Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
9red;
9blue;
9brown;
4tage%
(ig! E1olutionary Stage$ o0 2a$ic Color ,ord$
32erlin 4 5ay !66! 7!6869: ;<
0hat 3igure 1 above suggests is li(e this% if a language has two basic
color terms, it is identified as staying in the first stage of evolution, possessing
two basic color words "white" and "blac("E if a language has three basic color
words, it is assumed to be in the second stage of evolution, possessing three
basic color words "white", 'blac(", and "red". According to this evolutionary
theory, .nglish has all the eleven basic color words so it reaches the last
stage of evolution. )he good thing about this theory is that it correctly
captures a (ind of generalization in color words cross-culturally. *ecause it
was found that for the whole of : languages e+amined, there were only
about 8" combinations of basic color words, varying from two to eleven in
number. If there is not a linguistic universality in the basic color word system
of languages, as this theory suggests, a free combination of these eleven
basic color words will produce over two thousand random combinations.
White
black
green
yellow
)his evolutionary theory finds a good e+planation in our second e+ample
from >ani, a language which has become well (nown for its very restricted
system of basic color words. 3or instance, there are only two basic color
words in this language% modla for light, bright, hence, white, and mili for dar(,
dull, hence, blac( #*erlin H Aay 11%$!'. In relation to this specific language,
an interesting -uestion can be raised% 0hat will a native >ani spea(er do if
heGshe wants to designate colors other than blac( and whiteF ?r, alternatively,
do white and black always mean white and blac( cross-linguisticallyF A further
investigation of the basic color word system in >ani revealed that the native
spea(ers of this culture use this 0hite versus *lac( contrast to convey more
messages about their color perception. And it turns out that they use modla as
a general color term to include all warm colors such as red and yellow and
use mili as another umbrella color word to cover all the cold colors such as
blue and green. )herefore, the contrast between modla and mili in fact is a
contrast between "whitewarmness" versus "blac(coldness", instead of a
simple achromatic contrast li(e white and blac(. 3urthermore, these results
indicate that the color word system in >ani is still in its first stage of evolution
and by means of using this whitewarmness and blac(coldness contrast and
other types of color words, say, color words derived from ob5ect names,
animals, plants, and so on, the spea(ers from this culture can successfully
e+press any colors labeled by distinct color words in another
culture. )he force of linguistic relativity is hence greatly reduced if we also
ta(e into our consideration the issue of language use.
7!= Ca$e $tudie$
A constellation of e+amples could be pic(ed up from different levels of
language analysis to illustrate the interplay of language and culture and this
selection may range from te+tual structure to phonological variation. 3or
instance, Aaplan #1!!' claims that the structural organization of a te+t tends
to be culturally specific. 4ome interesting e+perimental studies have also
been conducted to testify the sensitivity of the spea(ers to conditional clauses
in a cross-linguistic conte+t, though no consensus results have been observed
yet #*loom 1:1 '. A crosscultural study of the meaning of some idioms or
metaphorical uses in a cultural conte+t, however, will definitely provide an
optimal opportunity to e+amine the issue. )his choice of observation may
partially e+plain why /ida, when summarizing some intrinsic features of
vocabulary in relation to semantic, translating and cultural studies, states that
words are sometimes "idiomatically-governed" and Iculturally-specificJ # 1:%
8& - $='. Additionally, this observation also implies that there comes an
important new force #i. e., the study of metaphor' in the pursuit of. the
relationship between language and culture #6a(off H 1ohnson 1:"'. 0hat is
presented below forms only a small part of the collections obtained through
our personal e+posure to the American culture #Cang 18', but it suffices to
serve the purpose of our discussion here.
1' 0hen you get "our hands dirt", it does not necessarily mean in the
American culture that you've done some manual wor( and need to wash your
hand.
Interaction ,ilieu% 2rofessor )ulai, an American linguist, and 2rofessor
Cang, a visiting scholar from <hina, were tal(ing about the relationship
between teaching and doing research in the office.
