Extralinguistic Conditions of Language Variability in National Languages
Abstract
The article is aimed at studying the concept of the existence of socially motivated language variants. They are explained by sociolinguistic differentiation and specific use of language in different situations of communication. The dialectical connection of the objective world, the society and a language gives the latter a special dynamic character. It is manifested in active language processes at all linguistic levels and in language usual innovations. Sociolinguistic variants do not only show different images of the world, but also reflect the changes of the world depending on the culture, which, in turn, is reflected in the specifics of linguistic phenomena. Language norms, in this case, correlate not only with communicative attitudes, but also with the cultural ones. In the context of linguistic variability, the speakers of codified standard language, who can switch from one sociocultural language to another one, in the official or informal communication can choose and use various sociolinguistic language variants in their everyday life. It explains the novelty of the research, which is closely related to the typological study of the paradigm of national language situations, determined by the presence of various social strata and groups in the United States, Germany, France, the Czech Republic, Russia and other countries. The authors view the language situation as a socially-motivated model of speech behavior of a native speaker in the social language space.
Downloads
References
Antropova, L.I. (2005). The Forms of Existence of Language: Sociocultural and Communicative Approach (Thesis of Doctor in Philology). Chelyabinsk State University, Chelyabinsk.
Antropova, L.I., Zalavina T.Y., Polyakova L.S. (2017). Linguistic and Cultural Space of Serbia and Russia: General and Characteristic National and Cultural Aspects. Наслеђе. Journal of Language, Literature, Arts and Culture, 14 (37), pp. 33-38.
Bausinger, H. (1979). Deutsch für Deutsche: Dialekte, Sprachbarrieren, Sondersprachen. Frankfurt am Main: Fischer Taschenbuch Verlag.
Bell, A. (1984). Language style as audience design. Language in Society, 13(02), pp.145-204.
Bräutigam, K., Lehr, R. (1986). Daheim: Ortstzpische Mundarten zwischen Rhein und Tauber, Main und Murg. Karlsruhe: Baudenia.
Brown, P., Levinson, S. (1979). Social structure, groups and interaction. In K.R. Scherer and H. Giles (Eds.), Social Markers in Speech (pp 291 – 342). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Chambers, J.K., Trudgill, P., and Schilling-Estes, N. (2004). The Handbook of Language Variation and Change. London: Wiley-Blackwell.
Chomsky, N. (1975). Reflections on Language. New York: Pantheon.
Dyorina, N., Savinova, T., Zalavina, T., Zerkina, N., Kisel, O., et al. (2017). Polydiscursive Space: TheWord, the Text, the Communication. Magnitogorsk. NMSTU
Dittmar, N., Schlobinski, P., & Wachs, I. (1988). The social significance of the Berlin urban vernacular. In N. Dittmar & P. Schlobinski (1988). pp.19-43
Dittmar, N. (2001). Text- and Gesprächslinguistic: ein internationals Handbuch zeitgenossischer Forshung. In: Linguistics of Text and Conversation. Berlin; N.Y.: de Gruyter. Handbücher zur Schpar-und Kommuni- kationswissenschaft. Bd.16. Halbbd.2. S. 971-973
Eckert, P. (2000). Linguistic variation as social practice. Oxford: Blackwell.
Gumperz, J. (1962). Types of Linguistic Communities, Anthropological Linguistics, 4, 1, pp. 28–40.
Jaberg, K., und Jud, J. (1928). Der Sprachatlas als Forschungsinstrument. Kritische Grundlegung und Einführung in den Sprach-und Sachatlas Italiens und der Süd-Schweiz. Halle (Saale): M. Niemeier.
Kachru, B. (1985). Standards, codification and sociolinguistic realism. The English language in the outer circle. In Randolph Quirk & H.G.Widdowson (eds.), English in the world: Teaching and learning the language and literatures (pp.11-30). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Labov W. (2002). Language in the Inner City. Philadelphia: U. of Pennsylvania Press. https://www.upenn.edu/pennpress/book/1082.htm
Launius, Roger D, McCurdy, Howard E. (2008). Robots in space: technology, evolution, and interplanetary travel. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins university press.
Lodge, R. Anthony (2011). La question de la “langue commune” en français. In Sonia Branca-Rosof, Jean-Marie Fournier, Yana Grinshpun, Anne Régent-Susini (eds.), Langue commune et changements de norms (pp. 77 – 91). Paris: Honoré Champion, Champion.
Preston, D., Shuy, R. (1988). Varieties of American English. Washington: United States Department of State: English Language Programs Division.
Radden, Günter (2001). The folk model of language. metaphorik. https://www.metaphorik.de/sites/www.metaphorik.de/files/journal-pdf/01_2001_radden.pdf
Reed, C.E. (1973). Dialects of American English. University of Massachusetts Press.
Schneider, Edgar W.(2010). English around the world: an introduction. Cambridge University Press.
Schönfeld, H. (1977). Zur Rolle der sprachlichen Existenzformen in der sprachlichen Kommunikation. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.
Schönfeld, H. (1985). Varianten, Varietaten und Sprachvariation. In: Zeitschrift für Phonetik, Sprachwissenschaft und Kommunikationsforschung, №1 (38). S. 207-208.
Tagliamonte, Sali A. (2013). Roots of English: Exploring the history of dialects. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Trudgill, P. (2000). Sociolinguistics: an Introduction to Language and Society.London: New York: Penguin.
Wardhaugh, R. (2006). An introduction to sociolinguistics. Blackwell textbooks in linguistics.
Wells, W.H.G. (1986). An Experimental Approach to the Interpretation of Focus in Spoken English. In Catherine Johns-Lewis (ed.) Intonation Discourse (pp. 53 – 75). London, Sydney: Croom Helm.
Yuzhakova, Yu., & Polyakova, L. (2018). Ethnic stereotypes in English political discourse. Philological Science. Questions of theory and practice,7 (85), pp. 199-202.
Yuzhakova, Yu., Polyakova L., Derina N., Zalavina T. (2018). Peculiarities of Ethnic Stereotypes Usage in English Political Discourse. Arab World English Journal, 9 (4), pp. 464 - 472.
Zalavina, T. Y., Antropova, L. I. (2018). Variability of Verbal Phraseology-Representatives of the Concept “Censure” in National Languages. Humanities and pedagogical research, vol. 2, n. 2, pp.54-61.
Zalavina T.Y., Dyorina N.V. (2017). National-Cultural Semantics Reflection of French Proverbs. Proceedings of the 14th International conference on Languages, Literature and Linguistics. «East West» Association for Advanced Studies and Higher Education, GmbH. Vienna. pp. 10-13.
.gif)
