What is language and what is dialect? When does a dialect become a language?

Many would say that one of the main criteria is mutual unintelligibility. Mutual unintelligibility means that when speakers of two different dialects do not understand each other, they may be said to be speaking two different languages. This is a popular criterion but one which may not apply in real situations. Danish, Norwegian and Swedish are mutually intelligible but they are considered different languages rather than different dialects of the Scandinavian language. In contrast, the Chinese language comprises many dialects which are mutually unintelligible such as Cantonese, Hakka, Hokkien and Mandarin. They are very different, as different as Bahasa Melayu and German, Hindi and Japanese. However, the Chinese do not consider them different languages. To them, they are just different dialects of a single language which are united through a common writing system and a similar political, social and cultural tradition. There is also a difference of size. Language is the superordinate term because it comprises the total sum of all the variants of a specific language. For instance, English language comprises Scottish English, Yorkshire English, Black English, Malaysian English and so on. Dialect is any set of one or more varieties of a language. It must share at least one feature or a combination of features which distinguishes it from other dialects of the language. The difference between language and dialect may also be sociohistorical. For instance, Hindi and Urdu are the same language. However, due to political and religious differences between India and Pakistan, minor linguistic differences between these two varieties have been magnified. Hindi is written from left to right in the Devanagari script. Urdu, on the other hand, is written from right to left in the Arabic-Persian script. Hindi borrows heavily from Sanskrit while Urdu relies on Arabic and Persian for its borrowings. Unlike dialect, a full-fledged language has a writing system and is used in formal documentation. Dialects tend to represent the non-standard, even the sub-standard. This implies a certain level of inferiority to those who speak a dialect. A language has more power than its dialects. This is because the dialect that is chosen as the language is usually one which belongs to the politically and socially superior group of speakers. However, not all languages are equally prestigious. Thai and Laos are two closely related varieties of a language. Laotians understand spoken Thai as it is widely used in the media such as radio and television. Educated Laotians may also comprehend written Thai. Thais do not readily understand spoken and written Lao. This reflects a power relationship. As far as Thai people are concerned, Thai is a high prestige language unlike Lao. This does not mean that these languages are inherently unequal. As far as linguistic judgements are concerned, all languages are equal. It is the social judgement which makes people regard one language as more important and powerful than another.

Solidarity is another contributing factor. This refers to common interest, the feelings that tie or bond one with the other. The situation in Yugoslavia is an example. Serbs and Croats used to speak Serbo-Croatian (a South Slav language). They had their own versions of this language and the difference between them was mainly vocabulary rather than pronunciation or grammar. The Serbs used Cyrillic for its written script while the Croats used Roman. When the Serbs and Croats split apart, so did the language. Now the Serbs speak Serbian while the Croats speak Croat. Serbo-Croatian is non-existent in the Balkans, and Serbian and Croatian have become two separate languages. Bell (1976 in Wardhaugh 1998), has outlined seven criteria which may help differentiate language and dialect. A language may fulfill any or several subsets of these criteria:

Criteria

Explanation

First is standardisation, which is achieved through the process of selection, codification, elaboration of function and acceptance which will be elaborated later in this module. The standardisation Standardisation process involves direct interaction of the society where a certain dialect is chosen as a unifying force for the country and a symbol of independence from other states. Second is vitality, which refers to the current existence of a community of speakers. This helps to differentiate between living and dead languages. An example of a dead language in the United Kingdom is Manx which used to exist on the Isle of Man. It should be noted, however, that certain dead languages remain significant. Latin which mainly exists in written but not in spoken form is very prestigious. Classical Arabic plays a significant role in unifying Islamic countries and Classical Chinese is important not only to modern Chinese, but also to Japanese and Korean. The sense of a common identity for a specific group of people using a specific language is called historicity - the third criterion. The shared identity may be social, religious, political or ethnic in nature. Russians are unified by a common language just like the many varieties of Arabic which are bonded together through Classical Arabic. Fourth is autonomy which refers to emotions. This means the speakers themselves must feel that the language is perceived by its speakers as a language, not just a variety. Fifth is reduction. This means a variety is recognised as a subordinate rather than a superordinate. For instance, the Kelantanese may almost certainly say that they are speaking a variety of Bahasa Melayu, and that there exists other subordinate

Vitality

Historicity

Autonomy Reduction

varieties such as the Kedah dialect. These varieties may lack a writing system and may be limited in function. Mixture is the sixth criterion. It refers to the speakers perception of the purity of the variety that they use. Speakers of certain languages such asFrench, make conscious efforts to preserve the pure form of the language. This is achieved through the establishment of local bodies such as the Academie Francaise. Lastly is de facto norms. This refers to the speakers perception of the norms of proper usage. Such norms will distinguish good speakers from poor speakers. They are highly important in certain languages. For instance, English speakers perceive that it is important for them to speak both correctly and appropriately, i.e. what to say, how to say it, to whom, when, etc. The need to be communicatively competent has made English a marketable and profitable entity. When users of a language speak and write it badly in almost all situations, the language may be dying.

Mixture

De facto norms

Standard and Vernacular Languages

The steps of standardising language are illustrated in Figure 1.1.

Figure 1.1: Steps in standardising language

a. Selection
As mentioned previously, the first step in standardising a language is selection. A variety or a combination of varieties can be selected and developed into a standardised language. The selection is of great social and political significance where the selected variety is recognised as prestigious by the community. Usually the dialect of the politically powerful and socially prestigious will be selected. The chosen variety may also be one which has no native speakers, as in the case of classical Hebrew in Israel and Bahasa Indonesia in Indonesia.

b. Codification
Secondly is codification. Some agencies or academies will produce dictionaries and grammar to define what is correct and incorrect. An example is Dewan Bahasa and Pustaka in this country. The decision made by these organisations must be shared and accepted by all users of the language.

c. Elaboration of Function
Thirdly, is the elaboration of function. The selected variety must cater for various functions and situations such as government, bureaucratic, educational, business, scientific, legal and so forth. This may require additional linguistic items to be added, perhaps through the process of borrowing. Existing forms may also be employed in new ways so that a more established language can be achieved.

d. Acceptance
Finally is acceptance. The selected variety must be accepted as the standard language by the target population. If acceptance is achieved, the following three factors may take place:

the standard language can serve as a strong unifying force for the country; it becomes the symbol of independence from other states; and it serves as a marker to differentiate one state from another.

