English in Society

Contents
Glossary................................................................................................................................................... 4 1. The History of English....................................................................................................................... 6 1.1. 1.2. 1.3. 1.4. 1.5. 2. Old English (450 1100 AD)...................................................................................................... 6 Middle English (1100 1500).................................................................................................... 6 Modern English (1500 1800) .................................................................................................. 6 Late Modern English ................................................................................................................. 6 Contemporary English .............................................................................................................. 6

Language in Society.......................................................................................................................... 7 2.1. 2.2. 2.3. 2.4. 2.5. Variation .................................................................................................................................. 7 Scientific Investigation.............................................................................................................. 8 Language and Society ............................................................................................................... 8 Sociolinguistics and the Sociology of Language ......................................................................... 9 Methodological Concerns ......................................................................................................... 9

3.

Language and Social Class .............................................................................................................. 10 3.1. 3.2. 3.3. 3.4. New York City ......................................................................................................................... 11 Norwich and Reading ............................................................................................................. 11 Dialects, and Varieties ............................................................................................................ 12 Language and Style................................................................................................................. 13

4.

Language and Gender .................................................................................................................... 13 4.1. 4.2. Sex and Gender ...................................................................................................................... 14 Man-made language? ............................................................................................................. 14

5.

Solidarity and Politeness ................................................................................................................ 16 5.1. 5.2. 5.3. Tu and Vous ........................................................................................................................... 16 Address Terms........................................................................................................................ 18 Politeness............................................................................................................................... 21

6.

Talk and Action .............................................................................................................................. 21 6.1. 6.2. Speech Acts ............................................................................................................................ 21 Cooperation ........................................................................................................................... 22

6.3. 7.

Conversation .......................................................................................................................... 23

Words and Culture ......................................................................................................................... 25 7.1. Whorf..................................................................................................................................... 25

8.

Linguists......................................................................................................................................... 25 8.1. Noam Chomsky (1928 present) ............................................................................................ 25

9.

Keeping in Touch............................................................................................................................ 26 9.1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 26 The birth of the mobile phone ........................................................................................ 26 Malta s linguistic landscape ............................................................................................ 26 Telecommunications systems in Malta............................................................................ 27

9.1.1. 9.1.2. 9.1.3. 9.2.

Politics of Telephone Calls ...................................................................................................... 27 Powers of the Telephone ................................................................................................ 27 Perils of the Telephone ................................................................................................... 27 Structure of the Telephone call ....................................................................................... 27 Answering machines ....................................................................................................... 28 Structure of telephone conversation: telephone openings .............................................. 28 Telephone closings ......................................................................................................... 28

9.2.1. 9.2.2. 9.2.3. 9.2.4. 9.2.5. 9.2.6. 9.3.

Research Methodology and Sample Profile............................................................................. 28 Qualitative and Quantitative methods of research .......................................................... 28 Qualitative study ............................................................................................................ 28 Quantitative study .......................................................................................................... 29 Eligible Respondents ....................................................................................................... 29 Owning a Mobile Phone.................................................................................................. 29 Sample Profile ................................................................................................................ 29 Mobile phone ownership ................................................................................................ 30 Why do the Maltese own a mobile phone? ..................................................................... 30

9.3.1. 9.3.2. 9.3.3. 9.3.4. 9.3.5. 9.3.6. 9.3.7. 9.3.8. 9.4.

Telephone Traffic ................................................................................................................... 31 Making phone calls across cultures ................................................................................. 31 Do the Maltese enjoy phoning and being phoned? ......................................................... 31 Gender and age factors ................................................................................................... 31 Whether the Maltese enjoy receiving phone calls ........................................................... 31 Why respondents enjoy being called............................................................................... 31

9.4.1. 9.4.2. 9.4.3. 9.4.4. 9.4.5.

9.4.6. 9.4.7. 9.4.8. 9.4.9. 9.4.10. 9.5.

Why respondents do not enjoy receiving phone calls ...................................................... 32 Why respondents phone mobile numbers ...................................................................... 33 Duration of phone calls ................................................................................................... 33 Talk time by mobile phone owners ................................................................................. 33 Do females talk more than males? .................................................................................. 33

Openings and Closings of Telephone Conversations................................................................ 34 A Canonical telephone opening ...................................................................................... 34 How do the Maltese answer the phone? ......................................................................... 34 Do conversational openings vary when using Fixed Fixed and Mobile Mobile lines? .. 34 How addressees usually answer calls on a fixed line and on a mobile .............................. 35 Caller self-identification .................................................................................................. 35 Summons Apology .......................................................................................................... 35 Termination of telephone calls ....................................................................................... 35 Addressee Hegemony ..................................................................................................... 35

9.5.1. 9.5.2. 9.5.3. 9.5.4. 9.5.5. 9.5.6. 9.5.7. 9.5.8. 9.6.

Mobile Phone Etiquette.......................................................................................................... 36 Politeness ....................................................................................................................... 36 Linguistic etiquette in telephone conversations .............................................................. 36 Inappropriate phoning times .......................................................................................... 36 Mobile phone etiquette .................................................................................................. 37 Mobile phone free zones ................................................................................................ 37 Where are you? .............................................................................................................. 37

9.6.1. 9.6.2. 9.6.3. 9.6.4. 9.6.5. 9.6.6. 9.7.

SMS Messages ........................................................................................................................ 37 Do all Maltese contact one another by SMS messages? .................................................. 37 Languages used by respondents when writing a SMS ...................................................... 38 Acceptable waiting time frames for reply to text messages ............................................. 38

9.7.1. 9.7.2. 9.7.3. 9.8.

Teenagers and the Mobile Phone ........................................................................................... 38 Reasons why teenagers own a mobile phone .................................................................. 38 Do teenagers enjoy being phoned? ................................................................................. 38 Reasons why respondents send SMS messages............................................................... 38

9.8.1. 9.8.2. 9.8.3. 9.9. 10.

Conclusion.............................................................................................................................. 38 Bilingualism and Bilingual Education .......................................................................................... 39 Simultaneous bilingualism .................................................................................................. 40

10.1.

10.2.

Sequential bilingualism ....................................................................................................... 41

Glossary
Term Bilingual Code Definition When a person has native-like abilities in two languages. The system of communication employed when two or more people communicate with each other in speech. In most cases that code will be something we may also want to call a language. When one shifts back and forth between two languages when conversing, thus actually using a third code which draws on these two languages. Knowing how to use a language appropriately. Controversial. A language which is no longer in use. Any divergence from Classical English. What the members of a particular society speak. This, however, in any society, can take many very different forms. It is a communal, yet abstract possession. The important matters of language and linguistic behaviour, as according to Chomsky. These concern the learnability of all languages, the characteristics they share and the rules and principles that speakers apparently follow in constructing and interpreting sentences. What we know about a language. A way of referring to certain changes in a language and their prescriptive evaluation. The most common way that a word can be said to be corrupted is the change of its spelling through errors and gradual changes in comprehension, transcription, and hearing. What we know about a language in practice.

Code-switching

Communicative competence Contentious Dead language Debased English Language

Language universals

Linguistic competence Linguistic corruption

Linguistic performance Macro-sociolinguistics

Micro-sociolinguistics Plurilingual Sanskrit Society When a speaker uses more than one language. The mother of Indo-European languages. Hindi is derived from it. Any group of people who are drawn together for a certain purpose or purposes. Understanding what a language is, how it is learnable and what it tells us about the human mind.

Theoretical linguistics

Morphology Langue Parole Contrastive distribution Emic Etic Language universals The essential properties and various typologies of languages, the factors that make languages learnable by humans but not by nonhumans, and the conditions that govern such matters as linguistic change. This is a major linguistic concern. Of an English accent, pronouncing the letter r wherever it appears, as in bar (/b r/) and bard or barred (/b rd/). Of an English accent: not pronouncing the written letter "r" unless it is followed by a vowel. The study of commonsense knowledge and practical reasoning. When individuals consciously try to speak like people they regard as socially superior but actually go too far and overdo the particular linguistic behaviour they are attempting to match. The approved pronunciation of British English; originally based on the King's English as spoken at public schools and at Oxford and Cambridge Universities (and widely accepted elsewhere in Britain); until recently it was the pronunciation of English used in British broadcasting.

Rhotic

Non-rhotic

Ethnomethodology Hypercorrection

RP (received pronunciation)

1. The History of English

Contemporary English is the result of a number of different stages in the evolution of the English language. The history of English is conventionally, if perhaps too neatly, divided into five periods usually called Old English (or Anglo-Saxon), Middle English, Modern English, Late Modern English and Contemporary English.

1.1.

Old English (450 1100 AD)

The earliest period begins with the migration of certain Germanic tribes from the continent to Britain in the fifth century A.D. The invading Germanic tribes spoke similar languages, which in Britain developed into what we now call Old English. Old English did not sound or look like English today. Native English speakers now would have great difficulty understanding Old English. Nevertheless, about half of the most commonly used words in Modern English have Old English roots. The words be, strong and water, for example, derive from Old English. Old English was spoken until around 1100.

1.2.

Middle English (1100 1500)

In 1066, William the Conqueror, the Duke of Normandy (part of modern France), invaded and conquered England. The new conquerors (called the Normans) brought with them a kind of French, which became the language of the Royal Court, and the ruling and business classes. For a period there was a kind of linguistic class division, where the lower classes spoke English and the upper classes spoke French. In the 14th century English became dominant in Britain again, but with many French words added. This language is called Middle English. It was the language of the great poet Chaucer (c13401400), but it would still be difficult for native English speakers to understand today.

1.3.

Modern English (1500 1800)

Towards the end of Middle English, a sudden and distinct change in pronunciation (the Great Vowel Shift) started, with vowels being pronounced shorter and shorter. From the 16th century the British had contact with many people from around the world. This, and the Renaissance of Classical learning, meant that many new words and phrases entered the language. The invention of printing also meant that there was now a common language in print. Books became cheaper and more people learned to read. Printing also brought standardization to English. Spelling and grammar became fixed, and the dialect of London, where most publishing houses were, became the standard. In 1604 the first English dictionary was published.

1.4.

Late Modern English

The main difference between Early Modern English and Late Modern English is vocabulary. Late Modern English has many more words, arising from two principal factors: firstly, the Industrial Revolution and technology created a need for new words; secondly, the British Empire at its height covered one quarter of the earth's surface, and the English language adopted foreign words from many countries.

1.5.

Contemporary English

The English language we make use of today. In everyday speaking, we nowadays find certain anomalies in English language. For example, the word cupboard is made up of two separate words: cup and

board . If taken literally, together these two words would not make sense if put together since a cup and a board have no direct connotation with a cabinet (another word for cupboard). This is due to the fact that over time the meanings of certain words may have changed and so nowadays wouldn t really make sense if taken literally. Another anomaly is the term unkept person which is a term used to describe someone who may be scruffy in appearance or attire. However, the literal opposite of this, i.e. kept person does not exist in English. In contemporary English we may also find some Old English words which have survived. For example the word werewolf which describes a person who changes into a wolf during a full moon. In Old English, the word were was the equivalent of man , thus werewolf may be translated into manwolf so as to show that this word has in fact survived all these years as it has kept its original meaning.