2rof. )ulai% )o do research means to get "our hands dirt".
2rof. Cang% 4o you thin( teaching is worthier than doing researchF >oes
the phrase "to get your hands dirty" have some pe5orative connotationsF
2rof. )ulai% ?h, noK I didn't mean that. 0hen I was saying that, I simply
meant "you are practicing something", or Iyou are engaged in doing
something."
&' 0hen you have enough dumbbells, it does not necessarily mean that
you (eep pairs of this instrument for regular physical practices..
Interaction ,ilieu% ,r. 7oodell, ,r. Cang's American landlord, and ,r.
Cang were cleaning up the apartment. ,r. Cang pointed to the dumbbells on
the floors and as(ed ,r. 7oodell if he would have any use of them for the time
being.
,r. 7oodell% I guess I'd better put them in the garage. #$ve had enough
dumbbells in my office.
,r. Cang% LeallyF <an you do dumbbell practice in your officeF
,r. 7oodell% >efinitely notK I was 5o(ing. 0hat I really meant is that there
have been a lot of stupid guys in my office.
7!; To #hich e>tent do #e need culture in our lingui$tic $tudy%
?ur Bopi, >ani, and case e+amples above partially provide a good
answer to this -uestion. In what follows, we are going to ta(e up a more
structure-related e+ample from .nglish to indicate that a study of linguistic
issues in a cultural setting can greatly promote our understanding of
)OTI-ATION and 'IRECTIONALITY in language change. ,oreover, by
introducing a study li(e this, we will have an opportunity to show how to "do
linguistics" in a cultural conte+t.
.ver since the early 1@"s, along with the disclosure of the notorious
political scandal dubbed as the 0atergate event, a bunch of derived words
have been rushing into the .nglish language. 0ord li(e "*illygate",
">ebategate,J I<attlegate," "Licegate" are some of these compounding forms.
In this situation, it is felt that a sociolinguistic study of the combining form
-gate and its derivations is necessary for us to e+amine the semantic,
structural, and functional development concerning these nonce-words and
(now more about the correlation of these related factors in the study of word-
formation #Cang 1@'. After a careful study of this phenomenon, we found
that 1' this suffi+ en5oys a rich productivity in American .nglishE &' words
derived from this source inevitably ta(e on a culturally pe5orative implication to
refer to "the disclosures of misconduct in highplaces" #*arnhart H *arnhart
1:1%&8!$', hence, a synonym to scandals of different types, political or
economical, and 8' a variety of derivational processes #i. e., antonomasia,
conversion, H affi+ation' can be e+plained in the study of the productivity of
this compounding form. *ased on these findings, we can draw some tentative
conclusions%
a' %atergate as a word ta(ing on a pe5orative implicature to refer to any
political scandal at the high ran(, will stay in .nglish for -uite a long time.
b' Its structural status in the language becomes rather stable through the
rich derivational processes it has undergone in word-formation.
c' )he semantic implicature it has will stay with the word for -uite a long
time.
)his combining form has become so generalized in its meaning that
some &gate words have even gone out of the society and been used to refer
to political scandals in other cultures as well.
7!? Culture in language teaching cla$$roo@
)o (now another culture is a rather difficult 5ob. )o act or behave
appropriately in another culture is a more demanding tas(. It is even claimed
that a satisfactory fulfilment of this tas( will ta(e about &" years of time #/ida
H 136 correspondent 1: '. Aeeping this in mind and also realizing the
facilitating role of cultural (nowledge in language learning, we will briefly
discuss the relationship between culture and language teaching here. )he
interested reader can find more e+amples in 7ao #&"""'.
2rincipally, there are at least three ob5ectives for us to teach culture in
our language class%
1' )o get the students familiar with cultural differencesE
&' )o help the students transcend their own culture and see things as the
members of the target culture willE
8' )o emphasize the inseparability of understanding language and
understanding culture through various classroom practices
All this leads to a belief that a good understanding of structural things in
some cases has much to do with a conscious understanding of the cultural
bac(ground of the target language from language learners. In other words, a
successful master of a given language has much to do with an understanding
of that culture. *ecause, as we have shown so far, language and culture are
correlated with each other at different levels of linguistic structure.