In contrast to standard language, vernacular language refers to language which is unstandardised and has not been made official. There are hundreds of languages which are not standardised such as Buang in New Guinea. The term vernacular implies the following:

it is uncodified and unstandardised; it is acquired in the home, as the first variety; and it refers to any language which is not the official language of a country.

The UNESCO report in 1951 defines vernacular language as the first language of a group, socially or politically dominated by a group with adifferent language.

So, in Malaysia, a language like Tamil is referred to as vernacular. Similarly, Greek is a vernacular language in Australia but not in Greece or Cyprus. Vernacular language is the most colloquial variety of a persons language. Since it is acquired at home, it is used among family and close friends for the purpose of maintaining solidarity. This term has also been extended to refer to a monolingual community or people from the same ethnic group.

What is a Speech Community?

Let us start this section by discussing the different definitions of speech community.

Lyons (1970:3260), defines a speech community as comprising of all the people who use a given language and dialect.

In other words, Lyons conceives of people who speak the same language or dialects, such as English, as representing one speech community. This definition has several weaknesses: i. ii. iii. iv. v. vi. The difficulty in distinguishing language and dialects. Since the two terms are ambiguous, it makes Lyons definition ambiguous too. A single language such as English is spoken in many different varieties, e.g. China, Philippines, Singapore. Variety can be regarded as its own community too. A single speech community may employ more than one language, as in case of Malaysia and Singapore. Many speakers of different languages such as Austrian, German and Hungarian share similar rules on greetings, expressing condolences, and so forth. Language background alone does not influence the rules and norms of communication. Defining a speech community by linguistic variable alone is too restrictive as group identity is also shaped by factors such as ethnicity, culture, and political forces.

Labov (1972:120-121), has a different view of speech community which is not defined by any marked agreement in the use of language elements, so much as by participation in a set of shared norms.

Labovs views mark a focal shift from the use of language elements to shared norms and beliefs which make speakers identify with a certain group or community. Such norms and beliefs may not be exclusively linguistic in nature. For instance, speakers of Hindi may see themselves as separate from those speaking Urdu, while speakers of the various Chinese dialects may see themselves as members of the same community even though their dialects are mutually unintelligible and may not allow them to share a sense of community except through a shared writing system.

Gumperz (1971:101), who introduced the term linguistic community, defines it as a social group which may be either monolingual or multilingual, held together by frequency of social interaction patterns and set off from the surrounding areas by weaknesses in the lines of communication.

On the other hand, Gumperz (1971), argues that there is no ground to define speech community by requiring that all members speak in a single language or a single variety. Communities may be bilingual or multilingual, bidialectal or multidialectal. This implies that, internally, there must be social cohesiveness that binds the community. At the same time, there must also be factors that differentiate it from other communities. A community is not just defined by what it is, it must also be distinguished from others by identifying what it is not. Hymes (1974), supports the idea that a speech community cannot be defined solely by linguistic characteristics. He cites the example of the Ngoni in Africa. Most Ngonis no longer speak their language but instead use the language of Malawi, the country they conquered. However, the Malawi language uses the conventions of the Ngoni language so as to demarcate itself from others. This is also true of English. Many minority groups speak English in distinctive ways so as to preserve their identity and distinguish themselves from the dominant group. This may be in terms of ethnicity, region, social class, and so forth. For Hymes and many others, the term speech community is difficult to define. Linguistics alone is inadequate since what is also important is how individuals relate to society through the use of language and its varieties. There are, for instance, the English speaking community (in contrast to German or Chinese), the New York speech community (in contrast to Detroit) and the Kuala Lumpur speech community (in contrast to Kelantan). A person often belongs to more than one speech community and it is important that the definition of speech community allows speakers to flexibly shift from one speech community to another.

.3

LANGUAGE VARIATION
Do variations occur in languages or do they also occur in dialects? Is language the total sum of varieties?

All languages have internal variations.

According to Hudson (1996:2), a variety of language refers to a set of linguistic item with similar social distribution. This suggests that sports commentary, Malaysian English, lower class New York English, upper class New York English, Kadazan, Bidayuh and so forth are varieties of language since they have a similar social distribution. The term variety is general, as general as the term music or plants which then can be employed to differentiate the types of music or plants. It applies to something greater than a single language and as well as something less, less even than something traditionally referred to as dialect (Wardhaugh, 1998:21.) This means variety may refer to as large as several different languages to as tiny as a single item. Variety relates to the association between linguistic items (sounds, words, grammatical structures, etc.) and external factors such as location, social class, age and gender. Sociolinguists are interested in investigating if there are patterns or conventions in the use and usage of the linguistic items and the range of speakers and situations that they are associated with. Why have the general term varieties? One of the most practical reasons is that it allows us to form a basis in distinguishing concepts such as language and dialects. From earlier discussion, we know that the difference between these terms is not as straightforward. Languages are not distinguished from dialects because of natural boundaries or sets of interlocking structural relations. Linguistics alone may not be adequate. In fact, the sets of structural relations may be mixed up and loosely tied. Since there is no consistent distinction between language and dialect, the general term variety, for the purpose of practicality, may be used to refer to both language and dialects, and even style and register. The two latter concepts will be discussed later in this topic. We will now focus on language variation in a monolingual community which can be categorised into two:

Regional dialect; and Social dialect.

