I. INTRODUCTION 1.1. Background Communication is one of the most crucial things that human need in their life.

Related to the fact, language is the means of communication we use in our dail life. There are thousands of languages in the world which emerged naturall or made in order to fill their need and goal in communicating. There are no!od s"eak e#actl the same to the others. $ach "erson has their own st le. %owe&er, the st les of "eo"le's s"eak can !e grou"ed according to certain as"ects. In monolingual communities, "eo"le tend to use &arieties of language to show their mem!ershi" to "articular grou". Two of the most clearl seen &arieties are the regional and social dialects. Regional dialect deals with the &arieties of dialect according to the geogra"hical state of the s"eakers of the language. (eanwhile, the social dialect refers to &arieties of dialects associated to the mem!ershi" of the s"eaker to the "articular grou". This "a"er will discuss a!out these two &arieties of dialect as well as their e#am"les. 1.). *ro!lems 1. +hat are regional and social dialect in monolingual communities, ). +hat are conte#t, st le, and class in monolingual communities, 1.-. .ims 1. To know regional and social dialect in monolingual comnmunities. ). To know conte#t, st le, and class in monolingual communities.

II. CONT$NT ).1. Regional and social dialect Regional and social dialects focused to the information con&e ed ! language &ariation in monolingual communities. *eo"le often use a language to signal their mem!ershi" of "articular grou"s. /ocial status, gender, age, ethnicit and the kinds of social network !elong to turn out to !e im"ortant dimensions of identit in man communities. No two "eo"le s"eak e#actl the same. There are infinite source of &ariation in s"eech. $&en a singe &owel ma !e "ronounced in hundreds of minutel different wa s. /ome features of s"eech, howe&er are shared ! grou"s, and !ecome im"ortant !ecause the differentiate one grou" from another. 0or e#am"le, the "ronunciation, grammar, and &oca!ular of /cottish s"eakers of $nglish in some res"ect 1uite distinct from that of "eo"le from $ngland. 1. Regional &ariation 1. International &arieties There are man such stories of mistakes !ased on regional accent differences. 0or

$#am"le2 to British ears, a New 3ealander's dad sounds like an $nglish "erson's dead, and !ad sounds like !ed. There are &oca!ular differences in the &arieties s"oken in different regions too. 0or e#am"le2 .ustralia has sole "arents, while in $ngland "eo"le call it single "arents, and New 3ealander call it solo "arents. *ronunciation and &oca!ular differences are "ro!a!l the differences "eo"le most aware off !etween different dialects of $nglish !ut there are grammatical differences too. .mericans "refer do you have, though it can also !e heard in Britain alongside the traditional British $nglish have you got.

). intra4national or intra4continental &ariation In this section, we are dealing not 5ust with different accent, !ut also with dialect differences within a countr , since the distinguishing forms in&ol&e grammatical usages

and le#ical items as well as "ronunciation. Regional &ariation takes time to de&elo", therefore British and .merican $nglish "ro&ide much more e&idence of regional &ariation than New 3ealand or .ustralian $nglish. /ome dialects, such as /couse, cockne and 6eordie, e&en ha&e distinct names showing how significant the are in dishtinguishing grou"s from one another. In the U/., dialectologist can identif distinguishing features of the s"eech of "eo"le from different regions. In areas where $nglish has !een introduced more recentl , such as .ustralia and New 3ealand, there seem to !e considera!l less regional &ariation 7 though there is e&idence of social &ariation. The high le&el of intra4national communication, together with relati&el small "o"ulations ma ha&e inhi!ited the de&elo"ment of marked regional differences in these countries.