7. Language and $ociety
7.! "o# doe$ language relate to $ociety%
)he relationship between language and society has long been
recognized and e+amined. .vidence for this claim, discrete as it might be, can
be conveniently gathered from the wor(s by those great philosophers and
grammarians either in the 7raeco-Loman tradition or in the Indian history
#Barris H )aylor 1@ 9 1: ;E Apte 1$'.
>uring the whole &"th century, a great deal of efforts has been ta(en to
treat the in-uiry of linguistics as a )ONISTIC or AUTONO)OUS &URSUIT of
an independent science. 4trongly influenced by this dominant view of
linguistic science, a separation of the structural study of language from its
social conte+t of usage was claimed, 5ustified, and reinforced. )he
resurrection of a 'UALISTIC -IE, of linguistic in-uiry, however, came into
being in the 1!"s, along with the development of sociolinguistics as an
opposition to the dominant theory of <homs(yan linguistics.
7.. A $ituationally and $ocially 1ariationi$t per$pecti1e
As far as the situational variation in language use is concerned, 7eertz
#1!"' provides a good e+ample to illustrate the diversity and richness of
some stylistic variants available for a 1avanese spea(er to choose when
engaged in different types of communicative events. 3or instance, even a
simple interrogative sentence li(e "Are you going to eat rice and cassava
nowF" will situationally admit several 1avanese translations, starting from a
rather lower level of style and moving to a comparatively higher level of style%
Are apa ' napa ' menapa
you kow( ' samp()an ' pand)enengan
going arep'ad)eng'dad(
to eat mangan ' neda ' dahar(
rice sega ' sekul
and lan ' kali)an
cassava lasp(
now saiki ' saniki ' samenika
)he copiously potential selection of linguistic forms in this 1avanese
community indicates that an appropriate language use in any social
interaction not only has something to do with structural rules, but also involves
some socially institutionalized norms in usage. In this sense, the choice of one
form over another is both stylistically and socially governed. )his
conceptualization of linguistic variation, in relation to what will be discussed
below, is li(ely to provide an innovative and more comprehensive
understanding of the issue in general.
)here has been a ma+im in sociolinguistics which claims that "Cou are
what you say" #6a(off 11'. 3ollowing this claim, we may e+pand the scope
of our observation by introducing some social factors that are believed to
influence our language behavior in a social conte+t. Among these factors,
some ma5or ones include 1' classE &' genderE 8' ageE $' ethnic identityE ='
education bac(ground, !' occupation, and @' religious belief. In our discussion
below, we are going to focus on the first two factors and show their impact
upon one's language use.
In the middle of 1!"s, 0illiam 6abov, a famous sociolinguist, conducted
a rather meticulous survey at several departments in the <ity of /ew Cor(.
)he ob5ective for having this sociolinguistic investigation was to e+amine the
relationship between spea(ers' social status and their phonological
-ARIATIONS )he results of this investigation were reported in *he +ocial
+tratification of English in ,ew -ork .it" #1!!', which has now become a
classical wor( in sociolinguistics. And it turned out that class and style were
two ma5or factors influencing the spea(ers' choice of one phonological variant
over another. *ased on these findings, 6abor e+plicitly delineated the patterns
of stratification by class and style and, more importantly, successfully
introduced class as an indispensable sociolinguistic variable. .ver since its
publication in the middle of the 1!"s, this research paradigm has become
the mainstream in sociolinguistics and alternatively termed as "the -uantitative
paradigm, sociolinguistics proper, variationist studies, urban dialectology and
secular linguistics" #,esthrie 1$% $""E*olton 1&%1$E ,ilroy 1$%$:=E
3asold 1 91";'.