DIGLOSSIA, LANGUAGE DIALECTS AND VARIETIES

Diglossia is defined as a relatively stable language situation where primary dialects of the language exist alongside a divergent and very highly codified variety. This variety usually has a more complex grammatical structure and a respected body of written literature either from an earlier period or in another speech community. This variety is usually formally learned and used for formal written and spoken purposes. It

however is not used by any part of the community for ordinary conversation. (Ferguson, 1959: p336) A diglossic situation happens when a society has two distinct language codes with a very clear functional separation. An example of this phenomenon is the Arabic situation where there is Classical Arabic (high variety) and the various colloquial varieties (low variety). Classical Arabic is the language of the Quran and is not used for ordinary conversation. The colloquial variety, on the other hand, is used for ordinary everyday social chores and functions.

Figure 1.8: How a diglossic situation happens A key characteristic of diglossia is that both high and low varieties are kept apart in their functions. The high varieties may be used for formal lectures and delivering sermons as well as literature. The low varieties may be used for giving directions to servants or workers, in conversations with familiars, in popular soap dramas and folk literature. The high variety is perceived to be the more prestigious variety as there tends to be a body of literature in that variety and none in the lower variety. Another important difference is that children learn the lower variety while the higher variety is taught in some kind of formal setting. n many countries around the world, English is a lingua franca. In some places, it is a native language; in others, it is a second language or a foreign language. In countries such as India, the Philippines and Singapore, English as a second language is used extensively

next to their respective first languages. In other foreign language situations, it may not be extensively employed. In short, English language is spoken in many ways and at many levels of proficiency. Greek Koine and Vulgar Latin were employed in the Ancient World, but these languages were not homogenous. The speakers of these languages were varied in their competency of the languages which were spoken in many ways in as many places. In many countries, the national language or the official language serves as the lingua franca. An example of such lingua franca is Russian in the former USSR. Throughout the Arab speaking world, classical Arabic, the language used in the Quran, is the lingua franca among the educated. In East Africa and Tanzania, Swahili is the lingua franca. Chinook Jargon which was used by American Indians is a dead language today. It was a lingua franca in the second half of the nineteenth century in the northwest of the United States, from British Columbia to Alaska. It was also learned by the French and the English. There are two types of Chinook:

The lingua franca which is the Plain Sign Language spoken widely in the mainland areas; and Chinook Jargon, used by speakers along the coast.

The reason for these two versions is not known, but it is thought that slavery may be the most significant contributing factor. Lingua franca may have initially developed as a trade language. Swahili was a widely used trade language. Hausa, which was used as a second language was also used for trading. Tok Pisin in New Guinea was used as a trade language. Originally a pidgin, it has now developed into a Creole.

Pidgins
When people of different language backgrounds meet, they need to find a language that they can mutually understand in order to communicate. In the case of Ming and the elderly lady in the example at the beginning of this topic, they found one. What if the speakers cannot find a common language but still need to communicate for trading or other purposes? They will then try to merge their languages so that a new code of communication can be created. This new code is called a pidgin. Pidgin has the following eight qualities:

It has no native speakers, and it is no ones native language. It is, nevertheless, the main means of communication for millions of people. It is a product of a multilingual situation with at least three languages, one of

which is dominant. The dominant language may be superior in terms of economical or social factor. If there are only two languages involved, chances are there is a power struggle for dominance. Since it is created through the combined effort of speakers from different languages, all the languages involved will contribute to the new variety in terms of phonology, morphology and syntax. There may also be new features which are exclusive only to the newly created variety. The dominant group, however, tend to supply more vocabulary while the other less dominant languages will have more influence on grammar. The dominant language is called the lexifier or superstrate, while the language which influences the grammar is the substrate. It has a reduced grammatical structure, a limited vocabulary and a narrow range of functions compared to a fully developed language. The words generally do not have inflections to mark plural or tenses. It also does not contain any affixes. The main function of pidgin is trading. The vocabulary and structure of the language tend to be solely for buying and selling or such related purposes. Speakers of pidgin have other languages as their repertoire. Pidgin is just an additional repertoire for a specific purpose. Consequently, it is not used as a means of group identification.

The life span of pidgins tends to be short because of their limited function. They usually exist for several years and rarely for more than a century. In Vietnam, for example, Pidgin French disappeared when the French left, and Pidgin English which developed when the American troops were there died out as the war was over. If a trading pidgin is developed, the pidgin will disappear when trading between the group members comes to an end. A pidgin remains if the need exists. As communities move apart, or as one community learns the language of the other, and when the need to communicate ceases to exit, the pidgin disappears. In some cases, pidgins have become a very powerful means of communication and lasted for a long time. They may even develop a more formal role and be given an official status by the community. Some are used as lingua franca in mass media, official documents, and even develop a literature of its own. These languages are referred to as expanded pidgins because extra forms and functions are added to the language. An example is Sabir, a Mediterranean lingua franca. It began in the Middle Ages and lasted until the twentieth century.

Mainly because of colonialism, most pidgins are based on European languages such as English, French, Spanish, Dutch and Portuguese. European colonials traded with the Indians, Chinese and Africans, and pidgins were employed. Most pidgins are found in the Caribbean, the north and east coasts of South America, the west coast of Africa, and India. They are mainly distributed in the equatorial belt around the world at coastal areas. Pidgin is hardly found in the interiors of continents, be it north or south. Pidgin was also found at Caribbean slave plantations in the 17th and 18th centuries. West African slaves were separated from others who spoke the same language to reduce the risk of them plotting a rebellion or escaping. To communicate with each other and with their master, they developed a pidgin comprising the language of the plantation masters and their own languages. Society generally has a negative attitude towards pidgin. Stereotypes of pidgins have been transmitted throughout the years through comics and films with Me Tarzan, you Jane messages. They are often used in comedy routines and described as mongrel jargons. Pidgin is not baby talk. It is not a product of laziness or speakers who are cognitively inferior and it is not a language which is corrupted or broken down. Quite the contrary, pidgins have their own rules of use and usage. They have their own structures which have been creatively adapted from natural languages. One cannot speak pidgin by arbitrarily simplifying English. If this happens, the language is incomprehensible to the speakers of the language. Pidgins need to be learned, just as natural languages have to be learned. There have been debates on the origin of the word pidgin. Some of the debates are as follows:

A Chinese mispronunciation of the English word business. Two Chinese characters and tsi i which means paying money. Portuguese word for business which is ocupacao. Hebrew word pijom which means barter. Yayo word pidians which means people. Portuguese pequeno which means little child or baby talk. English pigeon which is used to carry short messages a long time ago.