2. Language in Society
2.1. Variation
The language we use in everyday living is remarkably varied. No one speaks the same way all the time and people constantly exploit the subtle variations of the language they speak for a wide variety of purposes. The consequence is a kind of paradox: while many linguists would like to view any language as a homogenous entity and each speaker of that language as controlling only a single style, so that they can make the strongest possible generalisations, in actual fact that language will exhibit considerable variation, and single-style speakers will not be found. There is considerable variation in the speech of any one individual, but there are also definite bounds to that variation: no individual is free to do just exactly what he or she pleases so far as language is concerned. You cannot pronounce words any way you please, inflect or not inflect words such as nouns and verbs arbitrarily, or make drastic alterations in word order in sentences as the mood suits you. If you do any or all of these things, the results will be unacceptable, even gibberish. Individuals know the various limits (or norms) of variation in language, and that knowledge is both very precise and at the same time almost entirely unconscious. It is also difficult to explain how individual speakers acquire knowledge of these norms of linguistic behaviour. Much of what we find in linguistic behaviour will be explicable in terms of people seeking to negotiate, realise, or even reject identities through the use of language. In fact, as we will see, language is a profound indicator of identity, more potent by far than cultural artefacts such as dress, food choices and table manners. Some forces in society are stronger than others and produce real effects, among them linguistic effects that have consequences for the lives we live. Bourdieu (1991) thinks of languages as symbolic marketplaces in which some people have more control of the goods than others because certain languages or varieties have been endowed with more symbolic power than others and have therefore been given a greater value, e.g., standard languages, certain accents, a particular gendered style of speaking, a specific type of discourse.

Hudson (1996) particularly points out the conformity we exhibit in using irregular forms, e.g., went for the past tense of go, men as the plural of man, and best as the superlative of good. This irregular morphology is somewhat inefficient; all it shows is our conformity to rules established by others.

2.2.

Scientific Investigation

The scientific study of language, its uses, and the linguistic norms that people observe must attempt to arrive at an understanding of the general principles of organisation that surely must exist in both language and the uses of language. Such an attempt led Saussure (1959) to distinguish between langue (group knowledge of language) and parole (individual use of language); Bloomfield (1933) to stress the importance of contrastive distribution (since pin and bin are different words in English, /p/ and /b/ must be contrastive units in the structure of English); Pike (1967) to distinguish between emic and etic features in language (/p/ and /b/ are contrastive, therefore emic, units, but the two pronunciations of p in pin and spin are not contrastive, therefore etic); and Sapir (1921) and, much later, Chomsky (1965) to stress the distinction between the surface characteristics of utterances and the deep realities of linguistic form behind these surface characteristics.

2.3.

Language and Society

There are several possible relationships between language and society. (a) Social structure may either influence or determine linguistic structure and/or behaviour. Certain evidence may be adduced to support this view: the age-grading phenomenon whereby young children speak differently from older children and, in turn, children speak differently from mature adults; studies which show that the varieties of language that speakers use reflect such matters as their regional, social or ethnic origin and possibly even their gender; and other studies which show that particular ways of speaking, choice of words, and even rules for conversing are in fact highly determined by social requirements. (b) Linguistic structure and/or behaviour may either influence or determine social structure. This is the view behind the Whorfian hypothesis, the claims of Bernstein, and many of those who argue that language rather than speakers of these language can be sexist . (c) Language and society may influence each other (bi-directional influence). One variant of this approach is that this influence is dialectical nature, a Marxist view put forward by Dittmar (1976), who argues that speech behaviour and social behaviour are in a state of constant interaction and that material living conditions are an important factor in the relationship. (d) The assumption of no relationship at all between linguistic structure and social structure and that each is independent of the other. Although there might be some such relationship, present attempts to characterise it are essentially premature, given what we know about both language and society. This variant view appears to be the one that Chomsky himself holds: he prefers to develop an asocial approach being, in his view, logically prior. Gumperz (1971) has observed that sociolinguistics is an attempt to find correlations between social structure and linguistic structure and to observe any changes that occur. Chambers (2002) is even more

direct: Sociolinguistics is the study of the social uses of language, and the most productive studies in the four decades of sociolinguistic research have emanated from determining the social evaluation of linguistic variants . Holmes (1992) says that The sociolinguist s aim is to move towards a theory which provides a motivated account of the way language is used in a community and of the choices people make when they use a language.

2.4.

Sociolinguistics and the Sociology of Language

Hudson (1996) has described sociolinguistics (or micro-sociolinguistics) as the study of language in relation to society , whereas the sociology of language (or macro-sociolinguistics) as the study of society in relation to language . In other words, in sociolinguistics we study language and society in order to find out as much as we can about what kind of thing language is, and in the sociology of language we reverse the direction of our interest. Coulmas says that Micro-sociolinguistics investigates how social structure influences the way people talk and how language varieties and patterns of use correlate with social attributes such as class, sex and age. Macro-sociolinguistics, on the other hand, studies what societies do with their language, that is, attitudes and attachments that account for the functional distribution of functional speech forms in society, language shift, maintenance, and replacement, the delimitation and interaction of speech communities.

2.5.

Methodological Concerns

As part of an attempt to work out a set of principles, or axioms, which sociolinguistic investigation should follow, Bell (1976), drawing extensively on the work of Labov, has suggested eight as worthy of consideration: i. The cumulative principle: The more we know about a language, the more we can find out about it, and we should not be surprised if our search for new knowledge takes us into new areas of study and into areas in which scholars from other disciplines are already working. The uniformation principle: The linguistic processes which we observe to be taking place around us are the same as those which have operated in the past, so that there can be no clear break between synchronic (descriptive and temporary) matters and diachronic (historical) ones. The principle of convergence: The value of new data for confirming or interpreting old findings is directly proportional to the differences in the ways in which the new data are gathered; particularly useful are linguistic data gathered through procedures needed in other areas of scientific investigation. The principle of subordinate shift: When speakers of a non-standard or subordinate variety of language (e.g. a dialect) are asked direct questions about that variety, their responses will shift in an irregular way toward or away from the standard variety (e.g. the standard language), enabling investigators to collect valuable evidence concerning such matters as varieties, norms and change.

ii.

iii.

iv.

v.

vi.

vii.

viii.

The principle of style shifting: There are no single-style speakers of a language, because each individual controls and uses a variety of linguistic styles and no one speaks in exactly the same way in all circumstances. The principle of attention: Styles of speech can be ordered along a single dimension measured by the amount of attention speakers are giving to their speech, so that the more aware they are of what they are saying, the more formal will the style be. The vernacular principle: The style which is most regular in its structure and in its relation to the history of the language is the vernacular, the relaxed, spoken style in which the least conscious attention is being paid to speech. The principle of formality: Any systematic observation of speech defines a context in which some conscious attention will be paid to that speech, so that it will be difficult to observe the genuine vernacular . This brings about observers' paradox (coined by Labov).

Labov (1972) points out that the aim of linguistic research is to find out how people talk when they are not being systematically observed, but the data are available only through systematic observation. Somehow speakers must have their attention diverted away from the fact that they are being observed so that the vernacular can emerge. This can happen when speakers become emotional. Labov found that a question like Have you been in a situation where you were in serious danger of being killed? nearly always produces a shift of style away from careful speech towards the vernacular, thus providing the linguist with the kinds of data being sought. The above principles are fundamental to studies in language variation.

3. Language and Social Class

The usual kind of data collection device is a questionnaire designed to elicit data illustrative of the use of the variables that are to be investigated. Since experience has shown that the different variants of a variable occur in different circumstances, the questionnaire must be designed to elicit data in different circumstances, as follows: 1. A casual situation, with sub-categories such as speech outside the formal interview, or conversation with a third party, or responses to general questions, or recall of childhood rhymes, or the narration of a story about feeling one s life to be in peril; 2. An interview situation; 3. The reading aloud of a story; 4. The reading aloud of a list of words and pairs of words like den and then. A questionnaire which elicits these various kinds of linguistic behaviours will cover very casual speech (casual situation), more formal speech (the interview situation), and the most formal speech (the reading tasks). A person who says shootin when explaining he at some point felt himself to be in mortal danger may well read the same word presented on a list as shooting, and someone who pronounces caught and court as homophones during an interview may well distinguish them in some way when the words appear in contrast with each other on a list of pairs of words.

Sociolinguistics has been concerned with the principal social dimensions, these being: social class, age, sex and style. Social class is the social dimension which has been most researched. Sociolinguistic classes have grouped individuals into social classes on the basis of factors such as education, occupation and income.

3.1.

New York City

One of Labov s earliest studies of linguistic variation was a small-scale investigation of the (r) variable in 1966. He believed that r-pronunciation (rhotic) after vowels was being reintroduced into New York from above, was a feature of the speech of younger people rather than of older people, was more likely to occur as the formality of speech increased, and would be more likely at the ends of words (floor) than before consonants (fourth). He set out to test these hypotheses by walking around three New York department stores (Saks, Macy s, and S. Klein), which were rather clearly demarcated by the social-class groups to which they catered (high, middle, and low, respectively), and asking the location of departments he knew to be situated on the fourth floor. When the shop assistant answered, Labov would seek a careful repetition of fourth floor by pretending not to hear the initial response. 32% and 31% of the personnel approached in Saks and Macy s respectively used r in all possible instances but only 17% did so in S. Klein; 79% of the seventy-one employees in S. Klein who were approached did not use r at all, but only 38% of the sixty-eight employees approached in Saks and 49% of the 125 employees approached in Macy s were r-less. Hence, r-pronunciation was favoured in Saks to a greater extent than in Macy s but much less so in S. Klein. Careful repetition of the utterance nearly always increased r-pronunciation, and pronunciation of the r was found more often in floor than in fourth. A further analysis of the data showed that in Saks it was older people who used r-pronunciation less. The data from S. Klein on this point were quite inconclusive, and the results from Macy s pointed in a direction completely opposite to that predicted: r-pronunciation actually increased with age. Labov, hence, concluded that members of the highest and lowest social groups tend not to change their pronunciation after it becomes fixed in adolescence but members of middle social groups sometimes do, possibly because of their social aspirations.

3.2.

Norwich and Reading

Trudgill s (1974) analysis of the variables (ng), (t), and (h) shows that the higher the social class the more frequent is the use of the [ ], [t], and [h] variants in words like singing, butter, and hammer rather than the corresponding [n], [ ], and variants. However, whereas members of the lower working class almost invariably say singin , they do not almost invariably say ammer. Moreover although members of the lower working class say singin , when they are asked to read a word list containing words ending in ing, they pronounce (ng) with the [ ] variant on the majority of occasions. The data also suggests that, so far as the (ng) variable is concerned, its variant use is related not only to social class but also to gender, with females showing a greater preference for [ ] than males, regardless of social-class membership.