-. Cross continental &ariation8 dialect chains Though a ma" suggests the language of $uro"e or India are tidil com"artmentali9ed, in realit the :!lend' into one another. Dialect chains are &er common across the whole $uro"e. One chain links all the dialects of 6erman, Dutch and 0lemish from /wit9erland through .ustria and 6erman , to the Netherland and Belgium, and there is another which links dialects of *ortuguese, /"ain, Catalan, 0rench and Italian. %owe&er, it is hard to define the !oundaries !etween one dialect with another ;in same language< or !etween two languages which located ne#t to another. In realit , most Norwegians claim that the can understand /wedish, although two distinct languages are in&ol&ed, while Chinese who s"eak Cantonese cannot understand those who s"eak (andarin, des"ite the fact that !oth are descri!ed as dialects of the Chinese =anguage. ). /ocial &ariation 1. R*8 social accent R* stands for >Recei&ed *ronunciation? 7 the accent of the !est educated and most "restigious mem!ers of $nglish societ . It is claimed the la!el deri&es from the accent which was :recei&ed' at the ro al court, and it is sometimes identified with :the @ueen's

$nglish', although the accent used ! @ueen $li9a!eth II is a rather old4fashioned &ariet of R*. R* was "romoted ! BBC for decades. It is essentiall a social accent not a regional one.

.s triangle suggests, the linguist will find most linguistic &ariation at the lowest socio4 economic le&el where regional differences around. The &ariation reduces until one reaches the "innacle of R* 7 an accent used ! less than A "ercent of the British "o"ulation. In addition, in e#4colonies of Britain such as .ustralia and Canada, other accent of $nglish ha&e dis"lace the R* from its former "osition as the most admired accent of $nglish. ). /ocial Dialects Dialects are sim"l linguistic &arieties which are distinguisha!le ! their &oca!ular , grammar, and "ronunciation. Bust as R* is a social accent, so standard $nglish is a social dialects. a. /tandard $nglish /tandard $nglish is more accommodating than R* and allows for some &ariation within its !oundaries. This is reflected ! the figure !elow8

The flat to" reflects the !roader range of &ariants ;alternati&e linguistic forms< which 1ualif as "art of standard dialect of $nglish in an countr . It is estimated that u" to 1A "ercent of the British regularl use standard British $nglish. In /tandard $nglish, a limited amount of grammar &ariation is acce"ta!le. The dialect of /tandard $nglish is s"oken in man differences accents. %owe&er, .merican /tandard $nglish is distinguisha!le from .ustralian /tandard $nglish, for instance, and !oth differ from .ustralian /tandard dialect. In social terms, linguistic forms which are not "art of standard $nglish are ! definition non4standard. %owe&er, e&en though non4standard forms are associated with the s"eech of less "restigious social grou"s, there is nothing linguisticall inferior a!out non4standard forms. The are sim"l different from the forms which ha""en to !e used ! more sociall "restigious s"eakers. Bust as &ernacular languages contrast with standard languages, &ernacular dialect features contrast with standard dialect features. Cernacular dialects lack "u!lic or o&ert "restige, though the are generall &alued ! their users, es"eciall as means of e#"ressing solidarit and affecti&e meaning. -. /ocial /tatus a. Castes *eo"le can !e grou"ed together on the !asis of similar social and economic factors. Their language generall reflects these grou"ings4 the use different social dialects. In "laces such as Indonesia and India social di&isions are &er clear4cut. In these

countries, there are caste s stems determined ! !irth, and strict social rules go&ern the kind of !eha&ior a""ro"riate to each grou". These social distinctions are also reflected in s"eech differences. . "erson's dialect reflects their social !ackground. There are 1uite clear differences in Indian languages, for e#am"le, !etween the s"eech of the Brahmins and non Brahmins castes. The Brahmin word for :milk' in the Dannada language, for instance, is haalu, while non Brahmin dialects sa aalu. In Ba&anese, too, linguistic differences reflect &er clear4cut social or caste di&isions. Ba&annese social status is reflected not onl in choice of linguistic forms which each social grou"s customaril uses, i.e. the &arieties of st listic le&els that together make u" the grou"'s distincti&e dialect. In $nglish, st listic &ariation in&ol&es choices such as ta mate &s thank you so much.

