Sociolinguistics

William Labov

Prepared by
Mawj Burkan
 William Labov
December 1927 -age 95

William Labov has been a prominent voice

in American linguistics since the early 1960s.

He pioneered an approach to investigating the

relationship between language and society and
developed a field that has come to be known
as “variationist sociolinguistics.”
 Language from Labov’s perspective

Labov believes that generative theory associated with Chomsky and his
fellowers has reached a dead end, and that its practitioners are taking the
view of intellectual ostriches:' The penalties for ignoring data from the
speech community are a growing sense of frustration, a proliferation of
moot questions, and a conviction that linguistics is a game in which each
theorist chooses the solution that fits his taste or intuition – Linguistics is
not a predictive science- he stresses the value of observing naturally
produced speech.
I do not believe that we need at this point a new "theory of language";
rather, we need a new way of doing linguistics that will yield decisive
solutions (259).
Labov notes that the 'abstract' linguist has relegated variability and its
social causes to a level below that of linguistic significance (295); yet his
evidence shows that the speech of individuals is highly structured by
class and stylistic context. The concept of 'idiolect' simply avoids the
necessity of explaining why the speech of individuals and communities
differs. What was 'inexplicable' in the old framework yields to
understanding through rules of sociolinguistic variability (Darnell,1975).
 Labov’s contribution to sociolinguistics

Labov started by investigating language use in Martha´s Vineyard ,an

island in the United States, (which he did for his MA) and in New York
city. His seminal investigations were based on principles and methods
which have become standard in sociolinguistics and which led to insights
which are generally accepted today.

Labov has investigated quite specific phonological features in the use of

English in New York, such as varieties of /r/ or the voiceless interdental
fricative /θ / as in thing or thick.
Labov has been able to show that individual New Yorkers do not use one
or the other form of /e/ exclusively but may vary in their speech habits
according to the formality of the situation: thus they use different
variants of /θ / in casual speech, careful speech, in consecutive reading
style, or in reading a word list.

In other words, there is a stylistic gradient. But there are also social
differences. There is less stylistic differentiation among upper-middle-
class speakers than among working-class or lower-class speakers.

According to Labov, a sociolinguistic variable is a linguistic feature

which can be systematically related to some nonlinguistic feature in the
social context: the speaker, the addressee, the audience or the settings
(Philips & Stern, 1986).
In his Martha´s Vineyard study, Labov interviewed 69 people, each from
different age, ethnic and social groups as to get a representative sample. Rather
than getting his informants to read simple word lists, Labov used an interview
technique to subtly encourage the participants to say the words containing the
vowels which he wished to study. Labov tried to make the conversation as
natural as possible so that the participants didn’t necessarily know what Labov
was looking for…

Labov found that the pronunciation of certain vowel sounds were subtly
changing from the standard American pronunciations . He noticed that
Fishermen centralise /au/ and /aI/ more than any other occupational group

This was done subconsciously, in order to establish and identify themselves as

Vineyarders, an independent social group rejecting the values and speech style
of the mainland.
This, in turn, encouraged the Vineyarders to establish a somewhat non-
standard dialect and retain their social identity.

For these Vineyarders, the new pronunciation was an innovation. As more

and more people came to speak in the same way, the innovation gradually
became the norm for those living on the island and was established as a
dialect.

Therefore, there seems to be enough evidence to state that generations,

occupations, or social groups might be a big factor in language use as a
sociolinguistic consideration.
 Labov´s data collection methods
Labov further stressed the need to collect data reliably. The linguist must
be aware that an informant will show the following features in his speech:

1- style shifting (during an interview).

2- varying degree of attention, i.e. some speakers pay great attention to

their own speech (so-called 'audio-monitoring'); in excited speech and
casual speech the attention paid by the speaker is correspondingly
diminished.

3- degree of formality, determined by the nature of the interview; it can

vary depending on how the informant reacts to the interviewer and the
situation he/she is placed in (Holmes,1992).
The important and special method used by Labov in his studies as compared to
other regional dialect studies is because he did not separate language usage form
the social context that he was researching on.

As such, his recordings and findings were authentic and that they are reliable and
valid towards the context given. By collecting the data based on the real context
of language being used and spoken to, Labov is able to make valid assumptions
towards the social behavior on spoken language based on social hierarchy, social
esteem and social class.
Labov had conducted his research through quantitative method by coming up
with charts and graphs that proves the linguistic variation of a society (Lock &
Strong, 2010).
Conclusion

-Labov’s contribution lies in the social realistic perspective that takes into
account how a diverse range of speakers uses the language in everyday
situations.
-Labov suggested studying language as it is really used, not how is should be
used.
-He approached language through a scientific empirical method, and rejected
traditional ones based on contemplation and intuition.
 References

- Holmes, Janet 1992. An introduction to sociolinguistics. London:

Longman.

-Phillips, J. K., & Stern, H. H. (1986). Fundamental Concepts of Language

Teaching. Oxford: Oxford university press.

-The impact of Labov’s contribution to general linguistic theory.

Journal of Sociolinguistics.