In the case of glottal stop usage, what is socially significant is how frequently a person uses glottal stops in particular linguistic and social contexts. The use of glottal stops is socially stigmatized particularly in medial position e.g. bottle, butter.

3.3.

Dialects, and Varieties

This difference amongst dialects of English is the result of a linguistic change involving the loss of r preceding a consonant - this began centuries ago in south-east England and spread north and west. In the US the distribution of the post vocalic r reflects the history of settlement patterns of colonists from different parts of Britain and Ireland. Because the relevant linguistic factor for this change was the presence or the absence of a consonant in the immediately following word (e.g. car engine but they car key) what is known as a linking r appeared in non-rhotic accents before words beginning with a vowel (non-rhotic = non-r pronouncing). This pattern became somewhat generalized so that /r/ is inserted in many contexts before a vowel where it was never present. The 'idea of it' becomes 'the idear of it', 'Shah of Iran' becomes the 'Shar of Iran'. This phenomenon is known as the intrusive r. Each language exists in a number of varieties and is in one sense the sum of those varieties. Hudson (1996) defines a variety of a language as a set of linguistic items with similar distribution, a definition that allows us to say that all the following are varieties: Canadian English, London English, the English of football commentaries and so on. A variety can be something greater than a single language as well as something less, less even than something traditionally referred to as a dialect. Ferguson (1972) offers another definition of variety: anybody of human speech patterns which is sufficiently homogenous to be analysed 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. There is always some variation whether we consider a language as a whole, a dialect of that language, the speech of a group within that dialect, or, ultimately, each individual in that group. Such variation is a basic fact of linguistic life. Hymes (1974) has observed that language boundaries between groups are drawn not on the basis of the use of linguistic items alone, because attitudes and social meanings attached to those items also count. Any enduring social relationship or group may come to define itself by selection and/or creation of linguistic features, and a difference of accent may be as important at one boundary as a difference of grammar at another. Part of the creativity of users of languages lies in the freedom to determine what and how much linguistic difference matters. A large social barrier between the middle class and the working class may be reflected in the usage of some linguistic feature. In English, such features are more likely to be grammatical or syntactic such as the use of multiple negation: "I don t want no trouble". The result of a study of a grammatical variable in Detroit (US) and Norwich. This concerns the use of non-standard third person singular present tense verb forms without -s i.e. 'he go'. Verbs without s in Detroit and Norwich %

Class Upper middle class Lower middle class Upper working class Middle working class Lower working class

Detroit 1 10 57

Norwich 0 2 70 87

71

97

There is a close relationship between regional and social dialect in both the US and Britain. More specifically, it appears that working-class varieties are more localized. This is especially true in Britain, where those who are at the top of the social scale speak RP, an accent which does not betray the local origin of the speaker, the accent only betrays his /her social status. There is nothing like RP in the US where regional standards exist in different parts of the country. It is quite possible for highly educated speakers use marked local accents. Of course educated speakers in both countries would tend not to use non-standard grammatical features.

3.4.

Language and Style

The distribution of post vocalic r in New York City: The lower middle class show the most radical styleshifting, exceeding even the highest status group in their use of their post-vocalic r in the most formal style. This has been called the crossover pattern and is taken to be a manifestation of hyper-correction. The behaviour of the lower middle class is governed by their recognition of an exterior standard of correctness and their insecurity about their own speech. The use of post - vocalic r is seen by them as a prestige marker of the highest social group. In their attempt to adopt the norm of this group, they manifest their aspirations of upward social mobility but they overshoot the mark. By contrast (ing) shows no hyper correction and is not undergoing any linguistic change. While speakers no doubt pay attention to their speech in some circumstances more than others, they also make adjustments depending on whom they are talking to. In choosing which speech forms to use they assess not only the relative formality or informality of the context, but also the audience they are addressing.

4. Language and Gender

Women use more standard forms of language than men. One could look at women s speech to determine which forms carry prestige in a community, and conversely, at men s to find out which are stigmatised. One particularly influential book tried to identify a number of characteristics of women s speech which made women seem as they are tentative, hesitant, lacking in authority and trivial. Take for example the use of so-called question tags such as, It s a nice day isn t it? When a tag question is added into a sentence, it may have a number of meanings. A speaker can make an assertion without appearing

to be dogmatic leaving to open the possibility that others may not agree. It can also be used to check whether one s ideas are accepted, or to put forward a suggestion without making it sound like a command. Another feature which has been associated with women is the use of a high rising tone at the end of an utterance, especially when making statements, which make it sound as if a question is being asked. This too was seen as an indication of women s tentativeness and lack of confidence in putting forward their views. When empirical studies were actually conducted to test some of these claims, some found that men actually used more tag questions than women. Nevertheless, this discovery was not accompanied by any suggestion that men may be lacking in confidence. In practically all fields of research, it is women s differences from men and masculine norms which are seen as standing in need of some explanation.

4.1.

Sex and Gender

Men have used the observed differences between the sexes to justify their dominance and priority in the human scheme of things. Naming practices are social practices and symbolic of an order in which men come first, as can be seen in conventions following in expressions going back to Adam and Eve, such as man and woman (wife), husband and wife, boys and girls, etc. (a notable exception being ladies and gentlemen). Women are the second sex. Women have been typically excluded from media positions as announcers and broadcasters because it was thought that their voices lacked authority. Women were therefore seen as unsuitable for conveying information about serious topics such as the news.

4.2.

Man-made language?

Sexism in language can be demonstrated with many different kinds of evidence. Words for women have negative connotations, even where the corresponding male terms designate the same state or condition for men. Thus, spinster and bachelor both designate unmarried adults, but the female term has negative overtones to it. Because the word woman does not share the equal status with man, terms referring to women have undergone pejoration. If we examine pairs of gender-marked terms such as: a. lord/lady: While lord preserves its original meaning, lady is no longer used exclusively for women of high rank. b. baronet/dame: Baronet still retains its original meaning, but dame is used derogatorily, especially in American usage. c. Sir/Madam: Sir is still used as a title and a form of respect while a madam is one who runs a brothel. d. master/mistress: Master has not lost its original meaning, but mistress has come to have sexual connotations and no longer refers to the woman who has control over a household. e. king/queen: King has also kept its meaning, while queen has developed sexual connotations. f. wizard (warlock)/witch: Wizard has actually undergone semantic amelioration, or upgrading to call a man a wizards is a compliment, but not so for the woman who is branded as a witch.

we can see how the female terms may start out on an equal footing, but they become devalued over time. In general it seems that English has many more terms to refer to a sexually promiscuous female than a sexually promiscuous male. Some of the more derogatory terms applied to men, such as bastard and son of a bitch, actually degrade women in their role as mothers. Because it is men who make the dictionaries and define meanings, they persistently reserve the positive semantic space for themselves and relegate women to a negative one. If we were to break nouns such as man and woman, boy and girl into their semantic primitives, we would analyse them as follows. All the terms share the feature of [animacy]. We also need the feature [human] to distinguish between human beings and other animate objects. Again, we see a bias expressed in the distinction [-human] and [-adult], which suggests that the adult human life form or state is more basic, and that children are in a sense regarded as deficient adults. While such a feature analysis may seem elegant since it captures a number of semantic contrasts with a minimum of binary features, it is sexist and one can easily see that the cards are stacked against women, who have one negative feature, and little girls, who have two strikes against them. man [+ animate] [+ human] [+ adult] [+ male] woman [+ animate] [+ human] [+ adult] [- male] boy [+ animate] [+ human] [- adult] [+ male] girl [+ animate] [+ human] [- adult] [- male]

In Britain, males and females were indicated on student lists by using the initials and last names for the men, while women had the title Miss (or Mrs) added to their names. Many feminists have pointed out that it is difficult even to trace the history of women because the history of most countries, as Virginia Woolf said in talking about England, is the history of the male line . Fathers pass their names on to both male and female children, and when women marry they have traditionally taken the names of their husbands. Only men have a right to the permanency of their names. A common practice among some feminists has been to replace the father s last name with the name of a female friend or relative, or to drop their father s name. In this way, Julia Stanley has become Julia Penelope. Women are also more likely than men to be addressed by their first names. Women often protest that male doctors call them by their first names even on the first consultation. Men, however, are more likely to be addressed by a title plus last name. Another example of the marking of women can be seen in the use of titles such as lady/woman/female doctor . It is assumed that a doctor is a man, so a woman who is a doctor must somehow be marked as

such, which conveys the idea that she is not the real thing. Conversely, we have terms such as male nurse, where the male has to be marked because the norm is assumed to be female (also, widow and widower).

5. Solidarity and Politeness

When we speak, we must constantly make choices of many different kinds: what we want to say, how we want to say it, and the specific sentence types, words, and sounds that best unite the what with the how. How we say something is as important as what we say. One way of looking at the relationship is to examine a few specific aspects of communication: namely, pronominal choice between tu and vous forms in languages that require a choice; the use of naming and address terms; and the employment of politeness markers.

5.1.

Tu and Vous

Many languages have a distinction corresponding to the tu-vous (T/V) distinction in French, where grammatically there is a singular you tu (T) and a plural you vous (V). The T form is sometimes described as the familiar form and the V form as the polite one. A language with a similar T/V distinction is Italian (tu/Lei). English, itself, once had such a distinction, the thou/you distinction. According to Brown and Gilman (1960): In the Latin of antiquity there was only tu in the singular. The plural vos as a form of address to one person was first directed to the emperor, and there are several theories about how this may have come about. The use of the plural to the emperor began in the fourth century. By that time there were actually two emperors; the ruler of the eastern empire had his seat in Constantinople and the ruler of the west sat in Rome. Because of Diocletian s reforms the imperial office, although vested in two men, was administratively unified. Words addressed to one man were, by implication, addressed to both. The choice of vos as a form of address may have been in response to this implicit plurality. An emperor is also plural in another sense; he is the summation of his people and can speak as their representative. Royal persons sometimes say we where an ordinary ma would say I . The Roman emperor sometimes spoke of himself as nos , and the reverential vos is the simple reciprocal of this. The consequence of this usage was that by medieval times the upper classes apparently began to use V forms with each other to show mutual respect and politeness. However, T forms persisted, so that the upper classes used mutual V, the lower classes used mutual T, and the upper classes addressed the lower classes with T but received V. This latter asymmetrical T/V usage therefore came to symbolise a power relationship. Symmetrical V usage became polite usage. Symmetrical T usage was always available to show intimacy, and its use for that purpose also spread to situations in which two people agreed they had strong common interests, i.e. a feeling of solidarity. This mutual T for solidarity gradually came to replace the mutual V of politeness, since solidarity is often more important than politeness in personal relationships. Today we can still find asymmetrical T/V uses, but solidarity has tended to replace power, so that now