CAUSES OF LANGUAGE CHANGE

This section discusses eight reasons for languages change by (Hudson, 1997). Languages change is inevitable and they have always been changing in the past and certainly continue to change today. The result of language change can be problematic because it may cause miscommunication, when users of new forms of language mistakenly expect others to recognise them, so it is reasonable that language change has long and often been disapproved of, especially by the older generation. The characteristic

of language change that it is systematic suggests that it is unlikely to be harmful. Its characteristics of constancy and pervasiveness suggest that language change is necessary, and perhaps even useful (Hudson, 1997). Except for the obvious necessity to get new morphemes to express new meanings and to get rid of the obsolete ones, we might expect language change to be resisted more successfully. In fact, we are unable to predict the occasions and forms of language change, though the spread of language changes, once underway, can often be expected. Often, also, after a language change has been noticed, we can reasonably identify a probable cause or causes for it. A number of causes of language change have been recognised, including some which are controversial, but eight of the least controversial are these:

Ease of articulation Expression of new meanings Desire for novelty Regularisation Redundancy reduction Metanalysis Obsolescence of meanings Language contact

Each of the eight causes listed above is explained and exemplified, from the history of English and other languages. More than one cause may often be effective in a particular language change. Each of the eight causes listed above is explained and exemplified, from the history of English and other languages. More than one cause may often be effective in a particular language change.

Obsolescence of Meanings
Obsolete meanings disappear from language as obsolete things and ideas disappear from use. Almost gone from English in recent years, for example, are the words icebox, choke (of an automobile), and telegram, following the things they express into history and old movies.

Desire for Novelty

New words especially arise in two social contexts which suggest that their purpose, at least partly, is not a need to express new meanings, but a simple desire for novelty of expression:

In jargon; and In slang.

a. Jargon
All the devices of getting new words are employed in creating jargon, the specialised vocabulary of professional and occupational groups. The words of specialists often seem unnecessarily novel, and even obfuscatory, to those outside a specialisation, but they are probably considered useful by the specialists. i. Linguistic Role of Jargon Computer programmers, for example, regularly need to refer to unidentified problems in computer programs, and reasonably extended, by metaphor, the word bug for this. Linguists need often to refer to the specialised meaning aspect of grammars, distinct from the ordinary, broad, sense of meaning, and have derived the term semantics for this. The police need saddle seat rodadio CB radio (< road radio) Some English-speaking professions have traditionally had knowledge of foreign languages, such as the medical profession (German), musicians (Italian), and linguists (French), and their members have used words from these languages when writing and speaking to others of their profession who are expected to recognise them. When this happens often and repeatedly, the foreign words may become customary. The terminology of English linguistics, for example, includes French portmanteau, calque, and, recently, tableau (the meanings of which are unimportant here). Of course, if the foreign word does not add any meaning not fully available in the borrowing language, its use is just showing off". ii. Social Roles of Jargon Besides its linguistic purpose to express new meanings, jargon is motivated by at least three probably unconsciously fulfilled social purposes of its creators argot, euphemism and in-group markers.

Argot Jargon may play the roll of an argot to obfuscate - to keep others from understanding (The French word argot is sometimes used as synonymous with jargon).

Euphemism In some cases, jargon may be intended to make objectionable meanings less objectionable. This is called euphemism. Examples of euphemism are preowned car for used car, pass away for die,

Department of Defence for Department of War, and protection for condom (cases of derivation, compound, extension/metonymy, and extension/metaphor.

In-group Markers Jargon which fulfills any of the above purposes also serves the additional purpose, if again an unconscious one, of in-group marking, enabling members of the occupational group to announce themselves as such, and to recognise each other by how they talk. In-group markers: whether pins, uniforms, or special forms of language- promote solidarity or cohesiveness, as well as exclusivity and snobbery, within the group. The following Figure 3.3 are examples of in-group markers: Table 3.3: Some Words of Los Angeles Gang Slang

bud marijuana bullet one year in jail drag flirt with dope good (play that dope tape) drop a dime inform (to the police) double deuce 22 caliber

g-ride stolen car drag flirt with jacked hassled by police pisto drunk rata informer, snitch smack African American gang talk

Source: Los Angeles Times Magazine, May 5, 1991

b. Slang
Slang is the specialised vocabulary of social groups, especially young social groups. Like jargon, slang also illustrates all the means of new word formation: extension, derivation, clipping, borrowing, etc. Unlike jargon, slang perhaps rarely has the linguistic purpose of expressing new meanings, but ordinarily starts out as just clever alternative ways of saying things which the language has other ways of saying. Examples include wheels for car, rad for radical, and ID for identification (cases of extension/synecdoche, clipping, and acronym, respectively). The above examples are presented some reported examples of Los Angeles gang talk. Perhaps this could he considered a thieves argot, except that many of the words do not necessarily concern this line of work. The need for marking ones speech, to attract attention to what one is saying, is particularly present in close social groups. We especially want our friends to pay attention to us. Also, within

close social groups very familiar things are discussed, such as fun, food, friends, and enemies. This gets old, of course, so there is good reason to try to create some novelty. In addition, the main purpose of a lot of casual talk among friends is social play and building social relationships (grooming, in the animal world), in which cleverness or cuteness are valued. The new words, if cute and clever or useful enough, may spread within the social group, and come to serve as markers of the group. Since its purpose is the creation of novelty and the display of cleverness, slang, unless it spreads into the common language and displaces old words, usually fades quickly with repetition (like groovy and rad). Cleverness depends on novelty, and the novelty wears off. Slang will be perceived as excessively informal and even crude by those outside the social group in which it originates. However, if it is found helpful or clever enough by the general population, it may spread and eventually cease to be slang. Some examples of English words which started out as slang and made their way into the ordinary language are bus, throw up, gay, ID, jazz, and marijuana (clipping,compou

