Lecturer:

Rizki Amelia,
M.Pd

SOCIOLINGUISTICS
Languages, Dialect, Varieties

Arranged by:

Umi Kulsum
11214201570

DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH EDUCATION

FACULTY OF EDUCATION AND TEACHER TRAINING

STATE ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY SULTAN SYARIF KASIM

RIAU

2014
 CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

This Chapter is a study of communication trough conventionalization that seems to be

implicit in sociolinguistic research touching on dialect variation, register variation, genre
identification, and verbal interaction. In having communication, speakers have various ways
of saying the same thing. Speakers in Aberdeen, north-east Scotland may choose between the
terms boy, loon, loonie, lad or laddie when referring to a young male person, or between
quine, quinie, lass, lassie, or girl in reference to a young female. Different words refer to the
same things; therefore we can conclude that each language has a number of varieties
(Wardhaugh, 2006).

Hudson (1996, p. 22) defines a variety of language as ‘a set of linguistic items with
similar distribution’, a definition that allows us to say that all of the following are varieties:
Canadian English, London English, the English of football commentaries, and so on. A
variety can therefore be something greater than a single language as well as something less,
less even than something traditionally referred to as a dialect. Ferguson (1972, p. 30) offers
another definition of variety as ‘anybody of human speech patterns which is sufficiently
homogeneous to be analyzed by available techniques of synchronic description and which has
a sufficiently large repertory of elements and their arrangements or processes with broad
enough semantic scope to function in all formal contexts of communication’.

Hudson and Ferguson agree in defining variety in terms of a specific set of ‘linguistic
items’ or ‘human speech patterns’ (presumably, sounds, words, grammatical features, etc.)
which we can uniquely associate with some external factor (presumably, a geographical area
or a social group).

2 | S o c i o l i n g u i s ti c s
 CHAPTER II

CONTENT

II. I. Language and Dialect

Linguists have struggled with the definition of a dialect for decades. Unfortunately,
there has never been a truly clear guideline for distinguishing between a dialect and a
language. Simplified concepts, such as the idea that mutually intelligible varieties are always
considered dialects of the same language, can be easily disproved with a number of counter
examples – e.g., Scottish English and Boston English may not be mutually intelligible, but
they are both dialects of English.

Most speakers can give a name to whatever it is they speak. On occasion, some of
these names may appear to be strange to those who take a scientific interest in languages, but
we should remember that human naming practices often have a large ‘unscientific’
component to them. While people do usually know what language they speak, they may not
always lay claim to be fully qualified speakers of that language. They may experience
difficulty in deciding whether what they speak should be called a language proper or merely a
dialect of some language.1

Edward (2009) define dialect as a variety of a language that differs from others along
three dimensions: vocabulary, grammar and pronunciation (accent) because they are forms of
the same language.

Haugen (1966a) has pointed out that language and dialect are ambiguous terms. 2
Ordinary people use these terms quite freely in speech; for them a dialect is almost certainly
no more than a local non-prestigious (therefore powerless) variety of a real language. In
contrast, scholars often experience considerable difficulty in deciding whether one term
should be used rather than the other in certain situations. As Haugen says, the terms
‘represent a simple dichotomy in a situation that is almost infinitely complex.’ He points out
that the confusion goes back to the Ancient Greeks. The Greek language that we associate
with Ancient Greece was actually a group of distinct local varieties (Ionic, Doric, and Attic)

1
Wardhaugh Ronald. An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. London: Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 2006. p. 27
2
Ibid. 28

3 | S o c i o l i n g u i s ti c s
descended by divergence from a common spoken source with each variety having its own
literary traditions and uses, e.g., Ionic for history, Doric for choral and lyric works, and Attic
for tragedy. Later, Athenian Greek, the koiné – or ‘common’ language – became the norm for
the spoken language as the various spoken varieties converged on the dialect of the major
cultural and administrative center.

Haugen points out (p. 923) that the Greek situation has provided the model for all
later usages of the two terms with the resulting ambiguity. Language can be used to refer
either to a single linguistic norm or to a group of related norms, and dialect to refer to one of
the norms.

