understand the various functions of language as a tool of communication;; understand the relationship between language, culture and identity;. Language is basically a system of communication where sound or Much has been said about the relationship between language and society. In the history of . Simply put, language is the tool through which communication is less complicated. To sum parts of it up, I do believe that there is a connection between the two. . from another society, thus failing the purpose of allowing to communicate.
Social context looks at relationships between language and society and looks at language as people use it. We observe the way that people use language differently and try to explain why this is. This explaining is not always easy. Social context asks a what variations are there in a language and b why do they come about?
Social context is, interesting, exciting and fraught with difficulties. There are very few definite neat answers to things. What we need to do is try to become aware of the way language varies according to who people are, what they are doing, and the attitudes they have to their language.
We need to remember that there has been very little research into the Social context of BSL. This course may well raise more questions than it can answer, but at least we can become aware of the issues involved, even if we cannot come up with a simple answer.
Social context will think about variety within a language. Everybody who speaks a language has a very wide linguistic repertoire unless they have very severe learning difficulties, or are learning the language as a foreign language. This means, they can use language in many different ways, depending on the situation they are in. The sort of language that they use also depends on their social background and social identity.
We have said that Social context looks at the way relationship between society and people and language. What is the relationship between language and people? There are 4 possibilities: For each of these 4 possibilities, try to think of some examples that show the different influences.
When you have done so, look at some of the ideas I suggest below. When you have seen my ideas, maybe you can add some more of your own.
We can probably discount number 4: Neither interact with each other or influence each other. Some linguists would like to see language as something pure, abstract and untouched by the real world, like a mathematical formula, but that's just a convenient way of thinking about the structure of language. As soon as we look at people using language we can see that the practical version of this abstraction is much more complex. In the end we will probably need to say that number three: Society and language influence each other Is the correct way to look at the relationship.
Speech and social behaviour are constantly interacting. All the time language is changing because of social contexts and social contexts cause the language to be changed.
However, this does not mean that we should not explore the two other possibilities in some depth, because they can enlighten us about the relationship of language and society.
There are two views here - one is more extreme than the other. The first idea is that language is so powerful that it actually affects how you see the world; the second is that is influences the way we think and behave. A linguist called Whorf claimed language actually affects the way you see the world so language is like a pair of glasses through which we see everything.
Whorf said that Hopi and European had different ways of talking about the world, so it influenced the way they saw the world. European languages treat time as something that can be divided up into separate seconds, minutes and days. Trees and plates can be counted, but water and hope cannot and the language makes distinctions here. The Hopi language treats time as indivisible so that Hopi will not talk about minutes and weeks.
Trees and water are simply treated linguistically as non-discrete items. The result of this claimed Whorf was that the Hopi genuinely see the world differently from Europeans.
Their language structure makes them see the world differently. Unfortunately, for this theory, nobody asked the Hopi if they really saw the world differently. It would seem that they see it just as we do. Would their world view shift depending on the language they were speaking?
Another example of this theory is the often-cited fact that Eskimos have lots of different words for snow, so it means they actually see different kinds of snow, whereas we only see "snow". But this isn't really true because we can use words to describe the snow if we need to, e. We aren't tuned to thinking about it that way, but if it becomes important, we can easily do so.
We might not know the names of different makes of car, but still be able to tell the difference between a Fiat and a Rolls Royce, for all that. So could an Eskimo, even if the Inuit language didn't have the exact words.
Relation between language and society | Satria Rahmat - angelfirenm.info
Besides which, Eskimos don't really have all those words for snow - it's just one of those pieces of information that everyone repeats and no-one has checked if it's true. If you check, you find it isn't true! There is an important lesson here that linguists can learn: Any Hopi or Inuit could have told us immediately that this was a load of nonsense, but no-one ever thought to ask them.
Many people, including linguists have done the same when describing sign languages, too. Often they have said things that people have come to believe when deaf signers have known it wasn't true. The point about the story is that this sort of control does not really work, and cannot work because if we do not have words for our thoughts, we just create them anyway. Still, some politicians and businesses do like to believe that the language we use will affect the way we think about something.
So, language doesn't affect what we can see in the world, but it is still possible that language affects people and society because maybe language still affects the way we can think. Some people say that sign languages don't have abstract signs because all signs are iconic and so deaf people can't think about abstract things like love, bravery, inflation, investment for the future etc.