E. /ocial Class a. Coca!ular /ocial dialect research in man different countries has re&ealed a consistent

relationshi" !etween social class and language "atterns. *eo"le from different social classes s"eak differentl . The most o!&ious differences is in their &oca!ular . Coca!ular !asis. !. *ronunciation The wa different "ronunciation reflect the social class of their s"eakers was first demonstrated ! +illiam =a!o& in a stud of new Fork Cit s"eech %e inter&iewed 1)G "eo"le and e#amines their "ronunciations of a num!er of different consonant and &owels. %e found regular "atterns relating the social class of the s"eakers to the "ercentage of standard as o""osed to &ernacular "ronunciation the "roduced. /ome of the linguistic features he studied ha&e !een found to "attern sociall in $nglish4 s"eaking communities all o&er the world. The "ronunciation 7 ing &s 7in at the end of differences e#ist at all, the are rather like those which distinguish Brahmin and non4Brahmin castes, the distinguish social grou"s on a categorical

the word like sleeping and swimming, for instance, distinguishes social grou"s in e&er $nglish4s"eaking communit in which it has !een in&estigated. c. HrI4*ronunciation There are two "ossi!le &ariants of HrI. $ither it is "resent and "ronounced HrI, or it is a!sent. In a range of dialects, sometimes "eo"le "ronounce HrI following a &owel, and sometimes the don't. In some regions, "ronouncing HrI is "art of standard "restige dialect, e.g.2 /cotland and Ireland. In other areas, standard dialect s"eaker do not "ronounce HrI after &owels ;or :"ost4&ocall ' as linguists descri!e it< in words like car and card. d. Cowels (easuring small !ut significant differences in &owel "ronunciation can seem a nightmare. =a!o& de&elo"ed a method which in&ol&ed gi&ing a score to different "ronunciations according to how close the were to "restige "ronunciation or standard in the communit . In New 3ealand, a sur&e of 1E1 "eo"le li&ing in the /outh Island distinguished three different social grou"s on the !asis of the wa s"eakers "ronounced the di"hthongs in words such as boat, bite, and, bout. (an New 3ealanders consider R* an ina""ro"riate standard accent for New 3ealand, !ut in "ractice it is still an influential "restige norm. the higher a "erson's social class, the closer their "ronunciation was to R*. e. Other =anguages .lthough the sociolinguistic "atterns ha&e !een most e#tensi&el researched in

$nglish4s"eaking communities, the ha&e !een found in other languages too. In fact we would e#"ect to find such "atterns in all communities which can !e di&ided into different social grou"s. In *aris the "ronunciation of the first &owel in words like casser and pas &aries from one social grou" to another. In (ontreal the fre1uenc with which HlI is deleted distinguishes the 0rench of two social grou"s. f. 6rammatical *attern

On a&erage it was found that children from lower4class families used more &ernacular &er! forms that children from middle4class families. This "attern has !een noted for a &ariet of grammatical &aria!les. .s with "ronunciation, there is a clear "attern to the relationshi" !etween the grammatical s"eech forms and the social grou"s who use them. The higher social grou"s use more of the standard grammatical form and fewer instances of the &ernacular or the non4standard form. *eo"le are often more aware of social stigma in relation to &ernacular grammatical forms, and this is reflected in the lower incidence of &ernacular forms among middle class s"eakers in "articular.

).) /t le, conte#t, and register =anguage &aries according to its uses as well as its users, according to where it is used and to whom, as well as according to who is using it. The addressees and the conte#t affect our choice of code or &ariet , whether language, dialect or st le. Therefore, the focus will !e on the wa s in which s"eech reflects the conte#ts in which language is used, rather than the characteristics of the s"eakers. 1. .ddressee as an influence on st le The s"eaker's relationshi" to the addressee is crucial in determining the a""ro"riate st le of s"eaking. *eo"le use considera!l more standard forms to those the don't know well, and more &ernacular forms to their friends. Therefore, relati&e social distance or solidarit is one im"ortant dimension of social relationshi"s. There are man factors contri!uted in determining the degree of social distance or solidarit !etween "eo"le, such as relati&e age, gender, social roles, whether "eo"le work together, or are "art of the same famil , and so on. 1. .ge of addressee *eo"le generall talk differentl to children and to adults. +hen talking or writing to a J4 ear4old as o""osed to a -G4 ear4old, most "eo"le choose sim"ler &oca!ular and grammatical constructions. (an s"eakers also use a different st le in addressing