mutual T is found quite often in relationships which previously had asymmetrical usage, e.g. father and son, and employer and employee. Because solidarity is so important, it sometimes falls on one party to initiate the use of T. Brown and Gilman explain how such a change may be initiated, i.e. the change from asymmetrical T/V or polite V/V to mutual T: There is an interesting residual of the power relation in the contemporary notion that the right to initiate the reciprocal T belongs to the member of the dyad having the better power-based claim to say T without reciprocation. The suggestion that solidarity be recognised comes more gracefully from the elder than from the younger, from the richer than from the poorer, from the employer than from the employee, from the noble than from the commoner, from the female than from the male. Lambert and Tucker (1976) pointed out that all French communities and all groups within a community are not alike in their T/V usage. For example, children in Montreal and certain rural parts of Quebec, in the small city of Laval, in Mayenne, France, and in the sparsely populated French islands of Saint-Pierre et Miquelon lying just off the south coast of the Newfoundland, Canada, exhibit different T/V usage. In the last two places use tu with all kin and godparents, but in Quebec, especially in rural areas, they still use a considerable amount of vous within the family, particularly as distance in age and relationship increases. Children themselves receive tu in all three places: in Quebec this use is almost universal for adults to children and young men, regardless of circumstances. In both Saint-Pierre and Laval, however, either some acquaintanceship is necessary before tu is used reciprocally in most circumstances beyond the family. Quebec appears to be the most conservative in T/V usage with vous expected by strangers and older people. When a younger person uses tu to someone who might expect vous, that violation is noted even though it may not lead to comment. A book published in France entitled Savoir-vivre en France (Vigner, 1978) gives the following advice to foreigners on the current use of tu and vous there. Tu should be used between spouses, between brother and sisters regardless of age, between parents and children, between close relatives, between young people living or working closely together or older people engaged in some common endeavour, and between adults who have a friendship of long standing, particularly adults of the same gender. Vous should be used between strangers, between those who have no ties of any kind, between inferior and superior. You should not use tu indiscriminately, since such behaviour will seem excessively familiar and will not be appreciated. Since there is no precise rule for shifting from vous to tu, it is best to wait until the other person uses it to address you before you use it to address him or her. If you cannot judge who has power, settle for politeness and wait until the other indicates solidarity. There is some evidence (Bate and Benigni, 1975) to suggest that T/V usage in Italy is continuing to evolve. A survey of such usage among 117 Italian residents of Rome aged between 15 and 35, and 45 and 65 revealed that symmetrical address was the norm in most circumstances, with difference in age the only factor likely to bring about asymmetrical usage. However, upper-class youth and lower-class youth tended to behave differently. On the whole, lower-class youth were more formal in their choices than upper-class youth. One reason for the different behaviours may be that lower-class youth aspire to

what they consider to be the practices current among higher social groups, and upper-class youth, who quite often show radical tendencies, attempt to imitate what they consider to be the style of the people . There is considerable evidence that power is no longer as important as it once was in determining T/V usage; there has been a dramatic shift in recent years to solidarity. However, many local variations still remain. For example, solidarity in the French Revolution called for symmetrical T usage has always been characteristic of lower-class relationships, so it may be avoided in certain circumstances to deny any semblance of lower-class membership in a quest for politeness. On the other hand, T forms have sometimes exerted a very special appeal to those of upper-class origin as they have attempted to give their speech a deliberately democratic flavour. The T/V use that remains in English is archaic, found in fixed formulas such as prayers or in use in plays written during the era when T/V distinction was alive or in modern works that try to recapture aspects of that era. It is still possible, however, for speakers of English to show power and solidarity relationships through language; they just have to use other means.

5.2.

Address Terms

How do you name or address another? By title (T), by first name (FN), by last name (LN), by a nickname, by some combination of these, or by nothing at all, so deliberately avoiding the problem? What factors govern the choice you make? Is the address process asymmetrical or symmetrical? All kinds of combinations are possible in English: Dr Smith, John Smith, Smith, John, Johnnie, Doc, Sir, Mack, and so on. Dr Smith himself might also expect Doctor from a patient, Dad from his son, John from his brother, Dear from his wife, and Sir from a police officer who stops him if he drives too fast and he might be rather surprised if any one of these is substituted for any other. Brown and Ford s study (1961) of naming practices in English was based on an analysis of modern plays, the naming practices observed in Boston, and the reported usage of business executives and children in the mid-western United States and in Yoredale in England. They report that the asymmetric use of title, last name, and first name (TLN/FN) indicated inequality and unfamiliarity, and that mutual FN indicated equality and familiarity. The switch from mutual TLN to FN is also usually initiated by the more powerful member of the relationship. Other options exist too in addressing another: title alone (T), e.g. Professor or Doctor; last name alone (LN), e.g. Smith; or multiple naming, e.g. variation between Mr Smith and Fred. We should note that in such a classification, titles like Sir or Madam are generalised variants of the T(itle) category, i.e. generic titles, and forms like Mack, Buddy, Jack, or Mate are generic first names (FN), as in What s up, Mate? or Hey, Mack, I wouldn t do that if I were you. Address by title alone is the least intimate form of address in that titles usually designate ranks or occupations, as in Colonel, Doctor, or Waiter. They are devoid of personal content. We can argue therefore that Doctor Smith is more intimate than Doctor alone. Knowing and using another s first name is, of course, a sign of considerable intimacy or at least a desire for such intimacy. Using a nickname or pet name shows an even greater intimacy. When someone uses your first name alone in addressing you, you may feel on occasion that that person is presuming an intimacy you do not recognise or,

alternatively, is trying to assert some power over you. Note that a mother s John Smith to a misbehaving son reduces the intimacy of first name alone, or first name with a diminutive (Johnny), or pet name (Honey), and consequently serves to signal a rebuke. We can see some of the possible dangers in cross-cultural communication when different relationships are expressed through what appears, superficially at least, to be the same address system. Ervin-Tripp (1972) provides the following example: Suppose the speaker, but not the listener, has a system in which familiarity, not merely solidarity, is required for the use of a first name. He will use TLN in the United States to his new colleagues and be regarded as aloof or excessively formal. He will feel that first-name usage from his colleagues is brash and intrusive. In the same way, encounters across social groups may lead to misunderstandings within the United States. Suppose a used-car salesman regards his relation to his customers as solidary, or a physician so regards his relation to old patients. The American might regard such speakers as intrusive, having made a false claim to a solidary status. In this way, one can pinpoint abrasive features of interaction across groups. The asymmetric use of names and address terms is often a clear indicator of a power differential. School classrooms are almost universally good examples; John and Sally are likely to be children and Miss or Mr Smith to be teachers. For a long time in the southern states of the United States, whites used naming and addressing practices to put blacks in their place. Hence the odious use of Boy to address black males. The asymmetrical use of names also was part of the system. Whites addressed black by their first names in situations which required them to use titles, or titles and last names, if they were addressing whites. There was a clear racial distinction in the practice. According the Johnson (1943), one consequence of this practice was that: middle and upper-class Negro women never permit their first names to be known. Bharati Mukherjee s novel Jasmine (1989) is the story of an Indian woman Jyoti, who early in life marries a modern man Prakash: He wanted me to call him by his first name In Hasnapur wives used only pronouns to address their husbands. The first months, eager and obedient as I was, I still had a hard time calling him Prakash. I d cough to get his attention, or start with Are you listening? In English, when we are in doubt as to how to address another we can actually avoid the difficulty by not using any address terms at all. We can say Good morning as well as Good morning, Sir/Mr Smith/Susie. In other languages such avoidance may be either impolite or deficient. In English we therefore have the possibility of the avoidance of an address term, that is, use, or of a choice between familiar and polite. One simple test for distinguishing familiar, informal address terms from polite, formal ones in English is to look at them in conjunction with informal and formal greetings and leave-takings, e.g. Hi, Bye, and So long in comparison with Good morning and Good bye. Hi, Sally; Bye, Honey; and So long, Doc are possible, just as are Good morning, Mr Smith and Goodbye, Sir.

However, there is something peculiar about Hi, Colonel Jones; Bye, Professor; Good morning, Mate; and Goodbye, Pussykins. As you age and your family relationships change, issues of naming and addressing may arise. For example, knowing how to address your father-in-law (or mother-in-law) has often been a problem for many people: Mr Smith is sometimes felt to be too formal, Bill too familiar, and Dad pre-empted or even unnatural . The arrival of grandchildren is sometimes seen as a way out, it being easier to call a fatherin-law Granddad than Dad. Such a move may also be accompanied in some families with a switch address for your own parents, so that your mother is addressed as Grandma rather than Mom; sometimes this appears to be intended only as a temporary help to the grandchildren in learning the right terms of address, but it can easily become a permanent change so that Grandad and Grandma comes to replace Dad and Mom. In some cases Grandma may be used for the maternal grandmother and Gran or Nana for the paternal on, or vice versa. One additional peculiarity of systems of naming and addressing is that people sometimes give names to, and address, non-humans as well as humans. In a society where people keep a lot of pets of different kinds, there is likely to be a considerable variety of names and forms of address used depending on the kind of pet, e.g. horse, cat, or gerbil, and the circumstances, e.g. whether you are alone with the pet or in public view, feeding it or reprimanding it. It seems that a variety of social factors governs our choice of terms in addressing another: i. ii. iii. iv. v. vi. vii. viii. ix. The particular occasion; The social status or rank of the other; Gender; Age; Family relationships; Occupational hierarchy; Transactional status (i.e. a service encounter, or a doctor-patient relationship, or one of priest-penitent); Race; Or degree of intimacy.

The choice is sometimes quite clear; when racial or caste origin is important in society, that is likely to take preference; when family ties are strong, that is likely to be preferred; and so on. In societies which claim to be egalitarian there may be some doubt as to what is the appropriate address term, and consequently none at all may be used, say, husband and wife s mother, son who is learning a lowly job in a company and father who is the company president; police officer and young male offender; and older male and much younger feminist. There also seems to be an ordered relationship, sometimes like the steps of courting behaviour; you proceed to greater and greater familiarity with no back-tracking! When one party insists on stopping at a point both have previously gone beyond, this is likely to signal a reduction in familiarity and to indicate and be perceived as a kind of violation.

5.3.

