics In Linguistics. Politeness and Interaction. Issue 1 October 2007. Nitra: Univerzita
Kontantna Filozofa v Nitre. Filozofick fakulta, 2007, pp 6267. ISSN 3836/2007
Jesensk, P. 2009. Niekoko poznmok k pouvaniu anglicizmov mladch ud. In: Mlad
veda 2009 (Humanitn vedy lingvistika). Bansk Bystrica: FHV UMB, 2009, pp 26 32.
ISBN 978-80-8083-859-1

3.9 Language planning

Language planning refers to planning, usually by a government or government
agency, concerning choice of national or official language(s), ways of spreading the
use of a language, spelling reforms, the addition of new words to the language, and
other language problems. Through language planning, an official language policy is
established and/or implemented.
Such planning usually passes thorough several stages (see basic tasks of
sociolinguistics): a particular language or variety (of a language) is selected;
codification is undertaken to stabilize it, for example by agreeing writing conventions
for previously non-literate languages; the codified language is adjusted to enable it to
perform new functions, for example by inventing or borrowing scientific vocabulary;
and mechanisms are devised, such as teaching syllabuses and procedures for
monitoring the media, to ensure that the language is used in conformity with the
policy. This sequence is rarely appropriate for English, whose dominant role in the
world gives it a unique position, but English is nonetheless officially planned into
national education systems in various ways. In Wales, Welsh has been promoted
through the National Curriculum as a subject to be compulsorily learnt within Wales,
but is not compulsorily available to Welsh speakers or others outside Wales.
Sociolinguistics can be concerned with observing the details of individual
behaviour in, for example, face-to-face conversation. It can also be involved in the
larger scale investigation of linguistic behaviour in communities the size of New York
City. It can furthermore be concerned with the relationship between language and
society in even larger-scale units such as entire nations. Sociolinguists working in
areas such as the sociology of language and language planning are concerned with
issues like the treatment of language minorities, and the selection and codification of
languages in the countries which have hitherto had no standard language. In nations

95

such as Britain, Ireland, the US, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, English is the
majority language, in a relationship of dominance (see above in this chapter) with
numerically much smaller and officially much less well-supported languages, such as
Gaelic and Welsh in Britain and Maori in New Zealand. Sociolinguists study such
relationships and their implications for education. In the case of Britain, they also
attempt to obtain information on more recently arrived languages such as Gujarati,
Panjabi, Matlese, and Turkish. Elsewhere, they note that there are countries in which
native speakers of English are in minority, as in Nicaragua, Honduras, South Africa,
and Zimbabwe (OCEL, 1996).
English is the UKs official language, however, about 25% of Wales use Welsh,
a Celtic language, and it is the first language of 20% of the Welsh. Welsh-speakers
live especially in the rural West and North-West of Wales. In the whole of Wales,
public notices are in both English and Welsh. The Welsh language is taught in most
schools and there is also a Welsh TV channel. There is also vibrant nationalist
support of Wales and the Welsh language, which is represented in the House of
Commons by the nationalist political party Plaid Cymru (i.e. the Party of Wales).

The language of the Celts in Scotland and Ireland, Gaelic, is spoken by about 1.2%
of the population, which represents about 60,000 people in Scotland especially in
Western Highlands, where it is the mother tongue of a very small percentage of
inhabitants. The number of people able to communicate in Gaelic is rapidly
decreasing and it is in danger of dying out. A number of other languages are spoken
by Asian Britons, including Bengali (the official language of Bangladesh), Gujarati
(the state language of Gujarat), Hindi (a language or group of dialects of North
central India), Punjabi (the state language of the Punjab, NW India), and Urdu (an
official language of Pakistan, also spoken in India). Other prominent minority
languages used in the UK are Arabic and Chinese. It is said that over 300 different
languages are spoken in London (Pickardov, 2005:66).

BBC pronunciation is the well-known form of British English, because it is

considered to be a standard spoken in the UK. Estuary English (London regional
English) is the idea that originates from the sociolinguistic observation that some
people in public life who would previously have been expected to speak with a BBC
96

(or RP) accent now find it acceptable to speak with some characteristics of the
accents of the London area (i.e. London and its vicinity149), such as glottal stops,
which would in earlier times have caused comment or disapproval (Gramley
Ptzold, 2002; Roach, 2006). Estuary English shares the less stigmatized features of
Cockney, for example a move of /eI/ to /aI/, the loss of /j/ in words like new,
increasing replacement of /t/ by /?/. On the other hand, it does not have H-dropping
or the replacement of /T, D/ by /f, v/. Gramley Ptzold assert that in contrast to
Cockney the realisation of /r/ in Estuary English can be /m/ and /s/ may be uttered //
at the beginning of consonant clusters, such as in /stu:d@nt/, /stp/ and /@b'strkt/
thus become /tu:d@nt /, /tp/ and /@b'trkt/ (Gramley Ptzold, 2002:247).
BBC pronunciation is viewed as a model, proper, correct form of English spoken
usually by BBC announcers and newsreaders (newscasters) in the UK. It serves as a
model for foreign learners of English. RP or BBC pronunciation is usually informally
referred to by the British middle class as a BBC accent or a public school accent
and by working class as talking proper or talking posh. In England, it is also often
referred to simply as Standard English. Its advanced form (i.e. distinctive upper
upper-class and royal) is sometimes called la-di-dah (as in taking la-di-dah) or a cutglass accent, especially if used by people judged as not really from the top drawer.
RP or BBC pronunciation has been described by many of its users and admirers in
the UK and elsewhere as the best pronunciation for British English, for the countries
influenced by British English, or for all users of English everywhere. Americans do
not normally subscribe to this view, but many of them admire BBC English as the
representative accent of educated British English while some associate it with the
theatre and, in men, with effeminacy.

Many British people dislike BBC English/pronunciation, usually arguing that it is a

mark of privilege and (especially among Welsh, Northern Irish, and Scots) of social
domination by the (especially southern) English. It has, however, a considerable
gravitational pull throughout the UK, with the result that many middle- and lower
middle-class people, especially in England, speak with accents more or less adapted
towards it. These accents are therefore known among phoneticians as modified
regional accents and modified RP. Comparable accents in Australia, Ireland, New
149

the Thames Estuary and the lower Thames valley

97

Zealand, Scotland, South Africa, and elsewhere are often referred to as near-RP. It
has always been a minority accent, unlikely ever to have been spoken by more than
3 4% of the British population. British phoneticians and linguists have often
described it as a regionless accent in the UK and especially in England, in that it is
not possible to tell which part of the country an RP speaker comes from; it is never,
however, described as a classless accent, because it identifies the speaker as a
member of the middle or upper classes. Because it is class-related, it is socially and
politically controversial and can lead to embarrassment when discussed (OCEL,
1996).
Further reading on variety and/or BBC (RP):
Roach (2006: 3 6, 208 213);
Shaw, G.B. 1913, 1972. Pygmalion: A Romance in Five Acts. Moscow: Higher School
Publishing House, 1972, 141 pp. No ISBN
Further reading on differences between BrE and AmE:
tekauer (1993:15 24)

The speakers of American English outnumber all native speakers of English outside
the US by about two to one and those of British English by nearly four to one. This
advantage, strengthened by the US involvement with world affairs, has given
American English a global importance in the late 20th century comparable to that of
British English in the late 19th century.