elderl "eo"le, often with features similar to those which characteri9e their s"eech to children ! using a sim"ler range of &oca!ular and less com"le# grammar, the use of we rather than you to refer to the addressee, and e&en the sing4song intonation which characteri9e !a! talk. ). /ocial !ackground of addressee .ddressee or audience is a &er im"ortant influence on s"eaker's st le. The s"eakers accommodating their s"eech st le to their addressees in order to get on well with them and make "eo"le feel comforta!le. One e#am"le comes from the !eha&ior of the same news reader on different stations. +here the stations share studios, a "erson ma read the same news on two different stations during the same da . In this situation newsreaders "roduce consistentl different st les for each audience. The news is the same and the conte#t is identical, e#ce"t for the addressees. Therefore, the same "erson reading the news on the middle4le&el station reads in &er much less formal st le than on the higher4!row station.

). .ccommodation Theor 1. /"eech Con&ergence +hen "eo"le talk to each other their s"eech often !ecomes more similar. /"eech accommodation is the "rocess of con&erging each "erson's s"eech towards the s"eech of the "erson the are talking to. It tends to ha""en when the s"eakers like one another or where one s"eaker has a &ested interest in "leasing the other or "utting them at ease. Con&erging towards the s"eech of another "erson is usuall a "olite s"eech strateg . Using the same "ronunciation and the same sort &oca!ular , for instance is a wa of getting in the same wa&elength. /"eakers accommodate ! con&erging their s"eech downwards or u"wards. +hen "eo"le sim"lif their &oca!ular and grammar in talking to foreigners or children, the are con&erging downwards towards the lesser linguistic "roficienc of their

addressees. +hen, in an inter&iew with the hos"ital matron, a nurse ado"ts some of the matron's "ronunciation features, she is con&erging u"wards in her s"eech.

). /"eech Di&ergence

/ometimes for o!&ious reasons, the res"ondents deli!eratel di&erged from the s"eech st le, and e&en the language, of the "erson addressing them. The do it !ecause the disagree with his sentiments and had no desire to accommodate to his s"eech. Deli!eratel choosing a language not used ! one's addressee is the clearest e#am"le of s"eech di&ergence. .ccent di&ergence also occurs. *eo"le di&erging hisKher "ronunciation in order to make himKher distinguisha!le from their addressees. /"eech di&ergence does not alwa s reflect a s"eaker's negati&e attitudes towards the addressees. +here the di&ergent forms are admired, di&ergence can !e used to !enefit the di&erger. . small difference, such as a slight foreign accent ;"ro&ided it is one which is &iewed fa&ora!l <, can !e a""ealing. . foreigner can also elicit hel" ! using an accent or &oca!ular which signals inade1uate control of the language.

). .ccommodation "ro!lems O&er4con&ergent !eha&ior ma !e "ercei&ed as "atronising and ingratiating, as

s co"hantic, or e&en as e&idence that the s"eaker is making fun of others. In general, then reactions to s"eech con&ergence and di&ergence de"end on the reasons "eo"le attri!ute for the con&ergence or di&ergence. If di&ergence is "ercei&ed as una&oida!le, for instance, then the reaction will !e more tolerant than when it is considered deli!erate. Deli!erate di&ergence will !e heard as uncoo"erati&e or antagonistic. /omeone who uses $nglish in (ontreal !ecause their 0rench is clearl $nglish to 0ranco"hones. The !est wa inade1uate will !e "ercei&ed more s m"atheticall than someone who, though a fluent !ilingual, deli!eratel chooses to use of sol&ing an accommodation "ro!lem will

de"end on the conte#t. The s"eech accommodation or st le shifting which often occurs unconsciousl in casual conte#ts ma not !e a""ro"riate in more formal settings.