Politeness

Politeness itself is socially prescribed. This does not mean, of course, that we must always be polite, for we may be quite impolite to others on occasion. However, we could not be so if there were no rules for politeness to be broken. Impoliteness depends on the existence of standards, or norms, of politeness. The concept of politeness owes a great deal to Goffman s original work (1955, 1967) on face . In social interaction we present a face to others and to others faces. We are obliged to protect both our own face and the faces of others to the extent that each time we interact with others we play out a kind of mini-drama, a kind of ritual in which each party is required to recognise the identity that the other claims for himself or herself. In discussing politeness , Brown and Levinson (1987) define face as the public self-image that every member wants to claim for himself. They also distinguish between positive face and negative face. Positive face is the desire to gain the approval of others, the positive consistent self-image or personality claimed by the interactants . Negative face is the desire to be umimpeded by others in one s actions, the basic claim to territories, personal preserves, rights to non-distraction freedom of action and freedom of imposition . Positive face looks for solidarity; negative face, however, is more problematic for it requires interactants to recognise each other s negative face, i.e. the need to act without giving offense. When we interact with others we must be aware of both kinds of face and therefore have a choice of two kinds of politeness. Positive politeness leads to moves to achieve solidarity through offers of friendship, the use of compliments, and informal language use: we treat others as friends and allies, so not impose on them, and never threaten their face. On the other hand, negative politeness leads to deference, apologising, indirectness, and formality in language use: we adopt a variety of strategies so as to avoid any threats to the face others are presenting to us.

6. Talk and Action

In speaking to one another, we make use of sentences, or, to be more precise, utterances.

6.1.

Speech Acts

One thing that many utterances do is make propositions: they do this mainly in the form of either statements or questions but other grammatical forms are also possible. y y y I had a busy day today ; Have you called your mother? ; Your dinner s ready! .

Such utterances are connected in some way with events or happenings that can be experienced or imagined, and thus can be said to be true or false. They have been called constative utterances. A different kind of proposition is the ethical proposition, e.g.

y y y

Big boys don t cry ; God is love ; Thou shalt not kill .

Just like ordinary propositions, an ethical proposition may be true or false. However, the real purpose of ethical propositions is for them to serve as guides to behaviour. Another kind of utterance is the phatic type, e.g. y y y Nice day! ; How do you do? ; You re looking smart today!

We employ such utterances for their effective value as indicators that one person is willing to talk to another and that a channel of communication is either being opened or being kept open. Their use allows communication to occur should there be anything of consequence to say. Austin (1975), a philosopher, distinguished still another kind of utterance from these, the performative utterance. In using a performative utterance, a person is not just saying something but is actually doing something if certain real-world conditions are met. To say I name this ship Liberty Bell in certain circumstances is to name a ship. To say I do in other circumstances is to find oneself a husband or a wife. To hear someone say to you I sentence you to five years in jail in still other circumstances is to look forward to a rather bleak future. Such utterances perform acts: the naming of ships, marrying, and sentencing in these cases. Austin mentions certain felicity conditions that performatives must meet to be successful. i. ii. iii. A conventional procedure must exist for doing whatever is to be done, and that procedure must specify who must say and do and in what circumstances; All participants must properly execute this procedure and carry it through completion; The necessary thoughts, feelings, and intentions must be present in all parties.

Declarations like I promise, I apologise, or I warn you have many of the same characteristics as the previously mentioned utterances but lack any associated conventional procedure; for anyone can promise, apologise and warn.

6.2.

Cooperation

According to philosophers such as Grice, we are able to converse with one another because we recognise common goals in conversation and specific ways in achieving these goals. In any conversation, only certain kinds of moves are possible at any particular time because of the constraints that operate to govern exchanges. These constraints limit speakers as to what they can say and listeners as to what they can infer. Grice (1975) maintains that the overriding principle in conversation is one he calls the cooperative principle. You must therefore act in conversation in accord with a general principle that you are mutually

engaged with your listener or listeners in an activity that is of benefit to all, that benefit being mutual understanding. Conversation is a cooperative activity in the Gricean sense, one that depends on speakers and listeners sharing a set of assumptions about what is happening. If anything went in conversation, nothing would happen. The whole activity would be entirely unpredictable and there would be too much uncertainty to make conversations either worthwhile or pleasant.

6.3.

Conversation

One particularly important principle used in conversation is the adjacency pair. Utterance types of certain kinds are found to co-occur: a greeting leads to a return of greeting; a summons leads to a response; a question leads to an answer; a request or offer leads to an acceptance or refusal; a complaint leads to an apology or some kind of rejection; a statement leads to some kind of confirmation or recognition; a compliment leads to acceptance or rejection; a farewell leads to a farewell; and so on. This basic pairing relationship provides the possibilities of both continuity and exchange in that it enables both parties to say something and for these somethings to be related. It also allows for options in the second member of each pair and for a kind of chaining effect. A question can lead to an answer, which can lead to a comment, which can lead to an acknowledgement, and so on. The ring of a telephone (summons) can lead to a response ( Hello ) with the rising intonation of a question, which thus requires an answer and so on. These are purely linear chains. But there can be other types of chain, as when a question-answer or topic-comment routine is included as a sub-routine into some other pair. It has proved possible to plot the structure of many conversations using these ideas of pairing and chaining in order to show how dependent we are on them. We can also show this same dependence by acknowledging what happens when there are violations: not responding to a question; not offering a comment when one is solicited; not acknowledging a request; not exchanging a greeting; and so on. These violations tend to disrupt conversations or to require explanations. For example, if your telephone keeps ringing when I dial your number, I will tend to assume that you are out rather than that my summons is being ignored. Conversation is a cooperative activity also in the sense that it involves two or more parties, each of whom must be allowed the opportunity to participate. Consequently, there must be some principles which govern who gets to speak, i.e. principles of turn-taking. Turn-taking applies in a variety of circumstances: between as few as two participants and upward of a score; on the telephone as well as in face-to-face interaction; and regardless of the length of particular utterances or how many people want to take a turn. It is very rare to see turn-taking spelled out in advance, e.g. in ceremonials or formal debates in which turns are pre-allocated. Ordinary conversation employs no such pre-allocations: the participants just naturally take turns. Turn-taking may actually vary by cultural group. Tannen (1987) identifies a New York conversational style which she labels as conversational overlap. She claims that New Yorkers like a lot of talk going on in casual conversation to the extent that they talk while others are talking. In a later book (1994) she calls this kind of simultaneous speech cooperative overlapping . She adds that it is supportive rather

than obstructive, evidence not of domination but of participation, not power, but the paradoxically related dimension, solidarity. It is speech motivated by high involvement rather than disruption. She does admit, though, in the earlier discussion that those unfamiliar with this habit may well consider themselves to be constantly interrupted or even talked into silence, their turn-taking principles have been violated. There are also certain linguistic and other signals that go with turn-taking. Speakers may signal when they are about to give up a turn in any one of several ways, or maybe by some combination (Duncan 1972, 1974). y y y y The final syllable or final stressed syllable of an utterance may be prolonged. The pitch level of the voice may signal closure, for example, by dropping in level on the final syllable. An utterance may be deliberately closed syntactically to achieve a sense of completeness. Words or expressions like you know or something can also be used to indicate a turn-point.

Finally, the body itself, or part of it, may signal closure: a relaxing of posture; a gesture with a hand; or directing one s gaze at the listener. Such cues signal completion and allow the listener to take a turn. They signal what has been called a transition relevant place . We must be alert to such places if we want to take a turn. Of course, such places also offer the speaker opportunity to select the next speaker. When there are several listeners present, a speaker may attempt to address the cues to a specific listener so as to select that listener as next speaker. Speaking is not always a matter of self-selection; sometimes a specific person is clearly being called upon to speak, even on the most informal occasions. A speaker s use of gaze, i.e. looking at a specific individual, or of a name or even a plain you may suffice, but such usage varies widely by group and situation (Lerner 2003). Sometimes, when there is no such selection, there is often an embarrassing pause, and, since conversationalists abhor silence, someone will usually try to take up the turn as soon as possible. The beginning of a conversation will generally involve an exchange of greetings. A telephone conversation may involve an exchange of Hello s; a meeting between strangers might require an exchange of How do you do s followed by some kind of self-identification; a meeting between very intimate acquaintances who spend much time together may have its own special ritualistic beginning. Much of this preliminary part of a conversation is highly prescribed by cultural setting: how you answer the telephone varies from group to group; greeting exchanges involving the use of names or address terms may vary enormously; who speaks first, what a suitable reply is, and even what variety of language is employed may also be tightly constrained by circumstances. In Japan, it is the caller who speaks first on the telephone, and, in doing so, identifies himself or herself. In the Netherlands and Sweden people usually answer the telephone by identifying themselves. In France, a telephone call is an intrusion, so the caller feels some obligation to verify the number, identify himself, and be excused for intruding.

When you call someone you are choosing the time and topic and are exercising some degree of power. When you return someone s call you are choosing the time if not the topic but you are not unprepared. If you do not return the call you have exercised some power of your own, little though that may be. Once a conversation has been initiated and the opening forms have been exchanged, it will be necessary to establish a topic or topics on which to talk. Feedback, an important element in warranting the continuation of a turn, can also lend approval to the continuation of a topic. The nods of approval or other gestures of listeners mhm s and yes s, and other empathetic signals indicate to a speaker that the floor is still his or hers and the topic is of interest. When such feedback (or back-channeling) ceases, both turn and topic are put at risk.

7. Words and Culture

7.1. Whorf
One long-standing claim concerning the relationship between language and culture is that the structure of a language determines the way in which speakers of that language view the world.

8. Linguists
8.1. Noam Chomsky (1928 present)
Noam Chomsky is considered to be the father of modern 20th century linguistics. His goal as a linguist is to find the principles common to all languages that enable people to speak creatively and freely. Chomsky has argued on many occasions that, in order to make meaningful discoveries about language, linguists must try to distinguish between what is important and what is unimportant about language and linguistic behaviour. The important matters, sometimes referred to as language universals, concern the learnability of all languages, the characteristics they share, and the rules and principles that speakers apparently follow in constructing and interpreting sentences; the less important matters have to do with how individual speakers use specific utterances in a variety of ways as they find themselves in this situation or that. He has also distinguished between what he has called competence and performance. He claims that it is the linguist s task to characterize what speakers know about their language, i.e., their competence, not what they do with their language, i.e., their performance. To study actual linguistic performance, we must consider the interaction of a variety of factors, of which the underlying competence of the speaker-hearer is only one. (Chomsky) Following Chomsky s example, many linguists have argued that we should not study a language in use, or even how a language is learned, without first acquiring an adequate knowledge of what language itself is. The linguist s task should be to write grammars that will help us develop our understanding of

language: what it is, how it is learnable, and what it tells us about the human mind, i.e. theoretical linguistics. Many recent works have stressed that all children go through the same stages of language development regardless of the language they are learning. Chomsky says that children are born with a knowledge of the principles of the grammatical structure of all languages, and this inborn knowledge explains the success and speed with which they learn language. It is this innate knowledge is often referred to as 'universal grammar'. Give a child a language until he is seven years old. (Jesuits)

9. Keeping in Touch
9.1. Introduction
The telephone is considered to be a vital and indispensable piece of equipment that helps people keep in touch with each other. However the telephone can cause anxiety since it may be the harbinger of bad news, as on occasions when relatives are informed of the death or near fatal accidents of the their loved ones over the phone. Moreover, telephone calls can at times also cause the called to panic, when the caller makes a mistake and dials the wrong number. For Marshal Mc Luhan (1964) the telephone is an irresistible intruder in time or place. Many people consider the telephone as the instrument that ensures their safety and may act as a lifeline in emergencies. After all, help is only a phone call away. 9.1.1. The birth of the mobile phone The first generation of analogue phones in the 1980s were problematic to their users, since they were prone to interference and were easily leading not only to embarrassing revelations from the private calls of public figures Second generation mobile phones became very popular because most of the networks converted to the Global System for Mobile Communication (GSM) standard. Here, a complex series of checks is done to ensure that your conversation or other data is encrypted to deter eavesdroppers and that your mobile is useless to anyone else . The advent of less bulky and cheaper mobile sets, in addition to the availability of pre-paid mobile phone cards, ensured that mobile phones would be an affordable attraction to virtually everyone. All these factors contributed to an explosion in mobile phone ownership and usage. 9.1.2. Malta s linguistic landscape The Maltese language, the indigenous language of the islanders, and which belongs to the Semitic family, is co-official with English. However, it did not obtain official status until 1934. When Malta obtained its Independence from Britain in 1964, Maltese became the national language Malta and one of its two official languages.