The history of the variety falls into three periods, whose dates correspond to political
and social events with important consequences for the language:

1) The Colonial Period (1607 1776) during which a distinctive American English
was gestating150. English colonization of the Americas came relatively late, as
compared for example with Spanish settlement in Central and South America.
From the beginning, the colonies were of mixed origin. Because settlers came from
a variety of locations, there was no simple transplanting of British dialects, but rather
a combination of features in a single colony, resulting in the levelling of divergent
features and the apparently random survival of features from disparate sources. The
result was more uniform speech in the colonies than in the motherland. The barrier
150

gestate (v)
gestation (n) 1) the period of the development of a child or young animal while it is still
inside its mothers body, 2) the period of the development of ideas, thoughts or plans (CALD, 2003)

98

of the Atlantic151 began the process of divergence of American from British usage
almost immediately. Changes in the motherland were slow to reach the colonies, the
colonists adapted old uses to new purposes, and borrowed from other language
groups, especially from the Amerindians, Dutch, and French. Although still depending
on England for authority and a standard (see 2.1 and 4.1), the colonies were forced
to develop their own resources.

2) The National Period (1776 1898) which saw its birth, establishment, and
consolidation.
It was the War of Independence (1776 1783) that brought the Colonial Period to a
close. Several of the Founding Fathers of the new republic recognized that political
independence would require cultural independence as well. Linguistically, this period
faced two related challenges: the evolution and recognition of a separate
standard English for the US and the extension of that standard over the whole
nation as it expanded westward. Noah Webster is most closely associated with
linguistic nationalism in promoting what he called Federal English.
The Civil War (1861 1865) disrupted the fabric152 of the Union in politics,
culture, and language. By the time it began, US sovereignty extended to the Pacific,
fulfilling a sense of a mission153 which motivated national policy during this period.
The assimilation of foreign influences continued, including large numbers of
immigrants from Europe and contacts with speakers of Spanish in Florida and the
West.
Developments which moulded154 the language of Americans during the 19th century
included:

the settlement of the West,

the extension of railroads,

the growth of industry,

the labour movement,

the invention of the telegraph and telephone,

the burgeoning155 of journalism,

151

i.e. geographical reasons

fabric = structure (CALD, 2003)
153
the Manifest Destiny (1845) of the US more on this issue in Paul Johnson. 2000. Djiny americkho nroda.
Praha: Academia, 295 296pp. ISBN 80-200-0799-7
154
moulded = shaped (CALD, 2003)
152

99

the expansion of education at all levels, and

the publication of textbooks and dictionaries.

The establishment of a national identity and its domestic elaboration were the
preoccupation of this period, but by the end of the century new directions in
national policy began to affect the language. By the 1890s, the domestic frontier
was exhausted, and expansionism took Americas into territories overseas. The
Spanish-American War (1898) lasted barely four months, but was a turning-point in
foreign policy. During the 120 years since the founding of the nation, the US had
generally observed George Washingtons councel to avoid foreign alliances and
followed an isolationist policy concentrating on domestic matters. With this war,
however, the US and its English became internationally significant.

3) The International Period (from 1898) during which it has come increasingly
under foreign influence and has exerted influence on other varieties of English and
on other languages.
The Hawaiian Islands were annexed during the course of the Spanish-American War,
the island of Puerto Rico was ceded to the US, and the Philippines were bought for
$20m. In the following years, the US extended its overseas interests: an Open Door
policy was affirmed for China; the US mediated the Russo-Japanese war of 1905; the
Panamanian revolution against Columbia was supported (if not actually fomented156),
so that the US could build a canal across the isthmus of Panama; intervention in
Latin American affairs became frequent, to prevent European involvement and
secure American interests; the Virgin Islands in the Caribbean were purchased from
Denmark; and in 1917 the US entered the World war I. Thereafter, Americans played
an increasing role in world politics and economics with a consequent effect on
American English usage. In turn, such US institutions as the movie industry in
Hollywood, jazz and popular music from the South, participation in World War II,
post-war technological developments such as the computer, and the activities and
products of major US corporations and publications, from Coca-Cola to Time
magazine, have helped disseminate Americanisms throughout the world (OCEL,
1996).

155
156

burgeoning = quickly developing (CALD, 2003)

to foment (formal) = to cause trouble to develop (CALD, 2003)

100

Further reading on language policy in general: McKayHornberger (1996:103-140); Pavlk

(2006:157-161); Spolsky (1998:66-77); Wardhaugh (1994:346-371)

4 Borders of sociolinguistics
4.1 Sociolinguistics in the context of other linguistic
disciplines
Sociolinguistics does not stay in opposition to linguistics it is a significant part of it, it
is one of many interdisciplinary fields of linguistics that emerged in the second half of
the 20th century. Sociolinguistics concentrates more of its attention on actual speech
than on linguistic theories. Speech is, however, social behaviour and to study it
without reference to society would be like studying courtship behaviour without relating
the behaviour of one partner to that of the other. (Hudson, 1996:2)
Spheres of sociolinguistic interests overlap in particular points with the following
branches of structural linguistics:

Phonetics & Phonology (study of accent, dialects, pronunciation, etc.) offers

sociolinguistics a useful terminological background for studying sociolinguistic
varieties (for example see 1.4),

Morpho-Syntax (grammar issues and attitudes toward un/acceptable forms

and structures) also provides basis for further sociolinguistic research (for
example see 1.4),

Lexicology (choice/stratification of lexis/register/vocabulary, borrowings vs

native expressions, etc.) provides basis for language change (see 3.8), or for
example attitudes of language speakers towards such phenomena,

Lexicography

(study

and

encyclopedias,

approaches

production
to

language

of

dictionaries,

expressed

via

lexicons,

and

production

of

dictionaries),

Semantics (meaning of words, expressions, and phrases),

Stylistics (linguistic analysis applied to literature and style, spoken vs written

form of language, formal vs informal language, standard vs non-standard
varieties, marked vs unmarked language, switching styles, code-mixing, etc.),

Discourse analysis (textual linguistics, e.g. cohesion and coherence) and

pragmatics (the study of language usage, speech acts, taking turns,

101

expressing politeness in addressing people, speakers attitudes towards

language,

bilingual and

multilingual

issues,

lingua

francas,

language

acquisition, etc.).