).) Conte#t, /t le and Class

1. 0ormal conte#ts and social roles Besides characteristics of the addressee, formalit of the conte#t and their relati&e roles and statuses within a setting are also rele&ant factors on choice of st le. 0or instance2 the wa the !usinesswoman was addressed was determined largel ! the relationshi" !etween the woman and her addressee in terms of relati&e status and solidarit . *eo"le who were &er close to her used a short form of her first name ; Meg<, while "eo"le who were less close and sociall su!ordinate used her title and last name ; Mrs Walker). In classrooms where a child's mother or father is the teacher, the children will call their "arents Mrs Grady or Mr Davis rather than Mum or Dad. *eo"le's roles in formal conte#ts determine the a""ro"riate s"eech forms.

). Collo1uial st le or the &ernacular There are other strategies !esides to"ic mani"ulation which ha&e !een used in order to ca"ture "eo"le's most rela#ed or &ernacular st le. Ta"ing grou"s of "eo"le rather than indi&iduals, for instance, and choosing a &er comforta!le or informal setting are strategies which ha&e !een found to shift "eo"le's s"eech towards the &ernacular. There are man such features which distinguish collo1uial from more formal st le of $nglish. Two e#am"les which can !e found in the $nglish of widel different regions of the worlds are the use of me;for formal m <, e.g. then me mate arrives, and the use of them ;instead of those< as a determiner8 theres a cross-piece in them old- ashioned doors.

-. The interaction of social class and st le +hen information a!out the wa "eo"le from different social grou"s s"eak with

information a!out the wa "eo"le s"eak in different conte#ts is com!ined, it is clear that features of social class and conte#tual st le interact.

0igure a!o&e illustrates the relationshi" !etween social class, st le and linguistic &ariation. The structured hierarch of the Norwich social classes is reflected in each of the distinct lines drawn on the diagram.. $ach social class uses more HiLI "ronunciations than the one !elow and less than the one a!o&e. The diagram also shows that the more formal the st le a "erson is using, the fewer &ernacular HiLI "ronunciations or the more standard HiLI "ronunciations the will use. . low fre1uenc of &ernacular HiLI "ronunciations or a higher fre1uenc of standard HiLI "ronunciations ma therefore signal that the s"eaker !elongs to a high social class, or reflect the fact that the are s"eaking in a more formal conte#t, or !oth. The same linguistic feature often distinguishes !etween s"eakers sociall ;inter4s"eaker &ariation<, while within the s"eech of one "erson it distinguishes different st les ;intra4s"eaker &ariation<. +hen "eo"le want to shift st le, the o!&ious wa is to imitate the s"eech of another "erson. Therefore, the often ado"t

the linguistic features of different grou". 0or instance, In order to sound more casual, "eo"le model their s"eech on that of a lower social grou".

E. % "ercorrection % "ercorrect usage goes !e ond the norm. it in&ol&es e#tending a form !e ond the standard. The use of ! rather than me in constructions such as between you and ! illustrates structural h "ercorrection. /o does with he asked or you and !. These e#am"les of h "ercorrect !eha&ior result from the insecurit introduced ! =atin4!ased $nglish grammars. ! is o&er4e#tended from conte#ts such as !t was ! who rang you last night where one could argue it is formall and technicall correct, to conte#ts which a""ear similar !ut in fact grammaticall different. A. /t le in Non4+estern /ocieties One of the num!ers of languages with a s"ecial set of grammatical contrasts for e#"ressing "oliteness and res"ect for others is Ba"anese. Before deciding which st le of Ba"anese to use, Ba"anese s"eakers access their status in relation to their addresses on the !asis of such factors as famil !ackground, gender, and age, as well as the formalit of the conte#t. The then select from "lain, "olite and deferential st les. The choice of a""ro"riate st le in&ol&es not onl "ronunciation, !ut also word forms and s nta#. The a""ro"riate form of &er!, for instance, &aries in different st les. Dnowledge of the com"le#ities of st listic &ariation in countries like Ba"an and Dorea reflects a "erson's educational le&el and social status. Better4 educated "eo"le ha&e greater control of the &arious st les. .lthough the Islamic re&olution has increased the use of reci"rocal forms of address, ritual courtes is still &er im"ortant in Iranian societ too. In all social grou"s, there is a dramatic increase in the "ercentage of standard &ariants in "eo"le's reading and word4list st les, com"ared to their careful and casual st les. 0or at least some linguistic features, then, this societ differentl from social grou" mem!ershi". marks s"eech st le