9.1.3. Telecommunications systems in Malta Prior to 1974, communication services in Malta were provided by Cable and Wireless Ltd., Rediffusion Ltd., and the Posts and Telephone Departments. In 1975, the Maltese government nationalised the telecommunications services and gave birth to Telemalta. This was partially privatised in 1998 and renamed Maltacom. In 1989, the Maltese government gave a license to Racal-Telecom (Vodafone) of UK to provide mobile cellular telephony in Malta. In 2000, Go Mobile, a subsidiary of Maltacom, started offering mobile cellular telephony in Malta too. Nowadays, in most families, both parents, teenage, and even younger children, own a mobile phone.

9.2.

Politics of Telephone Calls

Deborah Schiffrin (1994) considers conversations to be hard work, and since there are no cues to help telephone interlocutors, this difficulty is further compounded in telephone conversations. For some individuals speaking on the phone is as natural as interacting face-to-face, others however feel uncomfortable speaking to relatives or friends on the phone. 9.2.1. Powers of the Telephone The first power cited by Honey (1986) deals with the fact that we use the telephone because it is an efficient and quick way to communicate with others. The second power regards the fact that when speaking, it is easier for you to represent your company or organisation. As far as the person on the other end is concerned, you are the company or organisation . The third power lies in the telephone s being cost-effective and time-saving. The fourth power cited is the fact that when phoning someone, the caller is more in control of the conversation, since s/he interacts with one person and not with a group of people. Finally, on the phone it is easier to be assertive and to say no while it is more difficult to do so in face-to-face encounters. 9.2.2. Perils of the Telephone Firstly, unlike face-to-face encounters, it is more difficult to establish rapport with the interlocutor on the phone since we do not have visual cues. Researchers tell us that 56% of the message in face-to-face communication is via non-verbal communication, 37% is through vocal communication (i.e. voice tone, rate and volume speech) and only 7% is actually conveyed in words. Secondly, one can mention the peril of invasion , occurring when we call someone and in doing so we might be interrupting the called from his routine jobs. Jumping to the wrong conclusions is the third peril in telephone conversations. Callers need to understand that although they are speaking to the person they have called, it does not necessarily mean that the person has the time, or is in a position to speak at length. 9.2.3. Structure of the Telephone call 9.2.3.1. Caller Hegemony The caller acts, the answerer must react (Hopper 1992). This asymmetrical relationship constitutes caller hegemony and according to Hopper (1992) this manifests itself particularly in two distinctive parts of the telephone call, namely, the opening and closing of the telephone conversation.

9.2.3.2. ID Caller With the advent of the ID Caller, the answerer may refrain from answering the call if s/he does not wish to speak to the caller. Thus, having an ID caller installed on the telephone helps to neutralise caller hegemony. One way of neutralising caller hegemony is for the called to refrain from answering the phone when anonymous or private comes up of the telephone screen. 9.2.4. Answering machines Some individuals do not like talking to, or leaving messages on an answering machine. Once again, an attempt to neutralise caller hegemony is foiled when the caller does not leave any message and the caller s number is ex-directory. 9.2.5. Structure of telephone conversation: telephone openings According to Schegloff s (1986) pattern the telephone interaction order, in a normal conversation, is as follows: Phone rings summons/answer sequence Answerer: Hello Caller: Identification/Recognition sequence Greeting sequence How are you? sequence Initial inquiry However, such a canonical telephone conversation is common in some cultures, but not in others. While the French consider telephone calls to be an invasion of their privacy, the Greeks enjoy talking on the phone, as it is one way of maintain the relationships with their relatives and friends. 9.2.6. Telephone closings It is the initiator of the call who is the terminator (Ball 1968), however this is not always the case.

9.3.

Research Methodology and Sample Profile

9.3.1. Qualitative and Quantitative methods of research It is often important to have a mix of the two methodologies since as Wimmer and Dominick (1994) note, Whereas quantitative researchers strive for breadth, qualitative researchers strive for depth . 9.3.2. Qualitative study Plant (2000) notes that In addition to these interviews [over the telephone], the research draws on extensive field studies involving the observation of people s behaviour and actions in reaction to mobile phones and attention to the form and content of their conversations and messages .

9.3.3. Quantitative study A representative sample of 500 respondents who had been randomly selected from the different towns and villages of Malta and Gozo, were interviewed by a team of bilingual interviewers. 9.3.4. Eligible Respondents Respondents were selected from among those who have the right to vote in local elections, including non-Maltese residents with a resident permit. A number of persons aged 14-17 were in each block, in proportion to the presence of this age cohort in the total population. 9.3.5. Owning a Mobile Phone One of the objectives of this study was to determine how Maltese respondents interact when speaking on the fixed line and/or on the mobile. 9.3.6. Sample Profile As is evident in Table 9.1, the 500 respondents who took part in the survey were made up of 246 (49.2%) males and 254 (50.8%) females. Total Male N= 500 % 14-17 18-25 26-35 36-50 51-65 65+ 7.4 14.0 16.8 30.8 16.8 14.2 246 % 8.1 14.6 17.1 31.3 16.3 12.6 Gender Female 254 % 6.7 13.4 16.5 30.3 17.3 15.8 AB 87 % 3.5 5.7 25.3 32.2 24.1 9.2 Socio-economic category C1 133 % 10.6 24.8 16.5 31.6 9.0 7.5 C2 121 % 2.5 9.9 19.0 34.7 20.7 13.2 DE 159 % 10.7 12.6 10.7 26.4 16.3 23.3

Table 9.1: Sample Profile by Gender & Socio-economic category AB professional, managerial and administrative C1 persons in higher clerical, clerical, supervisors, technicians, owners and managers of small businesses C2 skilled manual workers, foremen DE semi-skilled, unskilled workers, labourers and casual workers or those whose income is provided by

the State

Total Male N= 500 % 14-17 18-25 26-35 36-50 51-65 65+ 7.4 14.0 16.8 30.8 16.8 14.2 246 % 8.1 14.6 17.1 31.3 16.3 12.6

Gender Female 254 % 6.7 13.4 16.5 30.3 17.3 15.8 Primary 96 % 2.1 2.1 1.0 24.0 30.2 40.6

Education Secondary 239 % 9.6 11.7 18.0 36.4 15.5 8.8 Technical 75 % 12.0 16.0 20.0 34.7 10.7 6.6 Tertiary 90 % 3.3 31.1 27.8 20.0 11.1 6.7

Table 9.2: Sample Profile by Gender & Education 9.3.7. Mobile phone ownership The overwhelming majority (76.2%) of the respondents own a mobile phone. The differences between the two genders are slight (males 36.8%; females 35.8%). In the sample only 27.4% of the respondents are not mobile phone owners, the majority being females. Furthermore, respondents who do not own a mobile phone tend to be 51 and over, and belong to the two lowest socio-economic categories. Of the respondents who belong to the youngest age group, only 4 out of 37 are not mobile phone subscribers. Only 18% of the C1 respondents do not have a mobile phone. Only 3.4% of AB respondents do not own a mobile. This reveals that mobile phone penetration levels are quite high in Malta especially among younger Maltese. 9.3.8. Why do the Maltese own a mobile phone? The most popular reason why the overwhelming majority (70.2%) of the respondents own a mobile phone is to be contactable wherever they might be. Respondents in the youngest age group cited this reason the most, thus reflecting the hectic lifestyle that young teenagers lead nowadays and their need to have a mobile phone for their parents and friends to be able to contact them. The reason that obtained the next highest mention was to feel secure (28.9%). The mobile phone gives security to the respondents since others are only a phone call away, and, as one would expect, more females cited this reason than males.

The third most popular reason given by respondents was that they bought a mobile phone to feel freer since they do not need to be tied down to one place (13.5%). They no longer need to stay in one place to be reached but can be contacted anywhere. The idea that the mobile phone gives the respondents a degree of freedom runs counter to what some persons regard as being enslaved to the telephone, since one is always a call away. Respondents do not need to be anywhere in particular but just need to carry the mobile phone with them. They are in when they are out and no one would know where they are.

9.4.

Telephone Traffic

9.4.1. Making phone calls across cultures Sifianou (1989) notes that in Britain, telephone calls are more of a transactional nature, while for the Greeks the telephone is usually interactional in that it is meant to solidify relationships. Have the Maltese been influenced by the British somewhat transactional mode of communicating, or do they veer towards other Mediterranean cultures, like the Greek one and consider the phone as a social occasion during which we maintain relationships with others? 9.4.2. Do the Maltese enjoy phoning and being phoned? High percentages were those in which the respondents stated that they phone to maintain relationships (53.4%), followed by to obtain information (47%) or to give information (25%). Other reasons cited included phoning to make appointments or out of necessity , or because the phone call is work related or to communicate with family and friends , or because of an emergency . A very small percentage said they used the phone to televote . 9.4.3. Gender and age factors Research by Tannen (1990, 1993), Coates (1998) Holmes (1986, 1988), Maltz and Borker (1982) reveal that women value maintaining relationships more than men. In fact, more female participants than their male counterparts gave maintaining relationships as a reason for phoning others (females 63%; males 43.5%). Also, respondents who are aged 18-25 gave this reason the most, followed by the oldest respondents. Of the 25% respondents who said that they phone to give information , more females cited this reason than males, but of the 47% of respondents who stated that they phone to obtain information more males than females gave this reason. Only males cited phoning because of work related issues . 9.4.4. Whether the Maltese enjoy receiving phone calls The majority of the Maltese (77.6%) enjoy receiving phone calls, where female respondents enjoy being called more than males, thus reinforcing the socialisation aspect that telephone calls can have for women. Respondents aged 14-17 are the most positive about receiving telephone calls. Least positive are those who are in the 36-50 and 51-65 age cohorts. 9.4.5. Why respondents enjoy being called N = 388