There are several magazines and publications in Slovakia focusing on sociolinguistic

research of the Slovak language, for example Sociolinguistica Slovaca157 (by now 6
volumes released; ISBN 80-224-0479-9) published by Veda (publishing house of the
SAV158). Other magazines published in SAV: Jazykovedn asopis (ISSN: 00215597), Slovensk re159 (ISSN: 0037-6981), Kultra slova (ISSN: 0023-5202) all
these focus on linguistic research from various points of view.
Linguistic magazines published by J AV160 in the Czech Republic: Nae e (since
1916; ISSN 0027-8203), Slovo a slovesnost (since 1935; ISSN 0037-7031) founded
by PLC (see 2.2.2), Linguistica Pragensia (aiming at the methodology of functional
structuralism and PLC disciples; ISSN 0862-8432), asopis pro modern filologii
(since 1911; ISSN 0862-8459), Acta onomastica (ISSN 1211-4413), Korpus
gramatika axiologie (ISSN: 1804-137X).
Sociolinguistica Slovaca in Slovakia and Slovo a slovesnost in Czechia are
two major sociolinguistic journals in former Czechoslovakia which deal with issues
such as the theory of language, language cultivation, language planning, attitudes
towards language, etc.
Sociolinguistics and Socjolinvistika (ed. V. Lubas, Katowice, PL) are the two
international magazines dedicated to sociolinguistic issues in the world.
Applied Linguistics is an international journal publishing scientific articles on
language theories, research methods, and current practices in applied linguistic
research. The journal helps to make its readers perceive connections between
various branches of science(s) and linguistics.
Further reading: ermk (2001:42-57); ern (1996:390-410);
Fromkin Rodman Hyams
(2007:407-503); Hudson (1996:2-4); Ondrejovi (2008); Wardhaugh (1994:13-16)
Recommended materials to read:

157

http://www.juls.savba.sk/ediela/sociolinguistica_slovaca/
Slovensk akadmia vied
159
Since 1932
160
stav pro jazyk esk Akademie vied
158

102

Sasn jazykov komunikcia v interdisciplinrnych svislostiach. (Ed. Patr, Vladimr).

Bansk Bystrica: FHV UMB, 2004, 510 pp. ISBN 80-8055-979-1
vejcer, A. D.Nikolskij, L. B. 1983. vod do sociolingvistiky. Praha: Nakladatelstv Svoboda.

4.2 Sociolinguistics in the context of other sciences

Sociolinguistics is an interdisciplinary study that overlaps with other non-linguistic
interdisciplinary studies such as sociology, psycholinguistics (psychology of
language), applied linguistics, neurolinguistics and others. We have already known
that it stands somewhere on the borderline between sociology and linguistics. Hudson
mentions an interesting fact sociolinguistics can also be understood as the study of
society in relation to language (Hudson, 1996:4) which, according to some, makes it
closer to sociology than linguistics.
Sociolinguistics is a typical example of ecumenicism that has emerged in western
science during recent decades:

Anthropology Linguistic anthropology (while anthropology studies the

origin of human beings, linguistic anthropology focuses its attention on origins
and

development

of

human

language);

sociolinguistics

draws

on

anthropological research methods, mainly on ethnographic observation (see

1.5),

Applied linguistics (see also 1.2) studies linguistics in relation to practical

activities (e.g. language teaching methods, language planning, lexicography,
speech therapy, etc.),

Computational linguistics studies the use of computers to simulate language

processes,

Cultural studies language and culture (society as such, prototypes, cultural

and linguistic relativity, socialisation, sexism, etc.),

Ecology Environmental linguistics Ecolinguistics (see Ondrejovi,

2008),

Ethnology Ethnolinguistics (see 1.5 and Hymes in 2.2),

Ethics norms, forms of addresses, being im/polite, brief, etc. as in

pragmatics,

Geography significant for research of local dialects, accents and creating

language maps, which is also called dialectology,

103

History relevant for diachronic approach (e.g. language change) towards

language,

Logic and logical statements, methods, interpretations and conclusions,

Neurology Neurolinguistics (the study of the relationship between language

and the brain focusing on such topics as function/s of brain connected to
language and its use, speech centres in our brain, language and brain
disorders etc.),

Philosophy and Philosophy of language (e.g. language planning, culture,

reform, etc.),

Psychology Psycholinguistics (the study of relationship between language

and the mind focusing on the topics such as manipulation via language,
language acquisition, language production, language reception, bilingualism,
cognitive psycholinguistics, etc.),

Semiotics study of (not only linguistic) signs and symbols, i.e. verbal vs nonverbal communication (i.e. body language and facial expressions),

Sociology stratification of society - social dialects/sociolects (see 1.1): age,

education, gender, class, occupation, social status (power), ethnicity, diglossia,
social identity, etc.

Statistics (as a part of mathematics) mathematical and quantitative

research methods applied to process data.

Other sciences are also employed, such as physics, chemistry, biology,

medicine, computer science (corpus linguistics, lexicography see 4.1), etc.
Overlap with natural sciences is viewed as a kind of applied linguistics.
Further reading:

Drugdov, E. 2009. (Ne)spoluprca komunikantov v e-diskusich.In: Mlad veda 2009

(Humanitn vedy lingvistika). Bansk Bystrica: FHV UMB, 2009, pp 194 200. ISBN 97880-8083-859-1;
Fromkin Rodman Hyams (2007:204 209);
Hudson (1996);
Ondrejovi (2008);
Rudiments of English Linguistics (2000:297 309);
Yule (1993:110 111);
Wardhaugh (1994:20-21).

104

Bibliography
ALEXANDER, Louis G. 1995.:Longman English Grammar. London: Longman, 1995,
Twelfth impression, 374 pp. ISBN 0-582-55892-1
BROWN, Douglas H. 1994. Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. London :
Prentice-Hall, 1994, pp 231 - 235. ISBN 0-13-191966-0
Cambridge Advanced Learners Dictionary. 2003. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
2003, 1550 pp. ISBN 0-521-53106-3 (In text referred to as CALD)
CRYSTAL, David. 1996. The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English Language. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 490 pp. ISBN 0-521-40179-8
CRYSTAL, David. 1997. The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language. 2nd Edition.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 488 pp. ISBN-13: 9780521550505 (hardback)
ERMK, Frantiek. 2001. Jazyk a jazykovda. Praha: Karolinum, 2001, 345 pp. ISBN 80246-0154-0
ERMK, Josef ERMKOV, Kristina. 2006. Slovnk latinskch cittov. 4328 cittov
so slovenskm prekladom a vkladom. Bratislava: Ikar, 578 pp. ISBN 80-551-1188-X
ERN, Ji. 1996. Djiny lingvistiky. Olomouc: Votobia, 1996, 520 pp. ISBN 80-85885-964
DOLNK, Juraj 2009. Veobecn jazykoveda. Opis a vysvetovanie jazyka. Bratislava: Veda,
2009, 376 pp. ISBN 978-80-224-1078-6
Encyklopdia jazykovedy. (Ed. Jozef Mistrk)1993. Bratislava: Obzor, 1993, 517 pp. ISBN
80-215-0250-9
FASOLD, Ralph. 1990. Sociolinguistics of Language. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1990, 342 pp.
ISBN 0-631-13825-0
Filozofick slovnk. 1989. Bratislava : Pravda, 1989, 4. Edition, 613 pp. No ISBN
FROMKIN, Victoria RODMAN, Robert HYAMS, Nina. 2007. An Introduction to
Language. Boston: Thomson Wadsworth, 2007, 587 pp. ISBN 1-4130-2316-9
GRAMLEY, Stephan PTZOLD, Michael. 2004. A Survey of Modern English (Second
Edition). London, New York: Routledge, 2004, 398 pp. ISBN 0-415-30035-5
HUDSON, Richard A. 1996. Sociolinguistics. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 1996,
second edition, 278 pp. ISBN 0-521-56514-6
JESENSK, Petra. 2004. Anglicizmy v kritickom tdennku Domino frum. In: Sasn
jazykov komunikcia v interdisciplinrnych svislostiach. Bansk Bystrica: FHV UMB,
2004, pp. 318 326. ISBN 80-8055-979-1