The situation is further confused by the distinction the French make between un
dialecte and un patois. The former is a regional variety of a language that has an associated
literary tradition, whereas the latter is a regional variety that lacks such a literary tradition.
Therefore patois tends to be used pejoratively; it is regarded as something less than a dialect
because of its lack of an associated literature. Even a language like Breton, a Celtic language
still spoken in parts of Brittany, is called a patois because of its lack of a strong literary
tradition and the fact that it is not some country’s language. However, dialecte in French, like
Dialekt in German, cannot be used in connection with the standard language, i.e., no speaker
of French considers Standard French to be a dialect of French. In contrast, it is not
uncommon to find references to Standard English being a dialect – admittedly a very
important one – of English.

Bell (1976) says that a language has the following criteria3:

• Standardization (codified/put into a system) which functions to unify individuals and

groups, symbolize identity (regional, social, ethnic, or religious), give prestige to
speakers, reduce or eliminate diversity and variety, assert independence
• Vitality (the existence of a living community of speakers)
• Historicity (sense of identity)
• Autonomy (people feel their language is different)
• Reduction (not necessarily to be the representative speakers of a language)
• Mixture (speaker’s feeling of the purity of the language they speak)
• De facto norms (speakers realize there are good and bad speakers)
3
Wardhaugh Ronald. An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. London: Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 2006. p. 33

4 | S o c i o l i n g u i s ti c s
II. II. Regional Dialects

As you travel throughout a wide geographical area in which a language is spoken, and
particularly if that language has been spoken in that area for many hundreds of years, you are
almost certain to notice differences in pronunciation, in the choices and forms of words, and
in syntax. There may even be very distinctive local colorings in the language which you
notice as you move from one location to another. Such distinctive varieties are usually called
regional dialects of the language.

Dialect geography is term used to describe attempts made map the distribution of
various linguistic features so as to show their geographical provenance. For example, in
seeking to determine features of the dialects of English and to show their distribution, dialect
geographers try to find to question such as the following. Is this an –r pronouncing area of
English, as in word like car and cart or is it not? What past tense form of drink do speakers
prefer? What names do people give particular objects in the environment, e.g., elevator or lift,
petrol or gas carousel or round about? Do people say ‘I haven’t any ‘, ‘I don’t have any’, and
'ain’t got any’? And so on. Sometimes maps are drawn to show actual boundaries around such
features, boundaries call isoglosses, son as to distinguish an area in which certain feature is
found from area in which it is absent. When several such isoglosses coincide, the result is
sometimes called a dialect boundary. Just one example, one isogloss separates the area (to the
north) where come is pronounced with the same vowel as stood, from the area where it has
the open vowel [ʌ], as in Received Pronunciation (RP), the prestige accent of England.4

When the English of speaker in different geographical regions and from different
social groups shows systemic differences, the groups are said to speak different dialects of the
same language. The dialect of a single language may thus be defined as mutually intelligible
forms of a language that differ in systemic ways from each other.

There are two kinds of dialect; they can be regional dialect and social dialect.
Regional dialect is geographically based. It means that a dialect that differs because of
geographical area. The differences can be in terms of pronunciation, choice of words, and
syntax.

4
Hudson, R.A. Sociolinguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2001. p. 39

5 | S o c i o l i n g u i s ti c s
 Finally, the term dialect, particularly when it is used in reference to regional variation,
should not be confused with the term accent. Standard English, for example is spoken in a
variety of accent. often with clear regional social association: there are accent associated with
North America, Singapore, India, Liverpool (Scouse), Tyneside (Geordie), Boston, New York
and so on.

II. III. Social Dialects

A sociolect is stand for social dialect, that has meaning as a variety of language (a
register) associated with a social group such as a socioeconomic class, an ethnic group
(precisely termed ethnolect), an age group, etc.