?ver the past decades, in addition to the study of linguistic variation
produced by class, the investigation of gender effects upon one's linguistic
behavior has also been proven to be a rich resource for e+amining the
correlation of language and society, though the awareness of this issue
seems to be an older story which can be traced bac( at least to over two
millenniums ago. 3or instance, many precious e+amples reflecting gender
differences in speech have been documented in some Ancient 7ree( dramas
#7regersen 1@'. /onetheless, it is generally believed that the real
sociolinguistic in-uiry of this issue began with Lobin 6a(offMs #1@8'
retrospective study of gender differences in American .nglish in the early
1@"s #cf. 1esperson 1&&'. Inspired by this very seminal article, the following
years have seen a lot of publications either to support or challenge the
hypotheses 6a(off put forward concerning the linguistic behavior of females in
the American society. 0hat these hypotheses suggest is that there e+ists a
,O)EN REGISTER in the language that ta(es on the following features%
1' women use more "fancy" color terms such as mauve and beigeE
&' women use less powerful curse wordsE
8' women use more intensifiers such as terrible and awfulE
$' women use more tag -uestionsE
=' women use more statement -uestions li(e I>inner will be ready
at seven oMcloc(FJ#with a rising intonation at the end'E
!' women's linguistic behavior is more indirect and, hence, more polite
than men's.
,ore importantly, it is argued that these differences in language use are
brought about by nothing less than women's place in society. )he underlying
point for this argument is rather meaningful. 4uppose that we are not satisfied
with some practices in language use, say, LINGUISTIC SE*IS), and want to
reform the language. )hen, the first thing we need do is to try to change the
society. *ecause, as 6a(off correctly suggests, it is not language itself but
women' s place in society that ma(es people linguistically behave in that way.
Bence, the relationship between language and society can be further
illustrated by studying -uestions li(e this% Is a certain linguistic form more
li(ely to be used by females than by their male peersF If so, why should it be
soF )he natural connection of this type also e+plains why the study of gender
differences has become an ever-lasting focus in sociolinguistics ever since
the 1@"s.
7.= ,hat $hould #e Ano# @ore a/out $ociolingui$tic$%
4ociolinguistics, as an interdisciplinary study of language use, attempts to
show the relationship between language and society. ,ore specifically, in this
discipline we have two important things to thin( about% structural things and
their uses in a sociocultural conte+t. 4imilarly, when we are conducting a
sociolinguistic study of language use, we have two big issues to deal with.
3irst, we want to show how these two factors are related to each other, and
second, we attempt to (now why it should be so. 2ut another way, we want to
loo( at structural things by paying attention to language use in a social
conte+tE on the other hand, we try to understand sociological things of society
by e+amining linguistic phenomena of a spea(ing community.
)hese dual ob5ectives ma(e this new type of linguistic study as an
interdisciplinary, or multidisciplinary enterprise in nature #*olton H Awo(
1&'. )he pluralism and diversity of the field, on the other hand, ma(es it
difficult to delineate the scope of this enterprise. ?ver lapping with other types
of scientific research is another stri(ing property we can observe in a
sociolinguistic study. Aeeping this fact in mind, if we are prepared to e+amine
the structure of the whole sociolinguistic edifice, we can either classify
sociolinguistic studies by means of a hierarchical division, or alternatively, by
means of an orientational categorization. 3or convenience of discussion, we
choose the latter approach to continue our survey of the relationship between
language and society, which could be further specified as two related but not
identical perspectives of observation identified as a SOCIOLINGUISITIC
STU'Y O( SOCIETY and a SOCIOLINGUISTIC STU'Y O( LANGUAGE,
respectively.
If we want to (now more about a given society or community by
e+amining the linguistic behavior of its members, we are doing a
sociolinguistic study of society. )hat is, we are doing sociolinguistics at a
macro level of investigation. If we turn to 3asold #1:$' again, we may say
that at this level of discussion things that we are interested in include
bilingualism or multilingualism, language attitudes, language
choice, language maintenance and shift, language planning and
standardization, vernacular language education, to name some important
ones
?n the other hand, if we want to (now more about some linguistic
variations in language use by turning to potential sociocultural factors for a
description and e+planation, we are doing a sociolinguistic study of language.