105

JESENSK, Petra. 2007. EUROSPEAK and ELF English as a Current Global Lingua
Franca. In: Topics In Linguistics. Politeness and Interaction. Issue 1 October 2007. Nitra:
Univerzita Kontantna Filozofa v Nitre. Filozofick fakulta, 2007, pp6267. ISSN 3836/2007
JESENSK, Petra. 2009. Niekoko poznmok k pouvaniu anglicizmov mladch ud. In:
Mlad veda 2009 (Humanitn vedy lingvistika). Bansk Bystrica: FHV UMB, 2009, pp. 26
32. ISBN 978-80-8083-859-1
JESENSK, Petra. 2009. Prezentovanie rodovch rol a stereotypov vo vybranch
uebniciach anglickho jazyka. Bansk Bystrica: FHV UMB, 161 pp. ISBN 978-80-8083746-4
JONES, Leo. 2001. New Cambridge Advanced English. Cambridge : Cambridge University
Press, pp 49-50, 2001. ISBN 0521 62939 X
JONES, Karen Pasquali. 2005. Ozzys Gorgeous Girl. In: Closer, 16 22 July 2005, Issue
144, p 34. ISSN 9771478078006
KRKO, Jaromr IMRICHOV, Mria ODALO, Pavol. 2006. Socilny kontext onymie.
Bansk Bystrica: FHV UMB, 2006, 130 pp. ISBN 80-8083-195-5
KRUPA, Viktor GENZOR, Jozef. 1996. Jazyky sveta v priestore a ase. Bratislava : Veda,
1996, 356 s. ISBN 80-224-0459-4
KRUPA, Viktor ONDREJOVI, Slavomr. 2005. Jazykov mty. In: Mty nae slovensk.
Bratislava: Academic Electronic Press, 2005, pp. 62 70. ISBN 80-88880-61-0
LEKO, Vladimr MIHINA, Frantiek et al. 1996. Dejiny filozofie. Bratislava : Iris, 1996, 3.
vydanie, 359 pp. ISBN 80-967013-8-X
Longman Dictionary of Applied Linguistics.(Ed. J. Richards J. Platt H. Weber). Harlow:
Longman, 1985, 324 pp. ISBN 0-582-55708-9 (In text referred to to as LDAL)
Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English. Harlow: Longman, 2001. ISBN 0-582-456398
Longman Dictionary of English Language and Culture. Harlow: Longman, 1993. ISBN 0582-23720-3
Macmillan English Dictionary for Advanced Learners. Oxford : Macmillan, 2002, p 23, p
1097. ISBN 0-333-99093-5
McKAY, Sandra Lee HORNBERGER, Nancy H. (Ed.) 1996. Sociolinguistics and
Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996, 484 pp. ISBN 0-52148434-0
Montreal Gazette, 29 June 1982
NASH, Walter. 2003. Words and Wisdom. In : English Teaching Professional, Words and
Wisdom, p 43; London : Modern English Publishing, Ltd., Issue 27, June. ISSN 1362-5276

106

NICHOLAS, Sinclair. 1992. Wang-Dang American Slang. Praha: Horizont, 128 pp. ISBN 807012-064-9
ODALO, Pavol. 1997. Sociolekty v basketbalovom a penitercirnom prostred. Bansk
Bystrica: Pedagogick fakulta UMB, 1997, 91 pp. ISBN 80-8055-031-X
ONDREJOVI, Slavomr. 2008. Jazyk, veda o jazyku, societa (sociolingvistick etudy).
Bratislava: Veda, 2008, 306 pp. ISBN 978-80-224-0994-0
ORWELL, George. 1990. Nineteen Eighty-Four. London : Penguin Books, 1990, 326 pp.
ISBN 0-14-012671-6
PAVLK, Radoslav. 2006. Elements of Sociolinguistics. Bratislava: Univerzita Komenskho,
279 s. ISBN 80-223-2112-5
PICKARDOV, Sarah. 2005. Britsk civilizcia (British Civilization). Bratislava: Mlad let,
424 pp. ISBN 80-10-00710-2
POYNTON, Cate. 1990. Language and gender: making the difference. Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1994, 104 pp. ISBN 0-19-437160-3
QUIRK, Randolph GREENBAUM, Sidney. 1996. A University Grammar of English.
Harlow: Longman, 1996, thirty-second impression, 484 pp. ISBN 0-582-55207-9
ROACH, Peter. 2006. English Phonetics and Phonology. A practical course. (Third Edition,
10th printing) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 290 pp. ISBN 0-521-78613-4
ROMAINE, Suzanne. 1994. Language in Society (An Introduction to Sociolinguistics).
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994, 238 pp. ISBN 0-19-875134-6
Rudiments of English Linguistics. (Ed. Pavol tekauer) 2000. Preov: Slovacontact, 340 pp.
ISBN 80-88876-04-4
SALZMAN, Zdenk. 1996. Jazyk, kultura a spolenost. vod do lingvistick antropologie.
Suplement. Praha : Academia, 1997, 211 s. ISBN 0009-0794
SPOLSKY, Bernard. 1998. Sociolinguistics. Oxford : Oxford University Press, 1998, 128 pp.
ISBN 0-19-437211-1
SVOBODA, Ale HREHOVK, Teodor. 2006. An ABC of Theoretical and Applied
Linguistics. Opava: Silesian University in Opava, 272 pp. ISBN 80-7248-382-X
TEKAUER, Pavol. 1995. An Encyclopaedia
Slovacontact,1995, 498 pp. ISBN 80-901417-6-5

of

English

Linguistics.

Preov

TEKAUER, Pavol. 1993. Essentials of English Linguistics. Preov : Slovacontact,1993, 146

pp. ISBN 80-901417-1-4
TULAJTEROV, Alena. 2007. Sociolingvistick a lingvistick aspekty rodovo citlivho
jazyka v slovenine a anglitine. In: Teria a prax prpravy uiteov anglickho jazyka 5.

107

Bansk Bystrica: UMB FHV Katedra anglickch a americkch tdi, s. 54 63, 2007. ISBN
978-80-8083-475-3
The Oxford Companion to the English Language. 1996. (Ed. Tom McArthur). Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1996, 1054 pp. ISBN 0-19-863136-7 (In text referred to as OCEL)
THOMAS, Linda WAREING, Shn. 2000. Language, Society and Power. An Introduction.
London : Routlege, reprinted in 2000, 213 pp. ISBN 0-415-18745-1
THOMPSON, Sue. 2005. New! You: I looked like Woodstock... until my extreme
makeover. In: New! July 18, 2005, Issue 122, pp 56 57. ISSN 977147979031
UPTON, Clive WIDDOWSON, J.D.A. 2006. An Atlas of English Dialects. Second Edition.
London, New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group, 218 pp. ISBN 0-415-39233-0
WAGNER, E. 2001. Eurospeak Fighting the Disease. In : Cultivate Interactive, issue 4, 7
May 2001. Available: http://www.cultivate-int.org/issue4/eurospeak/ (28.2.2007)
WALLWORK, J. F. 1971. Language and Linguistics. London: Heinemann Educational
Books, 1971, 184 pp. No ISBN
WARDHAUGH, Ronald. 1994. An Introduction to Sociolinguistics (Second Edition). Oxford:
Blackwell, 1994, 400 pp. ISBN 0-631-18353-1
WILKINSON, Jeff. 1995. Introducing Standard English. London, New York: Penguin, 116
pp. ISBN 0-14-081391-8
YULE, George. 1993. The study of language. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 1993,
220 pp. ISBN 0-521-31877-7
Electronic sources
Cambridge Advanced Learners Dictionary (In text CALD). Cambridge University Press 2003
Software TEXTware A/S Denmark. Version 1.0
HAWKINS, John. Politically Correct Fairy Tales. (15/11/06) Text available on the webpage
http://rightwingnews.com/humor/tale.php
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dell_Hymes (25/06/10)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Descriptive_linguistics (10/08/07)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_prescription (10/08/07)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspeak (21/11/06)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robin_Lakoff (21/04/10)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociolinguistics (14/02/08)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociolinguistics#Traditional_sociolinguistic_interview
(14/02/08)
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3695/is_200312/ai_n9335152 (12/10/06)
http://home.edo.uni-dortmund.de/~hoffmann/Reader/Buhler.jpg (22/11/06)
http://images.google.sk/imgres?imgurl=http://www.ling.lancs.ac.uk/staff/geoff/geoff2.jpg&im
grefurl=http://www.ling.lancs.ac.uk/staff/geoff/geoff.htm&h=186&w=200&sz=22&hl=sk&st
art=1&tbnid=JVbkkyuQWziybM:&tbnh=97&tbnw=104&prev=/images%3Fq%3DLeech,%2

