Programme: accepted abstracts

Abstract ID: 875

Part of General Paper Session (Other abstracts in this session)

Non-Nativeness and Ethnocentricism: Examining Modern-Day Socialisation

Authors: Todd, Richard
Submitted by: Todd, Richard (University of Sheffield, United Kingdom)

English has historically positioned itself as the national or official language in a number of former colonies and commonwealth territorities. This study brings focus to migrants and subsequent generations from such communities who now live within a society where ethnic diversity is a long-standing, yet still increasing, phenomenon — the UK (ONS, 2001).

It has for some time been stated that linguistic variation is context-dependent and the choice of variant in use is controllable by the speaker (Fischer, 1958). Others have realised that for the most part however, minority-group and non-native speakers are heavily directed towards the (near-exclusive) use of a standard or dominant language variety when in out-group settings (Bourdieu, 1991; Heller, 1995). This study examines interactional opportunities that people of mainstream (i.e., British Anglo-Saxon) origin have with speakers from historically important but annexed regions of the old British Empire. The minority-groups considered are those who have (a) settled within one English city (Nottingham); (b) believe that have adopted a more localised variety of English for their day-to-day employment and similar (non-domestic) functions; and (c) proficiently use it.

In particular, the work unpicks an assumption that is implicitly reinforced by the undoubtable reality of living within a multiethnic society. Namely, the idea of the dominant population experiencing high (and moreover, frequent) levels of inter-mixing with visible minority groups has any real foundation.

Initially presented, is a framework which uniquely helps us identify exposure in the domains which most powerfully contribute to the shaping of social outcomes for adults having disparate ethnic backgrounds or otherwise hyphenated (linguistic) identities.

Although an ‘open and liberally mixed’ default may reasonably be imagined for a prime host nation such as the UK, analyses of sizeable participant data reveal how, in the chief social contexts (i.e., (1) work-centred and (2) leisure time) contact with ethnic out-groups does not comprehensively feature.

References:

Bourdieu, P. (1991) Language and Symbolic Power, Cambridge: Polity Press.

Cole, M. (1993) ‘Black and Ethnic Minority’ or ‘Asian, Black and Other Minority Ethnic: a Further Note on Nomenclature’, Sociology,27, 4, 671-673.

Fischer, J.L. (1958) ‘Social Influences on the Choice of a Linguistic Variant’, World, 14, 47-56.

Heller, M. (1995) ‘Language Choice, Social Institutions and Symbolic Domination’, Language in Society, 24, 373-405.

Lippi-Green, R. (1997) English With an Accent: Language, Ideology, and Discrimination in the United States, London: Routledge.

ONS (2001). Census of Population 2001: Key Statistics for Local Authorities. London: Office for National Statistics.

Payne, K., Downing, J. and Fleming, J.C. (2000) ‘Speaking Ebonics in a Professional Context: The Role of Ethos/Source Credibility and Perceived Sociability of the Speaker’, Journal of Technical Writing and Communication 30, 4, 367-383.

Ting-Toomey, S. (1999) Communicating Across Cultures. New York: Guilford Press.

Todd, L. (1984) ‘By their Tongue Divided: Towards an Analysis of Speech Communities in Northern Ireland’, English World-Wide, 5, 159-180.

Todd, R. (2000) ‘Salience of Speaker Ethnicity and Group-Belonging: Observations of an Attribution Task’, Paper disseminated at Conference of the International Association of Forensic Phonetics 2000, Rome.

Wells, J. (1982) Accents of English, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Sociolinguistics Symposium 19

Programme: accepted abstracts

Non-Nativeness and Ethnocentricism: Examining Modern-Day Socialisation