International Journal of the Sociology of Language
About: International Journal of the Sociology of Language is an academic journal published by De Gruyter. The journal publishes majorly in the area(s): Sociolinguistics & Language policy. It has an ISSN identifier of 0165-2516. Over the lifetime, 2274 publications have been published receiving 35458 citations. The journal is also known as: IJSL & IJSL (Berlin. Internet).
Papers published on a yearly basis
TL;DR: In this article, the authors argue that "ethnolinguistic identity theory" can provide a valuable new direction for furthering our understanding of the variables and mechanisms involved in the maintenance of an ethnic language in different social settings.
Abstract: The study of language maintenance and erosion has traditionally been approached from a sociological perspective, and this is understandable given that data are invariably collected at a macrolevel in terms of group tendencies. At the same time, the people who constitute the collectivities examined have of necessity to make up their own minds regarding whether to maintain their ethnic tongue or let it erode. In other words, given that personal decisions are being made and individual strategies enacted (albethey highly social), we feel that language-maintenance theory would be enriched by a social psychological input. As such, and in the context of language maintenance being an intergroup phenomenon to the extent that it is being fostered side by side or in conflict with another group's language, cognitive processes relating to social categorization, identity, comparison, attitude formation, attribution, and second-language acquisition (among many others) have an important part to play even at the macro-level. To this end, we argue that 'ethnolinguistic identity theory' can provide a valuable new direction for furthering our understanding of the variables and mechanisms involved in the maintenance of an ethnic language in different social settings. This theory was originally formulated to address the issue of who in an ethnic group uses what language strategy, when, and why, in interethnic encounters. More specifically, we were concerned with explaining why it was that in certain situations some members of a group accentuate their ethnolinguistic characteristics (be it by dialect, language, or whatever) when conversing with outgroup speakers, while others converge toward them by attenuating their linguistic distinctiveness. Now, the former divergent act can be considered a special case of language maintenance (short-term) at the micro-level. Indeed, this type of face-to-face strategy may arguably be an instance of language maintenance par excellence in the sense that when an outgroup language is the societal norm, ethnolinguistic differentiation can invoke considerable social sanctions as a consequence. Moreover, in some situations, little cognitive effort may be involved in maintaining one's own dialect or language within the private and 'safe' confines of the home and
TL;DR: The authors found that deference was associated with certain linguistic forms used for requesting as well as the similarity of the associations across the two languages in Spanish and English, and they employed a paired-comparison methodology to determine both how deference and politeness were associated with different linguistic forms.
Abstract: As the study of language has evolved from the narrow confines of linguistic form to include the study of language use, researchers have often found themselves either without the theoretical tools needed to pose and discuss the issues or without a research methodology adequate to collect the appropriate data. The study of deference and how it is associated with particular linguistic structures appears to suffer from both difficulties. On the one hand, aside from a few scattered comments in the recent linguistic and language-related literature (cf. Goffman, 1971), there has been no account of what deference is. Moreover, although speakers believe that they understood deference and can recognize it, it is very clear that one cannot follow the linguistic tradition and appeal directly to the intuitions of the native speaker to sort out the degree of deference associated with particular expressions. To be sure, there would be general agreement that the use of 'You ought to do that right now' as a suggestion is far less deferential than suggest that you do that fairly soon', but the use of such intuitions quickly breaks down on the more subtle cases, and judges are inconsistent. Nevertheless, this paper is an attempt to characterize deference and how it appears to be systematically associated with certain types of linguistic forms. We begin by presenting our view of deference, distinguishing it from politeness with which it is often confused. We then report on two experiments involving speakers of Spanish and English in which we employed a pairedcomparison methodology to determine both how deference was associated with certain linguistic forms used for requesting as well as the similarity of the associations across the two languages.
TL;DR: This paper investigated misunderstanding and its prevention among participants in university degree programs where English was used as a lingua franca, and found that speakers engage in various clarification and repair strategies in an apparent attempt to ensure the achievement of mutual intelligibility.
Abstract: The default assumption in human communication is mutual intelligibility between interlocutors. Nevertheless, misunderstandings also occur, and languages have resources for managing these in communicative interaction. When speakers do not share a native language, misunderstandings are generally expected to arise more frequently than between native speakers of the same language. However, it is not clear that communication breakdown is more common among second language users; the anticipation of communicative difficulty may in itself offset much of the trouble, and speakers resort to proactive strategies. This paper investigates misunderstanding and its prevention among participants in university degree programs where English was used as a lingua franca. The findings suggest that speakers engage in various clarification and repair strategies in an apparent attempt to ensure the achievement of mutual intelligibility and thereby the achievement of important communicative goals.
TL;DR: O'Rourke and Pujolar as discussed by the authors examined and reflected upon the emergence of "new speakers" in the context of some of Europe's minority languages, and focused on some of the fundamental principles which had for a long time been taken for granted in much sociolinguistic research and in particular, language planning associated with linguistic revitalization.
Abstract: In this special issue we examine and reflect upon the emergence of “new speak ers” in the context of some of Europe’s minority languages. The “new speaker” label is used here to describe individuals with little or no home or community exposure to a minority language but who instead acquire it through immersion or bilingual educational programs, revitalization projects or as adult language learners. The emergence of this profile of speaker draws our attention to the ways in which minority linguistic communities are changing because of globalization and the new profiles of speakers that this new social order is creating. The concept also focuses our attention on some of the fundamental principles which had for a long time been taken for granted in much sociolinguistic research and in particular, language planning associated with linguistic revitalization (O’Rourke and Pujolar 2013). The authors of the eight articles included in this issue engage with these issues through their analyses of new speaker communities across a variety of European contexts including the Basque Country, Brittany, Catalonia, Corsica, Galicia, Ireland, the Isle of Man and Occitania.