4.3.1 Linguistic Determinism

Linguistic determinism suggests that people from different cultures perceive the world differently because of their language. In a situation where words exist in one language but not in others, or where one language makes a distinction that others do not, speakers of the first language will be more aware of the concept or the difference in the situation which is called upon by the linguistic marker. If the concept does not exist in the speakers language, he/she may not be aware of the concept. For instance, there is only one word for snow in the Malay language which is salji, and two words in English, snow and sleet. For Eskimos, there are 52 words which describe the different categories of snow. Not knowing the 52 labels for the different types of snow may deter one from seeing the varieties of snow. This suggests that linguistic determinism not only controls ones perception, it also limits ones worldview. As there are only one or two words which describe snow in the said languages, speakers of these languages may have a limited perception. One will also perceive objects, materials and events in ones surrounding the way they are categorised in ones language. For instance, if a language slots nuts and fruits into a single category (such as the Chinese language), then hazelnuts and apples may be perceived as belonging to the same group of items, in contrast to a language that fits fruits and nuts into two separate categories. Meaning is, in this precise sense, different from one culture to another.

THE EFFECT OF SOCIETY ON LANGUAGE

The Whorfian hypotheses relate to the effects of language on thought and culture. Less controversial is the effect of culture or society on language. Language can be affected by:

The physical environment (lexical items and colour terminology); The social environment (kinship); and The values of the society (taboo and euphemisms).

Physical Environment
The physical environment one lives in is reflected by the language, especially its lexicon. As mentioned before, the Eskimo has 52 different terms for snow, while English only has two. Lapp in Scandinavia has a larger vocabulary for reindeer. Bedouin Arabic has many categories for camels, while Garo of Assam, India has many words for rice, basket and ants. Since kangaroo is an important part of Australia, there are also many labels for the different kinds of kangaroos. Different languages seem to have a different range of colours. It is difficult to translate colour words from one language to another. Berlin and Kay (1969) tried to find out if colour terms were arbitrary or if there was a general pattern. They found that:

If a language has two terms, they are equivalents for black and white (e.g. Jale of New Guinea). If a third term exists, it is red (e.g. Tiv of Nigeria). The fourth and fifth are yellow and green (e.g. Garo of Assam and Hanunoo of the Philippines). The sixth and seventh are blue and brown (e.g. Burmese). The rest may be any of the following: grey, pink, orange and purple in any order (e.g. English). There are 11 basic colour terms altogether. All languages employ basic colour terms which comprise a single word such as black and not a combination of words such as blue black, or a subdivision of other main categories such as scarlet and crimson for red. Basic colours have general use; they are applied to a narrow range of objects such as the word blonde. Blonde is used almost exclusively to refer to hair colour and wood. Basic colour terminology is also used by general speakers of languages instead of just sub-set of speakers such as designers or speakers from only a specific culture.

Evidence seems to suggest that societies analyse the colour spectrum in similar ways. Those with little technological advancement seem to employ a narrower colour range.

With technological advancement, there is a need for a wider range of colours to be identified. The process of extending the range of colours is systematic across all languages. Basically there are two sets of colours which prove to be difficult for language speakers to determine precise borders. One is between yellow and orange, and the other blue and green. In Zuni, orange and yellow are referred to by the same term. The Welsh word glass covers the ranges of green, blue and grey. Nevertheless, it can be concluded that people from all cultures have a rather consistent and systematic way of identifying and categorising colours.

5.1 LANGUAGE DEFICIT THEORY

Language deficit theory refers to linguistic incompetence. Linguistic incompetence is a reality for babies and young children acquiring the first language, as well as speakers who are in the process of learning a second or another language, with regard to the target language. Language deficit theory concerns school speakers, children or adults who are still incompetent in their first language, as compared to others in their age group. Such a deficit seems to be characteristic of speakers from the lower class, a factor which results in many of them underperforming in school. It seems to fall into a sadly predictable pattern. By and large, it is a problem faced by most children from the lower working class in urban areas. Failure in schools is not random. Children need certain tools to succeed and language is a very important tool in realising this aim. From Topic 4, we know that language relates to culture and cognition. Without proper linguistic tools, children from the lower class may not be able to meet the demands made by schools and society. In some sense, academic failure can be explained by linguistic failure, as shown in Figure 5.1.

Figure 5.1: Necessity of linguistic tools to overcome linguistic incompetence as claimed by language deficit theorist

Some extreme proponents of this theory have even gone so far as to claim that some children from the lower class go to school with hardly any language at all. They are unable to ask questions, make statements or use the language meaningfully. This view is rejected by many sociolinguists who argue that normal children are not short of language. Children can use language to communicate just like any other human beings. The only difference is the language variety that the children from the lower class may be using. Furthermore, many children may not want to use a lot of speech when they are working, as opposed to playing or messing about. Some children may opt to just give non-verbal responses or one word answers. They do so not because they are incapable, but because they choose to. When children are reluctant to speak, some teachers jump to the conclusion that these children do not have the language, that their vocabulary may be limited and that they do not know enough to construct sentences. The fault is not the lack of linguistic knowledge but the situational context which discourages children from speaking, and which makes them insecure, uncomfortable, and unwilling to cooperate. If the context is different, the result may be very different. In short, academic failure may not be due to the inadequacies of the child at all. Often, it is the educational policies of many school systems that need to be reviewed.

5.2.2 Bernsteins Theory

According to Bernstein (1973), every language speaker has access to the restricted code. It is the casual variety of language that is used between friends who know each other well and between family members. However, not all speakers have equal access to the elaborated code. Bernstein discovered some connections between the usage of elaborated and restricted codes and social class. Middle class children have access to both codes. Many working class children, however, only have access to the restricted code. As the elaborated code is used extensively in schools, lower working class children are at a disadvantage. Learning the elaborated code is not just linguistics. It includes learning about different cultural patterns. According to Bernstein (1972:173), lower working class children tend not to perform well academically. Our schools are not made for these children; why should they respond? To ask the child to switch to an elaborated code, which presupposes different role, relationships and systems of meaning without a sensitive understanding of the required contexts must create for the child a bewildering and potentially damaging experience.