No answer People who phone me think of me I enjoy phone calls as I don t feel lonely Speaking to relatives and friends is relaxing Enjoy talking to family and friends Phone calls relay good news To gossip It is useful to be called Table 9.3: Reasons why respondents enjoy being phoned

2.8 64.2 24.5 14.2 3.4 3.1 0.3 1.0

More females, and participants aged 14-17, cited the reason people who phone me think of me . More females also said that when people call them they don t feel lonely and this was also given by, this time, respondents in the oldest age group, followed by those in the youngest age group. Talking on the phone as a means of relaxation obtained the highest mention by male participants. 9.4.6. Why respondents do not enjoy receiving phone calls 22.4% of the respondents had answered that they do not enjoy receiving phone calls. N = 112 No Answer Waste of time Intrusion Uncomfortable as I don t see the caller Bad news Phone calls are work related Emergency Don t feel lonely Table 9.4: Reasons why respondents do not enjoy being phoned More females than males cited their reason as being a waste of time . Not many young respondents registered this reason. Moreover, more males than females cited the intrusive aspect of telephone calls, % 4.5 44.6 28.6 13.4 8.9 7.1 0.9 0.9

with the respondents from the youngest age group citing this reason the most, as opposed to those in the 51-65 age group. 9.4.7. Why respondents phone mobile numbers The call rates for mobile phones are significantly higher than those for fixed lines. Thus respondents were asked why they chose to phone a mobile number even though they would be incurring more charges. What is immediately striking about the reasons given by the respondents is the need for them to make direct contact with the addressee in case of emergency (15%) or when the addressee is outdoors (11.6%). It also seems to be the case that respondents loathe being kept on hold when phoning on a fixed line. Knowing that by phoning someone on the mobile the called will be the only person to answer the call seems to be one of the mobile phone s strongest selling feature. In fact, 28% of the respondents stated very clearly that by phoning a mobile number only the person I am phoning will answer the call. Thus, they are able to speak to the addressee without needing to go through the gatekeepers, who might be the secretaries or telephone operators at work, or if a person were to phone the fixed line at home, the husband or wife or parents of the addressee. Thus, the mobile phone empowers its users since it gives them the opportunity to circumvent gatekeepers and to retain their calls as private ones, away from such prying ears. 9.4.8. Duration of phone calls In Malta mobile phone companies charge calls per second and not per minute. This effectively means that if one is direct and to the point, the call will be cheaper than if the calls were charged by the minute. Venardou s (1988) research revealed that 15% of her respondents answered by saying embros go ahead . Such a mode of cutting short the pleasantries was commented upon especially by the present researcher s Australian colleague who would often remark I need to get used to your way of communicating with me on the mobile! It seems that several Maltese respondents are aware of this brief mode of speaking on the mobile. The highest percentage of respondents stated that their mobile phone calls do not exceed 2 minutes. Indeed, when one compares fixed line duration of calls with its mobile counterpart, it is immediately striking that when the Maltese want to speak at length to someone, they phone on the fixed line and not on the mobile, as it is significantly more cost-effective. 9.4.9. Talk time by mobile phone owners The data collected reveals that while mobile owners are very careful to be short and possibly sweet, one would have thought that non-mobile phone owners would be even briefer when calling a mobile number, since the expenses one incurs are greater when calling a mobile number from a fixed line. 9.4.10. Do females talk more than males? A much-disputed topic in sociolinguistics revolves around the fact as to whether women talk more than men. In conversations involving members of both sexes most researchers agree that men speak more

than women (Wardaugh 1988). Furthermore, Kramer (1974) analysed newspaper cartoons from the New York magazine (February May 1973) and discovered that though both male and females were equally represented in the cartoons, the male characters spoke twice as much as their female counterparts. In Malta, when communicating using a fixed line phone, males usually spend less than 5 minutes on the phone. The results of the survey reveal that while on the one hand, females speak more than males on the fixed line, on the other hand, more talk time is spent by males than by females when interacting on the mobile phone.

9.5.

Openings and Closings of Telephone Conversations

It is usually the case that the person who is called is the one who first answers by saying Hello or his/her name or the telephone number. After the initial greetings, it is the caller who needs to introduce the topic of the conversation. According to Sacks, Schlegoff and Jefferson (1974) there needs to be a defined turn taking rule between the interlocutors in face-to-face and telephone conversations. Schlegoff 2002, describes this two party talk as the ababab formula where a and b are either of the two parties. However, research has also shown that the structure of a telephone conversation is culturespecific. 9.5.1. A Canonical telephone opening Hopper 1992 notes four sequential entities for telephone conversational openings: 1. Summons-answer sequence, consisting of the telephone ring and the first thing said by the answerer; 2. Identification/recognition sequences, consisting of each party self-identifying and displaying recognition of each other; 3. A greeting sequence, consisting of an exchange of greeting tokens (hi); 4. Initial inquiries (how are you?) and their answers. 9.5.2. How do the Maltese answer the phone? In view of the fact that mobile phone calls are more expensive than those made from and to fixed line phones, the participants in this study were asked: i. ii. iii. iv. v. How addressees usually answered the telephone; How the respondents themselves usually answered the phone when called; Whether the caller uses initial inquiries, such as How are you? and Whether callers usually excuse themselves to the addressee when phoning them; Who should end the conversation.

9.5.3. Do conversational openings vary when using Fixed Fixed and Mobile Mobile lines? 43% of the respondents did not notice any difference, while a total of 49.6% said they do not use pleasantries such as self-identification and How are you? but get straight to the point when speaking

on the mobile. The fact that nowadays most fixed line telephones and mobile phones are equipped with caller ID means that the called usually knows who the caller is, resulting in shorter pleasantries (0.2%). 9.5.4. How addressees usually answer calls on a fixed line and on a mobile The overwhelming majority said that addressees answer the summons by simply saying hello 93.6% while 10.4% identify themselves. Low percentages were recorded with other variations such as Bon u 0.4% or by immediately identifying caller (0.6%) or by bluntly asking Min int 0.6%. The last two variations of answering a call is restricted to males only, while kif int is used by females only. 9.5.5. Caller self-identification As noted by Schlegoff (1986), following the answerer s reply to the telephone summons, it is usually the case that the caller indentifies himself/herself. Those taking part in the study were asked whether they do identify themselves at the beginning of the conversation. The overwhelming majority (82.6%) stated that they do identify themselves when phoning others. The reasons given by respondents for skipping one of the stages in Schlegoff s (1986) canonical telephone call ranged from I call addressees I am familiar with (50.6%), telephone sets have caller ID and so I am immediately identified (31%) and that callers expect to be immediately recognised by the telephone on the basis of their voices (31%) and I do not want to waste my time introducing myself since every second counts (4.6%). 9.5.6. Summons Apology Hopper (1992) notes that at times, some telephone callers apologise for phoning. Godard s (1977) research in France reveals that the French apologise when phoning people, since telephone calls are considered to be an intrusion. Such calls are characterised by a summons apology. 41% said that they never apologise, 37.2% said that they sometimes do so, 9.4% said they rarely apologise and 12.4% said they always apologise. The two main reasons the Maltese give for apologising when phoning are that they fear that they might be disturbing the addressee (63.1%) and that they might be intruding (29.2%). 3.4% said that they do so because they have been taught to do so and also because they are polite and educated . 2% said they only apologise when they dial the wrong number . 9.5.7. Termination of telephone calls The final part to the telephone conversation is the closing. According to Ball (1968) caller is terminator . From the study, only 25% did not know which of the two parties involved should terminate the telephone conversation. Further study showed that 40.6% are not adversely affected by having their calls terminated by the addressee. 0.2% expressed they are happy when this happens as they don t like receiving calls. However, the majority expressed feeling of hurt (7.2%), or felt that they were let down (11.2%) or were offended (22.4%) and a few respondents clearly stated that they were embarrassed (1.4%). 9.5.8. Addressee Hegemony Hopper (1992) also notes that in telephone conversations, caller hegemony occurs because the answerer of the phone does not know who is calling, although this is not a frequent norm when an ID caller is installed.

The addressee might not wish to speak to the caller and either does not react to the telephone summons by not lifting the telephone receiver or by not switching on the mobile phone, but instead might just be very brief and might even hang up on the caller. Ball (1968) dubs the very act of hanging up by the addressee as interactional homicide since the addressee destroys by himself alone the electronically linked up group. As noted by Gitte Rasmussen and Johannes Wagner (2002), in bilingual countries it is the language of the answerer that dictates the language of the telephonic interaction. In Malta both English and Maltese are the two official languages that are used in every day interaction. However, the most recent language survey (Sciriha and Vassallo 2001) has revealed that Maltese , the indigenous language of the islanders is used by the overwhelming majority of the Maltese. This study reveals that the majority 66% said that if the addressee answers in English, they would continue the conversation in English. However, 20.8% clearly stated that they would continue the conversation in Maltese, 11% said that they would code-switch in English and Maltese while 1.8% said that they would just hang up .

9.6.

Mobile Phone Etiquette

9.6.1. Politeness Politeness features prominently in every day conversations. We all strive to be polite so as to portray a good image of ourselves since we generally like polite people. Politeness has been defined as an expression of concern for the feelings of others (Holmes 1995). 9.6.2. Linguistic etiquette in telephone conversations The participants in this survey were asked in which language they interact if the answerer speaks English. A total of 66% said that they would continue the conversation in English, 20.8% stated that they would just answer back in Maltese, while 11% said that they would code-switch in English and Maltese. 1.8% said very bluntly that they would just hang up if the answerer speaks English. From those who had stated that they would proceed with the telephone conversation in Maltese or code-switch there seems to be a strong sense of patriotism on this part of the Maltese, such as, everyone who is Maltese should know how to speak Maltese (12.6%) and I am Maltese and Maltese is my native language (27%). Some also said that they spoke Maltese because they do not know English (33.3%). More of those who belong to the lower socio-economic categories expressed lack of English proficiency. 9.6.3. Inappropriate phoning times Since Malta is a tiny Mediterranean island, observance of siesta time, especially in the summer months when most of the employees finish their day s work at around 1pm, is one of the hallmarks of telephone etiquette. Though most Maltese are usually aware of siesta time, there are other times when it is considered inappropriate to phone someone.