108

BGeoffrey%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Dsk%26lr%3Dlang_en%7Clang_sk%26sa%3DN
(22/11/2006)
http://karljahn.tripod.com/lang/femspeak.html
http://padesatprocent.cz/cz/zpravodajstvi/je-politicka-politik-o-genderove-strance-verejnehoprojevu (26/03/10)
http://workinglanguages.blogspot.com/2006/01/eurospeak.html (12/10/06)
http://www.artlex.com/Artl_ex/Pm.html (12/10/06)
http://www.bloomsbury.com/dictionary (12/10/06)
http://www.britannica.com/dictionary (12/10/06)
http://www.brugesgroup.com/mediacentre/releases.live?article=161 (17/10/06)
http://www.damronplanet.com/doublespeak/examples.htm (3/2/10)
http://www.encyclopedia.com(17/10/06)
http://www.eu2004.ie/templates/standard.asp?sNavlocator=3,243,249 (12/10/06)
http://www.gofast.org/argos-spring-1998/article2.htm (17/10/06)
http://www.inzine.sk/article.asp?art=6738 (17/10/06)
http://www.inzine.sk/article.asp?art=6934 (17/10/06)
http://www.inzine.sk/article.asp?art=7129 (17/10/06)
http://www.heritage.org/Research/PoliticalPhilosophy/HL337.cfm (17/10/06)
http://www.lsadc.org/info/ling-fields-socio.cfm (14/02/08)
http://www.newspeakdictionary.com/ns_frames.html (21/11/06)
http://www-personal.um d.umich.edu/~nhughes/htmedocs/pc.html (17/10/06)
http://www.seanbryson.com/articles/pc_history.html (17/10/06)
http://www.sme.sk/clanok.asp?cl=804140 (17/10/06)
http://www.unixl.com/dir/education/languages/language_definition/ (17/10/06)
http://www-users.cs.york.ac.uk/~susan/cyc/p/pc.htm (17/10/06)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0nIXUjzyMe0 (16/02/10)
JESENSK, P. (2007) Jazykov situcia na Slovensku v kontexte E s ohadom na
anglicizmy. Bansk Bystrica: UMB FHV, 92 pp. [CD-ROM] ISBN 978-80-8083-394-7
KOLKOV, T. (2005): How to speak eurospeak. Tde, Bratislava, W Press, year 1, No.
24, 2005, pp. 34-35.
LORANG, P.V. (2005): Eurospeak. http://www.sprachpresse.vds-bb.de/?n=17 (12/10/06)
PHILIPS, M. (2003): When no means yes in eurospeak. Daily Mail, June 9, 2003.
http://www.melaniephillips.com/articles-new/?p=131 (12/10/06)
SCRUTON, R. (2005): Eurospeak. Tde, June 20, 2005 Available:
http://www.tyzden.sk/index.php?w=art&idart=3315&idiss=69 (17/10/06)
KALOUD, M.(2005): Pro eurospeak pouv neurit vrazy. Available:
http://www.skaloud.net/index.php3?act=stanoviska&display=1142 (12/10/06)
TRUDGILL, P. (1999): Standard English: what it isnt.
http://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/dick/SEtrudgill.htm (15/2/08)

Recommended materials
Students often complain about lack of primary and/or secondary sources to study and draw
from. This is the reason why the lists of recommended publications to read and films to watch
follow. None of the below mentioned sources have been used in this publication but they are
worthy to study into more detail. All materials enlisted below elaborate on gender studies (i.e.
role of females and/or males in society).

109

Recommended ASPEKT (Bratislava) publications (non-/fiction) to read if ones wants to

learn more about gender, gender stereotypes and position of women in (western) society:
ATWOOD, Margaret. 1998. Nevesta zbojnka
BADINTER, Elisabeth. 1998. Matesk lska
BADINTER, Elisabeth. 1999. XY. Identita mua
CEBOCLI, Pavla. 2005. Pavlin prbeh
FARKAOV, Etela. 2001. Po dlhom mlan
GRABRUCKER, Marianne. 2006. Typick dieva
GREGOROV, Hana. 2008. Slovenka pri knihe
JONES, Ann. 2003. Nabudce bude mtva
JUROV, Jana. 2006. Orodovnice
JUROV, Jana. 2008. ila som s Hviezdoslavom
KOVALYK, Urua. 2002. Nevern eny neznaj vajka
KOVALYK, Urua. 2004. Travesty ou
KOVALYK, Urua. 2008. ena zo seka
LUMISK, Kristna. 2002.Urobm ti peklo.
MLLER, Nicole. 1999. Pretoe to je na lske to stran
PATEMAN, Carole. 2000. Sexulna zmluva
WOLF, Naomi. 2000. Mtus krsy
WOOLF, Virginia. 2001. Tri guiney
WOOLFOV, Virginia. 2000. Vlastn izba
ASPEKT (Bratislava) readers (usually in the form of a monograph):
Aspekt. Patriarcht (2/2000 1/2001)
Histrie ien. Aspekty psania a tania (2007)
Hlasy ien. Aspekty enskej politiky (2002)
Monos voby. Aspekty prv a zodpovednosti (2001)
Ruov a modr svet (2003, 2005)
ena nie je tovar (2005)
Other recommended materials on gender problematic (materials marked
are rather
deterrent examples):
ANGIER, Natalie. 2000. Woman: An Intimate Geography. New York: Anchor Books
ATWOOD, Margaret. 1985. Handmaids Tale. Toronto: McClelland & Stewart
ATWOOD, Margaret. 2005. Penelopida. Mtus o Penelope a Odyseovi. Bratislava: Slovry
BEAUVOIR, Simone. (1949. Le Deuxime Sexe), 1972. The Second Sex. London: Penguin
BOCKOV, Gisela. 2007. eny v evropskch djinch. Praha: Nakladatelstv Lidov noviny
CHAUCER, Geoffrey. 1996 (first manuscript circa 1405 1410). The Wife of Baths
Prologue and Tale
. In: The Canterbury Tales (A Selection). London: Penguin Books, pp
203 240
ENSLER, Eve. 2002. Vagina monology. Praha: PRAGMA
FARKAOV, Etela. 2006. Na ceste k vlastnej izbe. Postavy/podoby/problmy
feministickej filozofie. Bratislava: IRIS
FEKOV, Katarna. 2009. Cestovateky v tele, mysli a fantzii. Dve tdie o afroamerickej
enskej literatre. Ostrava: Ostravsk univerzita
FEKOV, Katarna. 2006. Ne/lsky matiek a dcr. Feministick interpretcia prozaickho
diela Toni Mortison/ovej. Bansk Bystrica: FHV UMB
FRIEDAN, Betty. 1963. The Feminine Mystique. London: Penguin Modern Classics
LAWRENCE, David Herbert. 1997 (first published in 1928). Lady Chatterleys Lover.
London: Penguin Books