Students need to be very familiar with the elaborated code because the inability to use it

has many disadvantages. For example, some teachers have a tendency to underestimate and have low expectations of students who use the restricted code. This may cause them to have a negative self-concept which, in turn, may lead to academic failure. From the other pole: these students reluctance to interact verbally with the teacher will result in them gaining very little from school. This, again, has serious repercussions in terms of their academic achievement. Teachers also tend to consider the elaborated code the only acceptable code in school, and evaluate students based on their ability to use it. As such, they need to be made aware of the importance of not evaluating students based on their non-usage of middle class speech code. Elaborated and restricted codes are just two different varieties; both fulfill the communication needs of their speakers. Linguistically, they are just as efficient and neither is inherently more prestigious than the other. As long as teachers perception and attitude are not changed, students who have little access to the elaborated code may continue to suffer academically. Certain educators have argued that working class children who do not have access to the elaborated code suffer from cognitive deficiencies. This is the view of language deficit theory. It posits that lower class childrens ability to interpret their surroundings and develop knowledge about the world is limited due to the linguistics characteristics of the restricted code. Hence, there is a difference between middle class and working class childrens interpretation and perception of the world. Since elaborated code is more complex, children who have access to it are cognitively superior, thus academically successful. On the other hand, working class children tend to be cognitively inferior and academically deprived. The low usage of abstract words in restricted code leads to their inability in handling abstract concepts. Both their language and cognition are, therefore, deficient.

5.2.3 Criticisms against Bernstein Theory

Many educators and sociolinguists alike are of the view that the language deficit theory may be too strong. As discussed in the previous topic, language may not totally determine ones worldview. Speakers of a specific code may not necessarily have a different worldview or are in any way cognitively superior to the other. The codes are just different. Labov himself has provided evidence on how working class children who use restricted codes are also capable of handling abstract concepts. The following is the often quoted example of a fifteen year old boy of African origin who was asked in an interview if there was a God, and if so, what colour he would be: Interviewer:Jus suppose there is a God, would he be white or black? Boy :Hes be white man.

Interviewer:Why? Boy :Why? Ill tell you why! Cause the average whitey out there got everything, you dig? And the nigger aint got shit, yknow Yunderstan? So - um - for in order for that to happen, you know it aint no black God thats doin that bullshit. The argument presented is not conveyed in standard English or an elaborated code. Nevertheless, it is an argument which reflects higher levels of thinking. The notion of God is abstract, yet the respondent was able to use his language code effectively to present a complex argument on a hypothetical and abstract concept. This shows that restricted code does not hinder cognitive processes. The language deficit theory, therefore, needs to be reviewed. Bernstein himself seems to adhere to the weaker version of this interpretation. He never claimed that speakers who predominantly use restricted code are incapable of understanding elaborated code. He only provides evidence on the speech that speakers use, not the speakers ability to understand. He also states that working class children are not linguistically deficient. The problem is more on social convention. It is related to the teachers, societys, and schools expectations of success which is related to the use of the elaborated form. The explanation of the fault is not the language. It is a social one. To quote Bernstein, Education cannot compensate for society. Today, Bernstein has revised his theory. Many studies on working class children have also provided evidence that they can use and produce elaborated code, especially in writing. They do not use elaborated code especially in oral interactions because they are not used to it. They also may not want to use it. Therefore, to say that working class children cannot or do not use elaborated code is inaccurate. Based on this, Bernstein now believes that middle class and lower working class children differ in their language variety according to the contexts of their speech production (Trudgill, 1983). In recent years, Bernstein also discovered that the family structure also plays an important role. These structures cut across social class. The family structures are position oriented families and person oriented families.

Position oriented families use language which relates to a set of shared assumptions, have a preference for the implicit rather than the explicit, and are Person oriented families, on the other hand, use language which is more explicit and context free, and have a more open communication system. Person oriented families focus more on personal autonomy rather than social identity.

Elaborated and restricted codes are also not seen as two discrete varieties, but just different kinds of the same variant.

6.2 SEXISM IN LANGUAGE

One of the most well-known scholars in gender studies is Robin Lakoff. In her 1973 article, Language in Society, she argues that language is both the art and artefact of society. Language not only reflects societys norms and values, it also reinforces them. Lakoff based her study on observations as well as her intuitions as a native speaker of English in America. Both sets of data provide interesting insights into stereotypes that are deeply ingrained in mainstream America. Her research, however, was criticised as methodologically unsatisfactory for several reasons. Her subjects were mostly university students and therefore not representative of the American population. Additionally, her data was collected in laboratory conditions and at times with artificial constraints (e.g. the physical separation of interviewer and subjects by a screen placed between them). This may not reflect the spontaneous and informal data that could be collected in natural contexts. Despite these shortcomings, Lakoffs study is much quoted in sociolinguistic texts. She has paved the way for many other scholars to design other empirically sound studies to test her claims. The findings of Lakoffs study suggest that mens language is assertive, mature and direct. In contrast, womens language tends to be non-assertive, immature and hyperpolite:

Figure 6.1: Lakoffs study of mens and womens language Analyses of the way women speak, are spoken to, and spoken about reveal that they have an inferior status in American society. Language differences between men and women will be further elaborated later in this topic. For now, let us examine the relation between sexism and language.

6.3 SEXIST LANGUAGE

Can language be sexist? Or is it the speakers of the language who are sexists? Does language contribute to the social inequalities that exist between men andwomen? If so, how? Sexism in the English language is a reflection of the socialnorms of its speakers, as well as the attitudes that condone sexual inequalities between men and women. There are several ways that women are discriminated against, some of which will be discussed here. Women are generally discriminated against:

Semantic inequality; Derogatory images; Morphology; Generic structures; Social roles; Tterms of address and reference used; and Compliments.

