Amsterdam University College

Applying Sociological Theory to Linguistic

Observations: How the Use of Language
Contributes to the Construction of the Self and
Reveals Power Structures Within Society
Classical and Modern Sociological Thought
May 2019
By Chiara Thunnissen

One of the most fulfilling moments as an interdisciplinary student is the moment you come
to realize the ways in which two – perhaps on the surface distinct – fields of interest are
connected and relate to each other. As a Liberal Arts and Science student, I seek to discover
the intersections of individual disciplines and I always find myself excited when I am able to
deepen my understanding of one field of study by applying the knowledge I have gained in
another university course. It was in this spirit that during my second semester at the
Amsterdam University College I observed the many ways in which the discipline of
linguistics and the discipline of sociology complement each other. This applies in particular
to the final weeks, in which I learned about human interaction and the theory of practice.
Practice theory is concerned with the ways in which humans interact within and according to
social structures (Ritzer & Stepninsky, 2014, p. 527-528). Indeed, the use of language in
social interactions can be seen as a form of practice as well. The relationship between
language and the social word is a two-way process of influence: language affects the way in
which we perceive the social world around us, and simultaneously the structure of society
has an effect on the way we speak (Fromkin, Rodman & Hyams, 2017, p. 22-26). The use of
language can be analyzed from the perspective of numerous sociologists, but in this essay, I
will limit myself to the theories of Erving Goffman and Pierre Bourdieu. First, I will discuss
the way language is used in the construction of identity and the presentation of the Self. I
will incorporate a sociolinguistic study and link it to Goffman’s concept of impression
management and Bourdieu’s ideas on distinction. Then, I will use Bourdieu’s theory on class
structure to explain how language can reveal the power structures within society and I will
apply his ideas to two examples that will illustrate how class dominance affects the way we
speak.

In ‘The Presentation of the Self in Everyday Life’ (1956), Erving Goffman described the Self
as the product of the way a person presents himself and the way others perceive his
 Amsterdam University College

presentation (Goffman, [1956] p. 286-290). In his work, Goffman compared the world of
social interaction to a stage: the space where performers present themselves to an audience
like in a theatre (Goffman, [1956], p. 290). According to Goffman (1956), the Self is
constructed through social interaction as people are constantly evaluating the impressions
given to them in order to gain information of the situation in which they find themselves at
that time. Consequently, the way in which people present themselves can be redirected in
order to achieve the desired impression of the Self (Goffman, [1956], p. 286-288). This is
what Goffman calls Impression Management (1956, p. 288). Preserving Goffman’s analogy of
the theatre and the Stage, language could then be seen as the Script, utilized by performers to
construct a convincing impression of their identity. How we speak, the words we use, our
pronunciation of words, all those things have an influence on the impression of Self.
Language thus forms a big part in the construction of identity and can be used as a tool in
impression management.
That the choices with regards to language play a big part in managing how others
perceive our Self is illustrated in a sociolinguistic study by Mary Bucholtz (1999). In this
study, Bucholtz examines how language as a practice contributes to the construction of the
identity of high school teens. She is specifically interested in the identity of the Nerd.
Bucholtz analyzes several dialogues between teenagers who identify as nerds. She finds that
teenagers must adopt a specific speaking style in order to be accepted as a Nerd. For instance,
teenagers must have a very rich vocabulary and use complicated sentence structure
(Bucholtz, 1999). Interestingly, the style of the dialogue also appears to be a determining
factor in the preservation of the identity as a Nerd when Bucholtz observes that many of the
dialogues she observes are initiated with a similar purpose, namely to challenge the
knowledge of the participants of the conversation. The conclusions of Bucholtz’ study
resonate well with what Goffman wrote in book on his concept of the Self (1956) as also in
these particular instances, high school teenagers preserve their identity by using a language
style that is in accordance with the impression they want others to have of them.
Another thing Bucholtz (1999) mentioned in her study on the construction of
identity of high school nerds is that in the nerd-community appropriating expressions of the
more popular groups and thus “talking like one of the cool kids” is generally not accepted.
Bucholtz also wrote that in its essence, the identity of the Nerd is based upon the rejection
of being “cool”. Bucholtz referred to this as negative identity practice, since it revolves around
“what someone is not” (Bucholtz, 1999). This made me think of the concept of distinction,
introduced by sociologist Pierre Bourdieu (Ritzer & Stepninsky, 2014, p. 524-526). Bourdieu
believed that “the driving force of human behavior is the search for distinction” (Bourdieu in
Ritzer & Stepninsky, 2014, p. 526). In his work, called ‘Distinction’ Bourdieu wrote that the
cultural value that is assigned to a specific taste is determined by the position it obtains
 Amsterdam University College