110

MORRISON, Toni. 1999 (first published in 1997). Paradise. London: Vintage

NAGL-DOCEKAL, Herta. 2007. Feministick filozofie (Vsledky, problmy, perspektivy).
Praha: Sociologick nakladatelstv
PEASE, Allan PEASE, Barbara. 2002. Why Men Lie and Women Cry
. London: Orion
SHAKESPEARE, William. 1997 (first published in 1623). The Taming of the Shrew
. In:
William Shakespeare. The Complete Works (Compact Edition). Oxford, New York: Oxford,
Clarendon Press, pp 25-53.
SHAW, George B. 1972 (first Publisher in 1913). Pygmalion: A Romance in Five Acts.
Moscow: High School Publishing House
Recommended films and/or documents to watch:
Bad Girls (USA, 1994, directed by Jonathan Kaplan)
Bathory (SR, 2008, d. Juraj Jakubisko; Anna Friel)
Biianka z doliny (Czechoslovakia, 1981, d. Jozef Zachar; Eva Kristnov, Jana Nagyov)
Cinka Panna (SR, 2008, d. Duan Rapo; Anna Giorgobiani)
Hezk chvilky bez zruky (CR, 2006, d. Vra Chytilov; Jana Vlkov-Jankov, Jana
Pehrov-Krausov)
(The) Hours (USA, 2003, d. Stephen Daldry; Nicole Kidman, Julianne Moore, Meryl Streep)
Hra o jablko (Czechoslovakia,1976, d. Vra Chytilov; Dagmar Blhov)
Hriech Katarny Padychovej (Czechoslovakia, 1973, d. Martin Holl Jr.; Hana Pastejkov)
Kolja (CR, 1996, d. Jan Svrk)
Meden vea (Czechoslovakia, 1970, d. Martin Holl Jr.; Emlia Vryov)
Milion Dollar Baby (USA, 2004, d. Clint Eastwood; Hilary Swank)
Non motl (CR,1941, d. Frantiek p; Hana Vtov)
Obecn kola (CR, 1991, d. Jan Svrk)
Psla kone na betne (Czechoslovakia, 1982, d. tefan Uher; Emlia Zimkov, Veronika
Jenkov)
Postiiny
(Czechoslovakia, 1980, d. Ji Menzel; Magda Vryov)
Potistky (CR, 2006, d. Vra Chytilov)
Princ a Veernice
(Czechoslovakia, 1979, d. Vclav Vorlek; Libue afrnkov) The
film available: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3709908520536102813# (16/04/10)
Sestiky (Czechoslovakia, 1983, d. Karel Kachya; Alena Mihulov, Jiina Jirskov)
Sexmisia (PL, 1984, d. Juliusz Machulski)
(The) Stepford Wives (USA, 2004, d. Frank Oz; Nicole Kidman)
Ten svetr si nesvlkej (Czechoslovakia, 1980, d. Zdenk Mka; Iva Janurov, Zuzana
Bydovsk, Stella Zzvorkov)
Ticho (SR, 2005, d. Zuzana Liov; Ta Radeva)
Vesniko m, stediskov (Czechoslovakia, 1985, d. Ji Menzel)
eny promny (CR, 2003, d. Erika Hnkov; Karolna Chud, Eva Dolealov)

111

Appendices

Appendix A Some component disciplines of sociolinguistics (Pavlk, 2006:31)

112

Appendix B
(2009)

Jana Valdrov: Je politika politik? O genderov strnce veejnho projevu

http://padesatprocent.cz/cz/zpravodajstvi/je-politicka-politik-o-genderove-strance-verejnehoprojevu (26/03/10)
"ralok se mu vysmv a stle unik. Mon proto je v Melansii ralok enskho rodu." Z poadu
Kamera na cestch: brna do dosplosti. Jak se stt muem v Melansii. T 2, 9. 9. 2006.
Postaven jednotlivce i skupin obyvatelstva na spoleenskm ebku se buduje mimo jin
prostednictvm jazyka a ei. Jazyk ednch dokument, mdi i mluvn projev veejn innch osob
asto nese rysy sexismu pohlavnho rasismu. adu jazykov diskriminanch postup pouvaj jak
mui, tak i eny (u en to lze objasnit tm, e internalizovaly mocensk pomry). Tak napklad vrok
o raloku ve urit dehonestujc charakteristiky na ensk pohlav; je pouze jednm z mnoha
jazykovch stereotyp, kter enm pisuzuj podobu potmilch, nevypoitatelnch, mue
devastujcch stvoen. Jet pod zvrenmi titulky onoho poadu se objevil zbr na siluetu
neastnho mladka v lunu, marn ekajcho na "svho" raloka v zi zapadajcho slunce...
Jazykov sexismy jsou praktiky, je slou k upevovn a posilovn stvajc hierarchie pohlav. M
pedevm vi enm, je degraduj, stav do zvislosti na much nebo je ignoruj (zahrnuj eny pod
musk nzvy osob).
Dehonestace i degradace en bv nejitelnjm projevem sexistickho jazyka. Krom bonmot jako
tento o enskm rod raloka i vtip o blondnch sem pat teba sudky o ensk logice, intrikch,
o nedostatku vdch schopnost u en ponaje zenm auta. Sexismus m i svou "nnou" tv:
zdnliv gentlemansk tvrzen typu "Politika je pinav prce, nen to nic pro eny", ale tak "eny by
mly bt v politice, aby j dodvaly lidsk rozmr" (z webu Svazu otc) ve skutenosti vlastn
odsunuj eny z rozhodovacch pozic. Ritualizovan osloven "Mil dmy, ven pnov" pipisuje
enm pjemn vzhled i dojem, kdeto mum preferovanou autoritu. Poslankyn Vlasta Parkanov
uinila nedvno medvd slubu enm svm prohlenm o odlinm posln en a mu v politice na
zklad jejich biologick vbavy. Dovednosti, zpravidla pisuzovan enm, nestoj na nejvych
mstech na ebku hodnot a mlokdy enm pinej spch; nejpracovitj poslankyni roku 2006
Alenu Pralovou si Topolnek nevybral za ministryni.
Do zvislosti na much stav eny zpsob azen pohlav, kdy eny se ocitaj ve druhm poad:
"chlapci a dvata", "mui a eny", "poslanci a poslankyn". Je nanejv vhodn poad pohlav
stdat. Tak uvn kestnch jmen signalizuje nerovn postaven; etli jsme o "Hillary", nikoli o
"Billovi", v esku teba o "rce", ne vak o "Stanislavovi". Formulace typu "pan Novk s rodinou"
nebo dokonce "Novk" msto "Novkovi" evokuj institut hlavy rodiny z obdob ped rokem 1948.
Velmi subtilnm nstrojem stavn en do zvislosti na much a ignorace en je generick
maskulinum. Jde o zpsob oznaovn, oslovovn a titulovn en muskm rodem, nap. "uitel",
"lka", "politik", a uvaj je zcela automaticky i eny.
Dejme tomu, e ena o sob prohls "Jsem politik". Sledujme, co tu probhlo: dotyn se svm
oznaenm zaadila do skupiny, jejm typickm zstupcem je agiln mu v obleku s kravatou...
Mluv dala najevo svou pslunost k tto prestin skupin, a mla by tud povat vsadu te
prestie; potud se zd ve v podku. Ona ale nenapluje rysy prototypu, tedy mue v obleku, k nmu
se chce hlsit. Sama sebe tak znevhodnila a ve skupin zvan "politici" se marginalizovala pi
vysloven pojmu "politik" (nato "ideln politik", nap. na pozici "ministra" prce) si na ni nikdo
nevzpomene. Paradoxn legitimizovala prototyp "politik" a skupinu "politik" (do n tak trochu