6.3.1 Semantic Inequality

English vocabulary is heavily male oriented. There are terms such as chairman, fireman, policeman, and businessman. Even for terms where identification of genderis not placed, gender identification is usually added when used to refer to females(lady doctor, female judge, etc). The impression is that men normally occupy a higher position. When this is not the case, markers need to be made to indicate that this is an exception. Unfortunately, when the gender is identified as female in certain linguistic items, semantically they tend to carry negative connotations. For example, the term lady driver is used to refer to a lady who is careless and incompetent at driving. Negative connotations are also evident when a word referring to women is applied to men but not vice versa. An unmarried woman might at times be called a bachelor, but to call an unmarried man a spinster or an old maid would be insulting since it means that he is unmanly and prissy. There are also discriminatory expressions such as She is as courageous as a man, which is intended to be complimentary. The title King refers to a good leader, but queen has negative meaning. Sir, master and mister are positive terms but dame, mistress and madam have negative sexualconnotations. One cannot help but notice that all these male references reflectdignity, while all the women references show otherwise. Spender (1980:22-23) has this to say:

6.3.2 Derogatory Images

Women are also portrayed in derogatory images compared to men. Two of the ways this is done are through animal imagery and food imagery.

a. Animal Imagery
Animal imagery such as pig, dog, chicken, snake, skunk and turkey can refer to both men and women. There is, however, a difference in connotation. To call a woman a pig, a cow, a dog or even a horse is to say that she is far from sexually attractive. There is, arguably, no such connotation for men. When used on men, stud carries the enviable connotation of sexual prowess. A tiger is an aggressive man, which is a positive masculine trait, while a bear means that he has a manly large build. Wolf and goat have strong sexual connotations and are also not altogether negative for men. Women, on the other hand, are bitches, cows and hounds, none of which are complimentary. They are also sometimes referred to as birds (feather brained), kittens and chicks (young, sweet and helpless).

b. Food Imagery
There are fewer food imagery that are used to insult men than women. Mencan be cabbage or vegetable. Women, on the other hand, are sugar, sweetie, and honey. Less complimentary terms are tart and crumpet.

6.3.3 Morphology
In the area of morphology, the base structure of many English words takes the male form. It is the unmarked form, which again implies that it is the implicit norm. A female suffix such as ess or ette has to be added to mark it as follows: lion/ lioness, actor/actress and usher/usherette. However, occupations such as authoress and poetess carry with them trivial and casual connotations.

7.2.1 Goals of Language Planning

A number of authors (Annamalai & Rubin, 1980; Bentahila & Davies, 1993; Eastman, 1983; Jahr, 1993; Kaplan, 1990a; Karam, 1974; Nahir, 1984; Paulston, Pow & Connerty, 1993) have discussed the types of goals involved in language planning. While the language planning processes can be characterised by the four cells in Haugens model (selection, codification, implementation and elaboration, as shown in Figure 7.3), and that framework can be said to define a process for how language planning may be carried out, it does not really address the question of What goal(s) this process is intended to

accomplish? Haarmanns (1990) typology adds the dimension of prestige planning, but this still does not address the question of for what purpose?

Figure 7.3: Haugens model Finally, while Coopers (1989), accounting scheme asks most of the relevant general questions (what actors, what behaviours, which people, for what ends, under what conditions, by what means and through what decision-making process) needed in a goals oriented approach, most language planning is actually done to meet specific types of goals. Jahr suggests that language planning may have as its general goal the reduction of language conflict, but notes that the language planning activity may itself ultimately be the cause of serious problems as well as major conflicts (Jahr, 1993: 1).

7.2.7 Lexical Modernisation

As already noted in the previous section on language standardisation, there is often a need for a particular language to expand its capacity to deal with new concepts which have come into use in society more quickly than natural development can accommodate. Nahir (1984), argues that the terminological work which results can be categorised as belonging to one of two types:

lexical development which is related to the process of language modemisation (the standardising and enriching of a language and expanding its domains of activity); and term creation and adaptation which all standardised languages undergo relates to the process of adding terms for new ideas, concepts or technology for which the lexicon is unprepared.

Nahir (1984: 307), notes that lexical development is a process or activity, while term creation and adaptation is a goal or function itself. Both aspects of lexical modemisation can occur simultaneously in languages which are simultaneously standardising and modernising. Jernudd (1977), discusses some of the sources for terminological

innovation. At this point, it may be interesting to examine how lexical modernisation can occur as a language community has a number of means at its disposal for the creation of new words including:

words may be created entirely anew; old words may be recycled with new meanings; words may be borrowed from another language; and words may be created out of common roots and affixes deriving either fromthe historical base of the language or from a common external source.

Lexical modernisation is also related to terminological unification or term planning, which is being undertaken on an international basis so technological terms will have common agreed upon meanings across several languages.

a. The Creation of Entirely New Words

This is actually relatively rare, apart from trade names and acronyms. To the best of our knowledge, only one absolutely unique word has been added to English since the middle of the eighteenth century; it is the word created by Eastman to represent, onomatopoetically, the sound of a camera shutter opening and closing: Kodak. While the rate of such additions in English has been very slow, other languages may have differing rates. In languages such as (Mandarin) Chinese, Filipino, Icelandic and Bahasa Indonesia, for example, the rate of creation is much more rapid, in part because new technologies have been rapidly introduced, but also in part because there has been a concerted movement in the cultures represented by those languages not to borrow foreign words.

b. Old Words Recycled With New Meanings

The recycling in new ways of words whose functions have disappeared is somewhat more common. In English, for example, the word broadcast once meant a way of spreading seed by hand; with the advent of machine farming and the development of agribusiness, hand sewing of seed has been replaced. The word was taken over in the 1920s by the radio industry, and has, by the end of the twentieth century, entirely lost its original meaning and acquired a new life as a term to describe the dissemination of information by electronic means through the air. In the early part of this century, the phrase grid iron was used to describe a part of a wood-burning stove used for cooking and heating. To a great extent, cooking and heating have been overtaken by electric and gas appliances.