<onse-uently, we are more interested in e+amining micro linguistic
phenomena such as structural variants, address forms, gender differences,
discourse analysis, 2idgin and <reole languages, and other more language
related issues. )he interested reader can find more detailed discussions
concerning some of these heated sociolinguistic issues in Cang #1::, 1",
11, 1!, &"""'
7.; ,hat i@plication$ can #e get 0ro@ $ociolingui$tic$%
)he past decades have witnessed a rapid development in sociolinguistics
and the findings in this field have greatly enriched our understanding of the
relationship between language and society. Along with the gradual maturity
and acceptance of this school of linguistics, there has been an ever growing
possibility for us to have a new daughter discipline called "applied
sociolinguistics" #)rudgill 1:$'. 4ome more successful practices of this
attempt have been found in language classrooms, law courts, and clinical
settings, respectively.
3irst, we' 11 have a loo( at sociolinguistics in language classrooms. *ut
before we ta(e up this issue, we'd better raise a -uestion li(e this% 0hat is
wrong with the traditional perspective in language teachingF *y as(ing a
-uestion li(e this, we are in fact ma(ing a choice between training our
students as GRA))ARIANS and training them as ACTI-E LANGUAGE
USERS )his contrast reflects two different views of philosophy in language
teaching. 3or the traditional school, "language learning is treated as a process
of ac-uiring (nowledge, li(e studying history or mathematics. )he end result is
that learners will (now something about the language in the same way a
linguist does, but will (now little about the language used by others" #*erns,
1"% 8$&'. 0e witnessed, however, a change in language teaching in the
middle of the 1@"s when Byme' s theory of CO))UNICATI-E
CO)&ETENCE was introduced into the field as an antagonism to the
traditional philosophy in language teaching. <onse-uently, as the name of
this theory suggested, language teachers began to pay more attention to the
-uestion of how to train their students as active and successful language
users in a real language conte+t. As far as language teaching is concerned,
sociolinguistics is believed to have provided some important contributions
which can further be summarized as follows #*erns 1"%88'%
a' 4ociolinguistics has contributed to a change of emphasis in the
content of language teachingE
b' it has also contributed to innovations in materials and activities for
the classroomE
c' it has contributed to a fresh loo( at the nature of language
development and useE
d' it has contributed to a more fruitful research in this field.
4econd, let us have a loo( at sociolinguistics in law courts. )he in-uiry of
the relationship between language and law has opened another avenue for
the application of sociolinguistic findings to some more practical issues in
society. 4ome fruitful practices of this attempt have been observed in this
respect. 3or instance, the important role of linguists in the analysis of
language data gathered as evidence in law courts has been recognized by
more and more people. ,eanwhile, the 5oint wor( by sociolinguists and
legislators in the preparation of some legal documents is proven to be helpful
to increase the readability of this te+t and therefore appreciated #cf. 3asold
1 9 1" ; '. ?n the other hand, investigations of language use in a law
court bac(ground also have revealed some interesting results which, in turn,
greatly enrich our understanding of the relationship between the concept of
power and language in use #?'*arr H At(ins 1:"'.
6astly, we turn to sociolinguistics in clinic settings. )he analysis of
dialogues between doctors and patients in a hospital conte+t has also
attracted the interest of some researchers in sociolinguistics. 4imilar to our
last case in the law court, the study of this type is also employed to illustrate
things such as how the concept of power is encoded and decoded through
language use in a hierarchical society and what pragmatically related patterns
and forces in reference and implication are involved in a speech event li(e
this. 3or this reason, a lot of efforts have been ta(en in a sociolinguistic
analysis of discourse patterns in a clinic setting. *ecause it is believed that in
a highly hierarchically ordered communicative situation li(e this, through the
study of language use by doctor and patient# more implications can be
obtained in terms of the impact of some sociological factors upon the linguistic
behavior of the members of a speech community.