113

nepat, jak zjiujeme), a to prv tm, e pouila musk oznaen. Zrove nevratn opomenula
anci pipomenout, ba poslit image "politiky" a vliv "politiek"...
Pokraujme dle: dotyn svm vyjadovnm spoluvytv obraz svta, zenho skupinami muskch
politik, finannk, odbornk z rznch obor. eny generickm maskulinem odsouvan na
pozice netypickch prvk tchto skupin sice nesou podl na prosperit dan skupiny, ale bude to
opt "politik", tedy mu v obleku, kdo sklid odezvu. "Politikovy" kolegyn zstanou (pokolikt ji?)
nevidny a neuznny. Dlouhodob je to me pinejmenm demotivovat.
Tzv. generick maskulinum je v eskm veejnm projevu takkajc systmovou chybou. Zd se nm
pirozen mluvit o ench v muskm rod, a proto se v zjmu jazykov spornosti bn takto mluv
a pe. Tvrdme, e vrazy "nai politici" aj. pece zahrnuj tak eny. Nikoli nhodou se vak
souvislosti mezi jazykem a mylenm zkoumaj na psychologickch pracovitch. Reprezentativn a
pro esk jazyk velmi inspirujc studie badatelek Irmen/Khncke (Schmidt 2002) byla provedena na
Psychologickm stavu univerzity v Heidelberku a jasn prokzala spojovn muskch nzv osob s
obrazy mu.
Co z toho vyplv pro ns? esk republika se v okamiku pilenn k EU zavzala mj. k pouvn
nesexistickho jazyka (smrnice jsou dostupn mj. z www.eamos.cz/gender, v kapitole o jazyce a
ei). Do tisku se pipravuje publikace testu s vce ne 500 ky/nmi zkladnch a stednch kol, kdy
si dti pod tzv. generickm maskulinem v drtiv vtin pedstavily mue. Ukzalo se tak, e m
vy byla presti pojmu (nap. "vdec"), tm vce pibylo obraz mu. Je tedy zcela namst rozit
do obecnho povdom monosti nahrazovn tzv. generickho maskulina jinmi zpsoby oznaovn
osob (nvrhy nap. Valdrov 2001; 2005 je dostupn z www.genderonline.cz) a povzbuzovat veejnost
k vdom genderov reflexi eovch praktik. Veejn inn kolegyn pln zaslou, abychom nejen
vbec zaznamenali, nbr tak nleit ocenili jejich prci.
Zdroje:

Schmidt, Claudia 2002. "Kfz-Mechaniker wird Schauspielerin". Zum generischen Gebrauch

des Maskulinums unter psycholinguistischem Aspekt. In: Cheaur, Elisabeth / Ortrud Gutjahr
/ Claudia Schmidt (Hg.) 2002. Geschlechterkonstruktionen in Sprache, Literatur und
Gesellschaft. Gedenkschrift fr Gisela Schoenthal. Freiburg im Breisgau: Rombach, str. 233
246.
Valdrov, Jana 2005. Jak jazyk zabj image odbornice. In: Gender / rovn pleitosti /
vzkum. Ronk 6, slo 2/2005, str. 13. Dostupn z www.genderonline.cz.
Valdrov, Jana Novinov titulky z hlediska genderu. In: Nae e 84, 2001, ISSN 0027-8203,
. 2, s. 9096.
www.psychologie.uni-heidelberg.de, viz odkazy na tzv.generick maskulinum.

114

Index of linguistic terms

accent 11, 17, 18, 57, 83, 86, 87, 97, 98, 101, 103, 115
acquisition 34, 74, 78 80, 82, 102, 104
Acrolect (1.4) 11
affirmative action (3.4.4.3) 71
American English (3.9) 13, 15, 16, 32, 41, 42, 47, 71, 91, 92, 94, 95, 98, 100
Americanism (3.9) 94, 100
Anglicism (3.9) 93, 94
applied linguistics 8, 27, 28, 31, 102 104, 106, 107
Basic English 88, 89, 91
Basilect (1.4) 11
BBC English (3.9) 13, 16, 97
bilingualism (3.5) 34, 43, 74, 76 79, 92, 104
Briticism (3.9) 94
Britishism (3.9) 94
British English 11, 14 16, 18, 38, 66, 86, 92, 94, 96 98
common core of English (1.4) 37 38
creole (3.6) 7, 11, 12, 16, 34, 75, 79, 81, 82
creolisation 81, 82
de-creolisation (3.6) 81, 82
diachronic approach 19, 21, 29, 104
dialect 9, 11 14, 16, 17, 18, 25, 29, 31, 32, 33, 36, 38, 39, 40, 42, 43, 74, 83, 84, 85, 86, 89, 90, 96,
98, 101, 103, 104, 108
diglossia (3.5) 7, 27, 43, 74, 104
Doublespeak (3.4.2) 61, 62, 63 64
EFL 88
elaborated code (3.5) 17, 76
ELF 88, 89, 95, 106
Estuary English 96 97
ethnicity 7, 14, 28, 41, 43, 52, 56, 58, 82, 104
Eurospeak (3.4.3) 61, 64 65, 95
FSP (2.1) 26
Functional Sentence Perspective (2.1) 26
gender (3.2) 4, 6, 7, 9, 10, 34, 36, 41, 43, 45 48, 50, 52, 53, 54, 55 56, 67, 71, 82, 104
gender bias (3.2.2) 50
gender library (3.2.4) 55
gender ratio (3.2.3) 53
horizontal dimension (1.4) 13
H-variety (1.4) 11, 74
idiolect 11, 42 43
la-di-dah 97