What are the other old words which are recycled with new meanings that you know of?

a. Words Borrowed from another Language

This borrowing occurs quite naturally when a technology is transferred from one culture to another or when a language is re-rooted in a new environment (as in the colonial situation). For example, the English term TV has entered virtually every community in which that technology has taken root. In many cases, the word has been adapted to the phonology of the borrowing language, but that is not universally true; the original phonology maybe carefully retained as a prestige marker - as the word prestige, borrowed into English from French, testifies. Large numbers of English words have been borrowed into other languages; for example, the entire lexicon of baseball has been borrowed into Japanese, with appropriate phonological adaptation: English ball = Japanese balu; bat = batu; base = basu; and even the traditional hot dog served in baseball stadia = hotudogu. However, English has been a borrowing language itself; much of the English vocabulary for music has been borrowed from Italian,. and much of the basic militaryterminology has been borrowed from. French and German, with appropriate phonological adaptation (e.g. French colonel /kolonel/ = English /ken1/), and plant and animal names have been borrowed from Native American languages, again with appropriate phonological adaptation (e.g. Chippewa shikag = skunk, Cree otchek = woodchuck, Delaware pasimenan = persimmon).Clipping is a common phenomenon; prof, doc, and math are common English words, derived respectively from professor, doctor, and mathematics, and English mob is a clipping of Latin mobile vulgus. In Australian colloquial English many words (including names) are clipped and a vowel added - garbo = garbage collector, smoko = a smoking break, more generally a work break or Jacko = Jackson. In some cases, a borrowing occurs which later undergoes a change in meaning; e.g. the word bran, meaning a bib, was borrowed from Welsh into English as brat, meaning an ill behaved child (i.e. one who soils his/her bib).

d. Words Created out of Common Roots and Affixes

New words for new functions can be created out of a commonly held stock of roots and affixes belonging to another language. English has invented thousands of words based on Greek and Latin borrowings, sometimes creating strange bedfellows in the new words. An enormous number of new technical terms have such an origin the process importantly augmented by advertising; e.g. rayon, nylon, microscope, telescope,

telephone, sonar or solar. Again, interesting double-plays can occur: the word solar was coined as an adjective meaning of or pertaining to the sun; thus, we speak of solar energy - energy deriving directly from the sun. Recently, however, scientists have been able to capture the energy of the sun reflected from the surface of the earth; the term solar [Latin Solaris] cannot be applied to this energy source, since the source is not taken directly from the sun, so a new term had to be coined: solic. The process was essentially the same, but a Latin adjectival suffix [-ic] was employed. The stock ofroots and affixes need not be Latin and Greek; as has been noted above, in the discussion of new coinages, in languages such as (Mandarin) Chinese, Filipino, and Bahasa Indonesia, for example, new words have been created from historical roots, in part because there has been a concerted movement in the cultures represented by those languages not to borrow foreign words. New words can also be created by the migration of words; for example, in English, the names of people may become general nouns: English mackintosh is a raincoat named for Charles Mackintosh (1766-1843), the inventor of the garment, while other examples include macadam paving and the Gladstone bag. Additionally, trade names may become generic (e.g. frigidaire in US English is a substitute for refrigerator and xerox for photocopy). Once the noun exists, other parts of speech may come into use, so a xerox (n.) produces Xerox (adj.) copies through the process of xeroxing (v.). Several processes have been involved: the large-scale borrowing of terms from other languages, largely English; the adaptation of borrowed words according to the phonological rules of Tagalog; the coinage of new words from classical Tagalog roots, and the adaptation of archaic Tagalog words to new functions. While the process is complex and is basically related to corpus planning concerns, some status planning considerations are involved; for example, while it could make sense in phonological terms (both languages have a c-v structure) to borrow words into Filipino from Japanese, there is a strong emotional resistance to borrowing Japanese words. It is a curious footnote to linguistic history that, although the Philippines was occupied by Spain for nearly 400 years, the Spanish language has had a very small impact on Philippine languages (except in personal names, e.g. Andrew Gonzalez). Similarly, though the Philippines was occupied by Japan for a time, the Japanese language has had virtually no effect on Philippine languages, but although the Philippines was occupied by the United States as well, for a relatively brief period, English has had a great impact on some of the languages of the Philippines. Malaysia was formerly an anglophone area; through its language planning agency, the Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka, Malaysia, has mounted a massive campaign to enlarge the lexicon of Bahasa Malaysia so that it will be capable of dealing with technology and language domains previously underdeveloped in that language. That organisation has been charged not only with the creation of new terms for

technological and scientific areas, but also with morphological modification, and for mutual intelligibility with the varieties spoken in Singapore and Indonesia. Such an effort is replete with problems; for example, on what basis should a new lexicon be created: foreign word borrowing, borrowing from which languages English, Arabic, Sanskrit - borrowing and adjusting for the phonological and morphological rules of Bahasa Malaysia, the redefinition of archaic terms, and the creation of new terms from historical roots of the language? Such work must be done for large numbers of words more than 400,000 since 1972 - quickly, since people need these terms to use immediately (or they will invent their own) and within a modest budget. Lexical modernisation is today largely an economically driven process, the intent of which is to enrich the word stock of a language which already serves its speakers well in all but the technical registers. As we have seen, there are a to provide the means of dealing with new technologies that are having an important impact on society. Thus, the areas in which the word stock is enriched are specifically limited. Although the case of the Philippines (and Malaysia) has been discussed at some length, examples can be drawn from such languages as Mandarin (as the official language of the Peoples Republic of China), Japanese, Hebrew (as the official language of Israel), and a large number of sub-Saharan African languages (e.g. Kiswahili). The large-scale nature of the lexical modernisation process is further illustrated by Alisjahbana (1984: 87) who reported that the Indonesian language up until now has coined or accepted more than 500,000 modern terms expressing modem international concepts. This is an enormous undertaking when one considers that a good dictionary one might buy in a book store contains about 100,000 words.