7= Su@@ary
In our discussion above, we have introduced some important theories and
practices in a sociocultural in-uiry of linguistic issues. As we have indicated, a
more systematic pursuit of this (ind did not start until the 1!"s, with the
occurrence of sociolinguistics as a new force in the study of language. After
almost $" years' development, this innovative movement has gained much
momentum and vitality by incorporating the insights from other relevant
sciences and has gradually secured its position as a legitimate pursuit in
linguistics #cf. <homs(y 1='. ?n the other hand, as has been shown above,
the study of the relationship between language, culture, and society is a rather
intriguing tas(. ?ne of the difficulties observed in this attempt is the diversity
in sub5ect matters. )he interdisciplinary nature of this pursuit re-uires a
satisfactory mastery of (nowledge in relevant fields such as anthropology,
social psychology, sociology, ethnology, and cognitive sciences #cf. Losch
1@= H 1@@' on the part of its researchers and practitioners. )herefore, we
fully understand that what is presented above is only a small part of the whole
edifice. ,uch of its beauty and fascination is still there waiting for the
conscious and courageous e+plorer to search and discover. )hat said, we
suggest that the interested students go to the bibliographic part of this chapter
for more information concerning their further study in this respect.
(urther Reading
*erlin, *rent and 2aul Aay 1191!;./asic .olor *erms% *heir
0niversalit" and Evolution. *er(eley% Dniversity of <alifornia 2ress.
*olton, Aingsley H Belen Awo( #eds.' 1&. +ociolinguistics *oda"%
#nternational 1erspectives 6ondon: Loutledge
>ownes, 0illiam 1:. 2anguage and +ociet". &
nd
.dition. <ambridge%
<ambridge Dniversity 2ress.
3aslod, Lalph 191";. *he +ociolinguistics of 2anguage. ?+ford%
*lac(well.
Leadings in the +ociolog" of 2anguage Barris, Loy H )albot 1. )aylor
1@ 91:;. 6andmar(s in
3ishman, 1oshua 1!:. Leading in the 4ociology of 6anguage. )he
Bague% ,outon.
3irth, 1ohn 2. 1=". 2ersonality and 6anguage in 4ociety. *he
+ociological 3eview, $&%8@-=&. Leprinted in 1. 2. 3irth 1=@, 1apers in
2inguistics 18$ - 1=1, 1" - &1=. 6ondon% ?+ford Dniversity 2ress.
7iglioli, 2. 2#ed' 1@&.2anguage and +ocial .onte4t% +elected 3eadings.
Barmondsworth, .nglish% 2enguin.
Barris, Loy H )albot 1. )aylor 1@ 91:;. 2andmarks in 2inguistic
*hought #% *he %estern *radition from +ocrates to +aussure. 6ondon
Loutledge.
Bymes, >ell 1!&. )he .thnography of 4pea(ing. In ). 7ladwin H 0illiam
4turtevant # eds. ', Anthropolog" and Human /ehavior,
18 - =8. 0ashington, ><% Anthropological 4ociety of 0ashington.
Bymes, >ell #ed.' 1!$. 2anguage in .ulture and +ociet"% A reader in
2inguistics and Anthropolog". /ew Cor(% Barper H Low.
1espersen, ?tto 1&&. 6anguage% #ts ,ature, 5evelopment and 6rigin.
6ondon% 7eorge Allen H Dnwin.
6abov, 0illiam 1!!. *he +ocial +tratification of English in -ork .it".
0ashington, ><% <enter for Applied 6inguistics.
6a(off, 7eorge H ,. 1. 1ohnson 1:". 7etaphors %e 2ive /".
<hicago% Dniversity of <hicago 2ress.
Losch, .leanor. 1@@. Buman <ategorization. In /. 0arren #ed', +tudies in
.ross&cultural 1s"cholog", Nol I, 1-$6ondon% Academic 2ress.
4ampson, 7eoffrey 1:". +chools of 2inguistics: .ompetition and
Evolution. 6ondon% Butchinson.