115

language attitude 10, 18, 31, 86

change (3.8) 7, 10, 31, 34, 36, 42, 43, 76, 82, 84, 85, 101, 104
contact (1.4) 17, 34, 36
dominance (1.4) 12
lexifier l. (3.6) 82
national l. (1.4) 12, 13, 15, 40, 43, 82, 89, 90, 93
planning (3.9) 8, 9, 10, 26, 28, 32, 43, 86, 95, 102, 103, 104
purism 84
shift 7, 22, 28, 75, 76
Lect (1.4) 11, 43
lingua franca (1.4, 3.6, 3.8) 16, 79, 80, 87 88, 90, 95, 102
linguistics (1.2) 6, 7 10, 16, 19, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 36, 55, 82, 95, 101,
102, 103, 104
L-variety (1.4) 11, 74
macro-sociolinguistics (1.3) 10
Mesolect (1.4) 11
micro-sociolinguistics (1.3) 10
monolingualism (3.5) 7, 77
multilingualism (3.5) 34, 77
Newspeak (3.4.1) 61, 62 63, 73
pidgin (3.6) 7, 16, 17, 34, 79 82
pidginisation 80
PLC (2.1) 25, 26, 102
Political correctness (3.4.4) 62, 65 67, 69 72
politically correct fairy tale (3.4.4.4) 71 72
Prague Linguistic Circle (2.1) 25, 30
prestige 10, 12, 14, 15, 16, 54, 74
primary -isms (3.4.4.2) 70
region 10, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 36, 37, 38, 39, 42, 43, 74, 76, 83, 86, 91, 92, 96, 98
regional variation (1.4) 14, 16, 18, 38
restricted code (3.5) 76
RP (1.4) 11, 16, 18, 86, 87, 97, 98
sabir (3.6) 79
secondary -isms (3.4.4.2) 70
sexist language (3.2) 34, 47
social class 9, 12, 17, 18, 27, 29, 37, 41, 42, 53, 76, 83
social variation (1.4) 14
Society for Pure English, The (3.8) 85
sociolect (1.4) 10, 11, 12, 16, 31, 37, 41, 43, 104
Sociolinguistica Slovaca 36, 102
sociolinguistics definition (1.3) 7 10
in linguistics (4.1) 101 102
methods (1.5) 19 22
in other sciences (4.2) 103 104
proper (1.3) 10, 112
sociology (1.1) 6, 7, 9, 10, 23, 50, 69, 95, 103, 104
speech variety (1.4) 11, 16
stability 74
standard variety (1.4) 12, 14, 15, 74, 83
standardisation 74, 75

116

stereotype 41, 47, 50 54

stratification 6, 7, 13, 27, 29, 32, 33, 43, 82, 101, 104
stylistic variation (1.4) 14, 17, 26
synchronic approach 19
Technospeak (3.4.5) 61, 73
use-related varieties (1.4) 13
user-related varieties (1.4) 13
variable (3) 13, 37, 41, 42, 79
variation acc. to medium (1.4) 14
variety (1.4) 11, 12, 13 16, 21, 22, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 44, 52, 74, 75, 80, 82, 83, 88, 92, 93, 95,
98
vertical dimension (1.4) 13
womens language (3.2.3) 32, 53
word-formation 7, 35, 81

Index of personalities
Bernstein, B. (3.5) 76
Bloomfield, L. 8
Boas, F. (2.1) 23, 24 25, 30
Catford, J. C. 8
Comte, A. 7
Crystal, D. 22, 23, 92
ermk, F. 102
ern, J. 7, 22, 36, 40, 41, 43, 54, 102
Dolnk, J. (2.2) 8, 18, 32
Elk, V. (2.2) 36
Fasold, R. (2.2) 31
Ferguson, C.A. (2.2) 8, 27, 74
Findra, J. 18
Fishman, J. (2.2) 28
Fromkin, V. 48, 102, 104
Genzor, J. 87, 91
Gramley, S. 10, 14, 15, 17, 43, 45, 54, 86, 97
Gumperz, J. (2.2) 24, 27
Hawkins, J. 72
Horeck, J. (2.2) 26, 27, 84
Hrehovk,T. 19, 23, 24, 29, 36, 75
Hudson, R. 9, 15, 54, 101, 102, 103, 104
Humboldt, W. (2.1) 23, 24
Hyams, N. 48, 102, 104
Hymes, D. H. (2.2) 27, 29, 30, 31, 103
Jesensk, P. 14, 15, 18, 47, 48, 54, 65, 87, 90, 93, 94, 95

117

Kachru, B.B 14, 16

Krmov, M. (2.2) 32
Krko, J. 12
Krupa, V. 33, 87, 91
Labov, W. (2.2) 16, 18, 19, 20, 29, 41, 85
Lakoff, R. (2.2) 32, 53, 54
Lutz, W. 63 64
Mathesius, V. (2.1) 26
Meillet, A. (2.1) 23, 24
Nblkov, M. (2.2) 35
Nash, W. 70, 72
Odalo, P. 12
Ondrejovi, S. (2.2) 11, 12, 18, 27, 32, 33, 36, 102, 103, 104
Orwell, G. 62, 63, 73
Patr, V. (2.2) 35, 36, 103
Pavlk, R. (2.2) 10, 21, 22, 35, 41, 43, 44, 56, 61, 79, 82, 83, 101, 112
Pauliny, E. (2.1) 25, 26, 84
Ptzold, K.M. 10, 14, 15, 17, 43, 45, 54, 86, 97

Pickardov, S. 44, 45, 53, 59, 60, 61, 96

Poynton, C. 48, 49, 50, 51, 54
Roach, P. 97, 98
Rodman, R. 48, 102, 104
Romaine, S. (2.2) 17, 34, 44, 48, 54
Ross, A.S.C. (2.2) 27, 28
Salzmann, Z. (2.2) 28
Sapir, E. (2.1) 23, 24, 25, 30
Schuchardt, H. (2.1) 23, 24
Sgall, P. (2.2) 29
Spolsky, B. (2.2) 9, 10, 11, 19, 21, 22, 31, 101

Svoboda, A. 19, 23, 24, 29, 36, 75

iklov, J. 55
kaloud, M. 65
tekauer, P. 36, 98
tulajterov, A. 18, 48, 54
Thomas, L. 44, 45, 54, 56, 57, 58, 61, 73
Trudgill, P. (2.2) 33, 83
Urbancov, L. (2.2) 35, 36
Valdrov, J. (2.2) 34, 113, 114
Wardhaugh, R. (2.2) 22, 31, 32, 37, 54, 101, 102, 104
Wareing, S. 44, 45, 54, 56, 57, 58, 61, 73
Whorf, P. (2.1) 23, 25
Wolfram, W. (2.2) 32

118

Yule, G. 14, 61, 104

E S S E N TI A LS OF S O C I OL I NG UI S T I C S
V yd a l a Os t r a v s k u n i v e r z i t a v Os t r a v , F i l o z o f i c k f a k u l t a

Autorka: PaedDr. Petra Jesensk, PhD.

Oblka: PhDr. Ingrid Balov
Recenzen tk y a recen zen ti : P hDr. Mi rosl av ern, P hD.
doc. PhDr.Eva Homolov, PhD., mim. prof.
PaedDr. Alena Kamrov, PhD.
PhDr. Radoslav Pavlk, PhD.
Jazykov prava: Mgr. Arnot Hrn
Nklad: 100 ks
Rozsah: 120 strn
Miesto a rok vydania: Ostrava, 2010
Vydanie: prv
Tla: Tribun EU s.r.o., Brno

Formt: A5
ISBN 978-80-7368-799-1

119