within the framework constituted by the structures within society (Ritzer & Stepninsky,
2014, p. 524-526). The preference with regards to language style can also be seen as an
expression of taste. Bourdieu described that the similarities and differences in taste - and
thus in language style - allow people to classify themselves (Ritzer & Stepninsky, 2014, p.
524-526). Therefore Bourdieu would say that it is by choosing to speak with difficult words
and rejecting “cool” expressions, that the teenagers in Bucholtz’ study (1999) to classify
themselves as Nerds.
Who, then, is responsible for deciding what is “cool” and what is not? According to
Bourdieu, the most powerful class, which has to access to the greatest amount of all forms of
capital, is responsible for imposing the societal norms that others must follow (Bourdieu,
[1986], p 5-7). Language and the use of language reveal the class structure and power
relations within society (Fromkin, Rodman & Hyams, 2017, p. 277-287). In case of the
Bucholtz study (1999), the more popular teenagers, who had the largest social network and
thus the most social capital (Bourdieu, [1986], p. 7-8), decided what was considered “cool”.
Besides this example, there are more cases to be found that reflect how language reveals the
underlying power structures of society. In the following paragraph, I will discuss two other
examples that illustrate this observation.
The first example concerns what we consider “the right way to speak”. Due to the
ever-changing nature of language, linguistic variation around the globe is endless (Fromkin,
Rodman & Hyams, 2017, p. 359-361). According to Fromkin, Rodman, and Hyams (2017) in
the branch of linguistics, each rule-governed form of speaking is considered a language.
Linguists make no distinction between dialects and official languages and therefore there
exists no language form that is considered superior (Fromkin, Rodman & Hyams, 2017, p.
269-277). In the social word, however, some ways of speaking are clearly preferred over
others. In school, for instance, children learn Standard American English. (SAE). Speakers
that do not speak this form of American English are often considered less intelligent
(Fromkin, Rodman & Hyams, 2017, p. 269-280). However, it should be noted that the fact
that Standard American English is seen as the “correct” speaking style is an ideology
imposed by the powerful classes that regulate the forms of education. Within the structure of
the language itself there is no reason to be found why this form should be the standard form
of American English.
The second example illustrates how power relations and class dominance is reflected
in languages that emerged during the colonial period. In the colonies, the two opposing
groups – the colonizers and the colonized – had to create a new simplified language that
allowed them to communicate. These relatively new languages are called pidgins (Fromkin,
Rodman & Hyams, 2017, p. 292-295). Interestingly, the grammar and substrate of a pidgin
are usually derived from the native language of the dominant group, in this case, the
 Amsterdam University College

colonizers. The dominated group only provides some vocabulary (Fromkin, Rodman &
Hyams, 2017, p. 292-295). As a result the pidgin will usually resemble the language of the
dominating group the most and consequently the colonizers will have an advantage in
conversation. It is thus yet again the most powerful class that imposes its preferences upon
the classes it dominates. Many languages today still reflect their colonial history and the
power relations that existed back then.

In this essay, I have sought to apply the insights I have gained in sociological theories to
linguistics observations by applying the idea of language as practice. I have illustrated that
language is used as a tool in the preservation of the Self and I have suggested that language
could thus be seen as a Script used by the performers. Moreover, language also functions as a
means to differentiate oneself from others and it therefore plays a role in Bourdieu’s idea of
class distinction. Finally, language can reveal a lot about the power structures within society,
as illustrated by two real-life examples I discussed. In conclusion, language is a crucial aspect
of human interaction and is affected by social structures in many ways. By taking a linguistics
and a sociology course at the same time I was reminded that the theories of a specific
discipline are never limited to that discipline alone. I will always remain excited to discover
new ways in which I can apply sociological theories to other university courses and to my
everyday life.
 Amsterdam University College

Bibliography

Bourdieu, P. [1986]. The Forms of Capital. First published in J. Richardson (Ed.) (1986). Handbook of
Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education. New York, NY: Greenwood, 241-258.
Retrieved from https://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/fr/
bourdieu-forms-capital.htm

Bucholtz, M. (1999) "Why Be Normal?": Language and Identity Practices in a

Community of Nerd Girls. Language in Society, 28(2), 203-223. Retrieved from
https://www.jstor.org/stable/4168925

Goffman, E. [1956]. The Preservation of the Self in Everyday Life. In J. Farganis (Ed.)
(2014). Readings in Social Theory; The Classic Tradition to Post-Modernism. New York, NY:
McGraw-Hill

Fromkin, V., Rodman, R. & Hyams, N. (2017). An Introduction to Language. Boston, MA: Cengage.

Ritzer G. & Stepninsky, J. (2014). Sociological Theory. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education