%ere, it is shown that linguistic features which signal social grou" mem!ershi" are often, !ut not alwa s, signals of conte#tual &ariation too. . high le&el of education and familiarit with using language in more formal conte#ts fre1uentl go hand4in4hand, and so it is scarcel sur"rising that the features which characteri9e each tend to o&erla". %owe&er, "articular "ronunciations, s ntactic constructions or &oca!ular sim"l indicate a "erson's social grou" without also "atterning for st le. J. Register /t les are often anal 9ed along a scale of formalit , as in the e#am"les from social dialect research discussed. Registers, on the other hand, when the are distinguished from st les, tend to !e associated with "articular grou"s of "eo"le or sometimes s"ecific situations of use. Bournalese, !a! 4talk, race4callers, and s"ort commentators could all !e considered e#am"les of different registers. The term : register' here descri!es the language of grou"s of "eo"le with common interests or 5o!s, or the language used in situations associated with such grou"s. Sports announcer talk $#am"le of this 7 s"orts announcer talk 7 to illustrate the kind of linguistic features which ma distinguish different registers. +hen "eo"le descri!e a s"orting e&ent, the language the use is 1uite clearl distinguisha!le from language used in other conte#ts. The most o!&ious distinguishing feature is usuall the &oca!ular . Terms like silly, mid on, s"uare leg, the covers, and gully, for instance to descri!e "ositions, and o break, googly, and leg break to descri!e deli&eries, are e#am"le of &oca!ular "eculiar to cricket. . 1. Syntatic reduction items ma

Example 0rom Base!all or cricket commentaries. a. !. ;it< !ounced to second !ase ;it's< a !reaking !all outside

c. d. e.

;%e's< a gu who's a "ressure "la er (cCatt ;is< in difficult Tucker ;is< taking a few ah shuttering ste"s down the wicket from the !owler's

end !ut +augh ;is< sending him !ack +hile descri!ing the action the are o!ser&ing, s"orts announcers often omit the su!5ect noun or "ronoun, as in ;a<, and fre1uentl omit the &er! !e as well, as utterances ;!< and ;c< illustrate. Utterance ;d< and ;e< omit onl !e. There is no loss of meaning as a result of this s ntactic reduction, since the omitted elements are totall "redicta!le in the conte#t. 2. Syntactic inversion

Re&ersal or in&ersion of the normal word order is another feature of s"orts announcer talk. This de&ice allows the announcer to foreground or focus on the action and "ro&ides him or her ;!ut almost uni&ersall him in fact< with time to identif the su!5ect of the action4 an im"ortant "iece of information for listeners. 3. Heavy noun modification

0rom !ase!all or cricket commentaries a. Da&id +infield, the )A4million4dollar ma, who is hitting 9ero, fi&e, si# in this

+orld /eriesM !. c. 0irst4!ase um"ire =arr BarnetM This much sought4 after and &er e#"ensi&e fast !owler

*eo"le rather than action are the focus of interest at certain "oints during the s"orts announcer's s"iel. +hen this is the case, the su!5ect nouns which are the focus of interest are often hea&il modified !oth after the noun as in ;a<, and !efore the noun as in ;!< and ;c<. E. Routines and formulas

.n interesting feature of s"orts commentaries, including race calling, is the use of routines to reduce the memor !urden on the s"eaker. The formulas in&ol&e a small num!er of fi#ed s ntactic "atterns and a narrow range of le#ical items. The sound "atterns of race calling are also distincti&e. Race callers use "articular intonation "atterns or tunes as the call the race. /"orts commentators are e#"ected to gi&e the im"ression of fluenc . *auses and hesitations in race calling, for instance, are unacce"ta!le. Race callers must kee" talking at four to fi&e s lla!les "er second. The use of formulas ena!les them to con&e information with the minimum demand on short4term memor . /"orts commentators must also retain the listener's interest and con&e the drama of the action.

III. CONC=U/ION