IF this was true, then we could say this was an example of language affecting people. BSL can express anything that English can. A linguist called Basil Bernstein found that middle class children used an "elaborated" code of English in school. This meant they used more abstract words, less context dependent words and more complicated sentences. Working class children seemed to use a more "restricted" code.
This meant using more concrete words, more context-dependent and less complicated sentences. So some people but NOT Bernstein said this means working class children can't think in abstract ways because their language doesn't allow them to. This, of course, is nonsense.Language and Society Week 1 PowerPoint Lecture
Just as with deaf people. All it means is that the children used different ways of expressing the same thing. One example of the way that language is said to affect society is in sexist language.
The theory is that language affects the way we view men and women because it treats men and women differently. If you use words like chairman or fireman it implies only men can do the jobs, so women feel left out.
Language really could not apart from every people. This two case mutual interrelated, so did with indonesian language raised from melayu language was charachteristic lingua franca.
Sociolinguistics is study the relationship between language and society Holmes, The sociolinguistics deals with explaining why we speak differently in different social context and factor such as, class, ethnicity, age, and sex. This study is concerned with the identifying the social functions of language and the ways it is used to convey social meaning.
Sociolinguistics is also the study about dialects, languages in contact, language and education, and language in use Fromkin, In vice versa, Wardhough states that sociolinguistics and the sociology are different study. Language and social interaction have a reciprocal relationship: Language is a tool for interact with other human.
Through language we can related and interact with other human and created communicative in the community Sociolinguistics is the study of the connection between language and society and the way people use language in different social situations. It asks the question, "How does language affect the social nature of human beings, and how does social interaction shape language? The basic premise of sociolinguistics is that language is variable and ever- changing.
As a result, language is not uniform or constant. Rather, it is varied and inconsistent for both the individual user and within and among groups of speakers who use the same language. People adjust the way they talk to their social situation.
An individual, for instance, will speak differently to a child than he or she will to their college professor. One way that sociolinguists study language is through dated written records. They examine both hand-written and printed documents to identify how language and society have interacted in the past. This is often referred to as historical sociolinguistics: For example, historical sociolinguists have studied the use and frequency of the pronoun thou in dated documents and found that its replacement with the word you is correlated with changes in class structure in 16th and 17th century England.
Sociolinguists also commonly study dialect, which is the regional, social, or ethnic variation of a language. For example, the primary language in the United States is English. People who live in the South, however, often vary in the way they speak and the words they use compared to people who live in the Northwest, even though it is all the same language. There are different dialects of English, depending on what region of the country you are in. Sociolinguists study many other issues as well.
For instance, they often examine the values that hearers place on variations in language, the regulation of linguistic behavior, language standardization, and educational and governmental policies concerning language. But the language function is not merely a means of communication. The means from the statement that the point is that language is different if we see from different aspec as mentioned above.
Explanation from language function as follow: Listener side From listener side, language function directive. Language is not just make listener do something, but do anything conform what speaker want.
Speaker side From speaker side, language function personally or individually. It means that speaker explain about his attitude to what he speak. Topic side From topic side, language function reference. In this matter the language function as instrument for explain about object or happening in the sorrounding speaker or in the culture. Code side From code side, language function metalingual or metalinguistic.
Monolingual society One language 2. Bilingual society Two language 3. Multilingual society More than two language In this part of the discussion, the writer will describe sociolinguistic factors, the dialects, languages in contact, language and education, and language use Holmes, ; Fromkin, Social factors The social factors are including the users, participants, social settings and functions. The setting and social context are also relevant such as, at home, hospital and class.
Social dimensions The relationship between the participants is one of the factors of the social dimension. The factors like the social distance intimate-high solidaritystatus scale high-low statusthe status, formality formal-informal and functional scale topic of interaction are really influenced the sociolinguistics. Explanation factors This factor is to identify clearly the linguistic variation such as, vocabulary, sounds, grammatical construction, dialects, languages and the different social which lead the speakers to use one form rather than another such as, participant, setting or function of the interaction.
Dialect All speakers can talk to each other and pretty much understand each other. Between one and another do not speak alike. It can be influenced by age, sex, social situation and where and when the language was learned.