An immediate problem is that of defining social group (see chapter 5) or social class
(see chapter 6), giving proper weight to the various factors that can be used to determine
social position, e.g., occupation, place of residence, education, ‘new’ versus ‘old’ money,
income, racial or ethnic origin, cultural background, caste, religion, and so on. Whereas
regional dialects are geographically based, social dialects originate among social groups and
are related to a variety of factors, the principal ones apparently being social class, religion,
and ethnicity. In India, for example, caste, one of the clearest of all social differentiators,
quite often determines which variety of a language a speaker uses. In a city like Baghdad the
Christian, Jewish, and Muslim inhabitants speak different varieties of Arabic.5

Studies in social dialectology, the term used to refer to this branch of linguistic study,
confront many difficult issues, particularly when investigators venture into cities. Migration,
both in and out of cities, is also usually a potent linguistic factor. Cities also spread their
influence far beyond their limits and their importance should never be underestimated in
considering such matters as the standardization and diffusion of languages.

II. IV. Styles, Registers, and Beliefs

The study of dialects is further complicated by the fact that speakers can adopt
different styles of speaking.6 You can speak very formally or very informally, your choice
being governed by circumstances. We may try to relate the level of formality chosen to a
variety of factors: the kind of occasion; the various social, age, and other differences that

5
Wardhaugh Ronald. An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. London: Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 2006. p. 49-51
6
Holmet, Janet. Op.cit. London. 1992 : Longman, p. 59

6 | S o c i o l i n g u i s ti c s
exist between the participants; the particular task that is involved, e.g., writing or speaking;
the emotional involvement of one or more of the participants; and so on. Style is the way
speakers speak, the speaker also can make a choice weather informal and formal, and it
depends on circumstance and the age and social group of participant (Wardhaugh, 2006). And
also style is the variants in the speech which is used in certain situation or form of the
language used for the same purpose under certain circumstances.

Register is another complicating factor in any study of language varieties. Registers

are sets of language items associated with discrete occupational or social groups. Surgeons,
airline pilots, bank managers, sales clerks, jazz fans, and pimps employ different registers.

Many people hold strong beliefs on various issues having to do with language and are
quite willing to offer their judgments on issues (see Bauer and Trudgill, 1998, Niedzielski and
Preston, 1999, and Wardhaugh, 1999). They believe such things as certain languages lack
grammar, that you can speak English without an accent, that French is more logical than
English, that parents teach their children to speak, that primitive languages exist, that English
is degenerating and language standards are slipping, that pronunciation should be based on
spelling, and so on and so on.7

7
Wardhaugh Ronald. An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. London: Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 2006. p. 53

7 | S o c i o l i n g u i s ti c s
 CHAPTER III

CONCLUSION

Variety is a language that has same sounds, words, grammatical features. A general
term for any distinctive form of a language or linguistic expression is Language varieties.
Linguists commonly use language variety, as a cover term for any of the overlapping
subcategories of a language, including dialect, idiolect, register, and social dialect.

Dialect refers to a variety of a language that can signal the speaker’s regional or social
background, dialects are subdivisions of language; the term of dialect refers to grammar and
vocabulary (or lexis). Dialect is divided into two, social dialect and regional dialect. Regional
dialect refers to a place, and social dialect refers to social groups and classes.

Style relates to the typical ways in which one or more people do a particular thing,
and Registers can simply be described as variations of the language according to its use,
while the dialect as a language variation based on users registers on this concept is not limited
to the choice of words (such as the notion registers in the traditional theory) but also includes
the choice of the use of text structure, and texture.

8 | S o c i o l i n g u i s ti c s
 REFERENCES

 Wardhaugh Ronald. (2006). an Introduction to Sociolinguistics. London: Blackwell

Publishing Ltd.
 Hudson, R.A. (2001). Sociolinguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
 Holmet, Janet. (1992). an Introduction to Sociolinguistic. London : Longman
 Dole Iman. ( 2010 ) Language Varieties.
http://imandole.blogspot.com/2010/05/language-varieties.html (Accessed 2014-09-
24).
 http://udel.edu/~amandapa/dialect.pdf (Accessed 2014-09-25)

9 | S o c i o l i n g u i s ti c s