Quite interesting is the fact that 14.8% do not mind receiving phone calls at any time of the day. However, 56.2% do not like receiving phone calls late in the evening from 9pm onwards, while 36.4% do not like being called during siesta time (1-4 pm). The next highest percentage obtained is that of 17.6% who said that they do not like being phoned early in the morning (before 7.30am). Observance of siesta time seems to be more a female trait than a male one. In fact, 42.1% females as opposed to 30.5% of the males said that they did not like being phoned during this time. Many consider callers who phone during inappropriate times to be inconsiderate (46.7%), rude (17.8%), uneducated (17.2%) or arrogant (8.3%). 9.6.4. Mobile phone etiquette The study revealed that 29.5% of the respondents would move away from others and answer the call while 27.5% said that they would excuse themselves with the other persons and answer the call . 24% stated that they would just switch off the phone ; 17.4% said they would answer the call, speak softly, so that others will not be disturbed or overhear while 8.5% answer the call by telling the caller that they will return the call . 9.6.5. Mobile phone free zones According to Puro (2002) one of the most distinctive characteristics of a mobile phone is that it privatises public spaces . In highly enclosed spaces such as the buses, other people who happen to be nearby are usually irritated by the noise pollution that mobile phone users cause. Which are the zones that according to the Maltese mobile owners ought to be mobile-free? The overwhelming majority clearly stated that the church (80.7%), the theatre (78.8%), the school (68.3%) and the hospital (63.9%) should be embarked as mobile-free zones. Somewhat remarkable is the fact that only 13.8% stated that answering the mobile while driving should be banned. A mere 2.2% stated that the bus should be a mobile-free zone. 9.6.6. Where are you? The study reveals that more males consider such a question by the caller as inquisitive than females. A total of 6.3% consider such a question to be irrelevant , once again more males than females. Persons in the two youngest age groups are the ones who are most annoyed by such a question because callers are inquisitive as compared to those in the other age groups.

9.7.

SMS Messages

9.7.1. Do all Maltese contact one another by SMS messages? 75.2% said that they do send SMS messages, the reason most cited for being a financial one. According to 43.3%, sending SMS messages is cheaper than calling someone on the mobile, with persons in the two youngest age groups citing this the most. Another reason given is to maintain contact with friends and family. 10.2% said they send SMS messages to inform people of obtain information.

9.7.2. Languages used by respondents when writing a SMS A total of 27.3% said that they only use English to send SMS messages while 22.9% said they only use Maltese. 8.8% said they text mostly in English with a few Maltese words, while 10.7% text in Maltese with a few English words . English is so commonly used maybe due to people s spelling skills being better in English than Maltese. Surprisingly, the youngest generation registered the lowest use of English when keying text messages. 9.7.3. Acceptable waiting time frames for reply to text messages The Maltese made a distinction between urgent and non-urgent messages. The majority (66.7%) stated that they expect a reply to an urgent SMS message within 5 minutes of sending the message to the addressee.

9.8.

Teenagers and the Mobile Phone

It seems that by purchasing mobile phones for their teenagers, parents release them little by little (Ling 1999) since they allow their teenage offspring to go out alone, but at the same time, remain under parental surveillance through the mobile (Green 2001). Concomitantly, for most teenagers, having a mobile phone removes social exclusion since most of their friends own one and it has become a common practice to give teenagers mobile phones as Christmas or birthday gifts. For many teenagers, the mobile phone has also become a fashion statement and for this reason they beg their parents to buy them the latest model, in the same way as they twist their parents arms to ensure they are only bought clothes that carry well known brand names. 9.8.1. Reasons why teenagers own a mobile phone Teenagers cited the facts that everyone has a mobile phone (18.2%), they are contactable everywhere (75.8%). 9.8.2. Do teenagers enjoy being phoned? It was revealed that teenagers are the most enthusiastic about being phoned. In fact, 89.2% of them said that they enjoy being phoned, while lower percentages were registered by respondents in the other groups. 9.8.3. Reasons why respondents send SMS messages Sending SMS messages is also a predominantly teenage method of communicating with others. According to Kate Fox (2001) Texting is particularly important in maintaining contact with a wide social network. Texting helps teenagers to overcome awkwardness and inhibitions and to develop social and communicative skills they communicate with more people, and more frequently, than they did before mobiles .

9.9.

Conclusion

A pertinent question arises: does the telephone enhance freedom or does it engender a new form of slavery? The real answer appears to be that it does both. It enhances freedom to the extent that it extends an individual s physical space and allows him/her to move around without the fear that s/he

cannot be contacted in need. But it also enslaves him because it keeps him or her tied down to the chores and the problems of his house and home even when she/he is miles away from them. All in all, it can be stated that in the contemporary world, the need to stay in touch has acquired new prominence, and telephony is providing an easy and relatively cheap way of how it can be satisfied. The telephone can, and indeed has, saved lives, but at the same time it has also contributed to give a sense of freedom when in reality it has managed to enslave modern man. Once introduced, it cannot be ignored, and the demand for it is still on the increase, as this study has clearly shown. As time passes, and perhaps as man realises that the trappings it creates are sometimes not as beneficial as they appear, more disciplined use will be made of it, as is the case with TV in a number of advanced societies in which the number of hours persons expose themselves to it has decreased and more time is spent in other activities.

10.

Bilingualism and Bilingual Education

There are various ways through which children and adults may become bilingual. In simplistic terms, a bilingual person is one who is capable of speaking two languages early on in life, e.g. one language could be learnt at home (Maltese) and another from the community (English). After childhood (8+), acquiring a language is not child s play anymore. After this critical period language acquisition becomes a feat, e.g. the need to attend a (or several) language courses. The social context in which children acquire a language can be split into two: a. The macro-social context: being a member of e.g. an immigrant community, the majority language group, or the minority language group; b. The micro-social context: e.g. the street, nursery, school, family. It is imperative to look at both of these contexts at the same time. Mackey, in his The bilingualism reader, defines bilingualism as the alternate use of two or more languages by the same individual . A balanced bilingual has the mastery of both languages, thus being capable to understand, read, write and speak using both. There are two types of bilingualism which one needs to make a distinction of: a. Simultaneous bilingualism: the acquirement of both languages at the same time; b. Sequential bilingualism: acquiring one language after the other. Thus, a child may grow up to be bilingual using one of these methods. a. Simultaneous bilingualism: each parent would communicate with the child using a different from birth, thus learning both languages at the same time; b. Sequential bilingualism: the child would first acquire one language from the family, and another one from school/peers.

The age of 3 marks the boundary of these two methods. Before the age of 3, the acquisition of languages is informal. After the age of 3 it is more likely that a language be acquired through formal instruction. However, Jesuits believe that a child is quite capable of learning languages until the age of 7.

10.1. Simultaneous bilingualism

The bilingual family: a handbook for parents by Edith Harding is a handbook for all parents who might be considering bringing up their children as bilinguals . One of the languages that parents use to communicate with their child must be the dominant language of their community, or at least one of high status. Bringing up children to be bilingual can be possible if both parents are bilingual, both are monolingual (in different languages) or when one parent is bilingual and the other is monolingual. Obviously, when a parent is bilingual he/she is making a conscious decision of what language to use with the child, and this may prove to be difficult task at first. Bilingualism may be of two types: a. Additive bilingualism: occurs in an environment in which the addition of a second language and culture does not replace the first language and culture; rather, the first language/culture are promoted and developed, such as in dual language programs or developmental bilingual education programs; b. Subtractive bilingualism: the acquisition of a second language at the expense of the first. The first study on Bilingual First Language Acquisition was carried out by the French psychologist Ronjat in 1913. He made detailed records of his son Louis's speech from birth to the age of 4. The family lived in Paris. The mother and nanny were native speakers of German; the father was a native speaker of French. They only used their mother tongue with Louis. Ronjat's study showed that Louis's bilingual upbringing had no adverse effects on his cognitive development; that grammar, phonology and lexis developed in parallel, that the child realised very soon the existence of two languages and acted as an interpreter; that language mixing was always limited and tended to disappear towards the fourth birthday; and that Louis showed a more abstract conception of language. Another detailed study of bilingual development was undertaken by Leopold (1939-1949) who studied the linguistic developments of his two daughters in a German-English family where the 'one person - one language' rule was respected. The conclusions are very similar to Ronjat's. Leopold also claimed that another advantage of early bilinguality was the sustained attention to content rather than to form and the greater capacity for dissociating a word from its referent. In Bilingual children: Guidance for the family, Saunders' perceptive and dedicated study of his two bilingual sons ranks with the work of Ronjat (1913), Elwert (1959), and Leopold (1939-49) in its contribution to the literature on bilingualism. It is based on eight years of observation, using a carefully planned "home language-immersion program" and involving Leopold's "diary" technique, 400 hours of tape recordings, and periodic administration of various language achievement and dominance tests. For eight years, Saunders spoke nothing but German to his sons, and his wife spoke nothing but English. The children became active bilinguals in that they answered each parent in their respective language and became very uncomfortable with any deviation from the established routine. Both husband and wife are

native speakers of English, being natives of Tasmania (Australia). Neither of their sons has ever been outside Australia. One of the most unusual aspects of Saunders's experiment is that German is not the native language of either parent, nor is it the dominant language of the community where the children grew up. In the Australian case, society has seemed to reach the point where the loss of various European immigrant languages is becoming keenly felt. Thus, language activists, like Saunders, are willing to go to great lengths to show that the loss of these languages is not inevitable and to demonstrate to parents that their children can be raised bilingually, even if there is little support for the non-community language outside the family. The process is highly dependent on the varying roles played by family language, peer group language, and community language in the language input of potentially bilingual children. Saunder s observed three stages in the development sequence of a bilingual child: a. Up until the age of 2 the child makes no distinction between the languages since he/she treats the both vocabularies as one global language system; b. As the child starts growing he/she may still mix languages on certain occasions but is in fact aware of the differences. The age differs from one child to another; c. He/she will gradually separate the vocabulary of each language code. However, this bilingual development depends on the following factors: a. The exposure to the two language domains (macro and micro); b. The attitudes of the parents towards both languages; c. The child s language abilities. Swain (1972) has referred to the acquisition of "bilingualism as a first language", since she discovered there is no difference in the development order between simultaneous bilingualism and monolingualism. Children appear to learn two languages as if they are learning one In some families, particularly immigrant, it may also be the case that the parents make use of one language with their children, whilst the children speak between them in another language.

10.2. Sequential bilingualism

Mackey recommends that the age of 3 is the demarcation between simultaneous and sequential bilingualism. There is no best route for children to become competent in a language, it depends on the child. Despite enforcing second language learning in schools in the US and UK, few students result in becoming bilingual. Popular reasons for this phenomenon may include: a. b. c. d. Formal emphasis on reading and writing; Low aptitude to learn a second language; Lack of motivation on the part of the teacher/child; Lack of opportunity to practice the second language.

10.3. Defining Bilingualism

a. b. c. d. e. 'bilingualism' has not been used in a consistent and homogenous way. Many people have different definitions of 'bilingualism'. 'bilingualism'= a global population who has proficiency in two or more languages, 'multilingualism' is the same thing. For the use of an individual, the term 'bilingual' infers possession of two languages. Bloomfield (1933: 55-56) also maintain that a bilingual is one who has "native-like control of two or more languages" Thiery (1978: 146) defines a bilingual as "...someone who is taken to be one of themselves by the members of different linguistic communities, at roughly the same social and cultural level." Ostreicher (1974) bilinguals have been defined as those individuals who show complete mastery of two different languages without interference between the two linguistic processes. If bilinguals are only those individuals who have 'native like control', this excludes many people who have incipient knowledge of a second language, but no such a balanced proficiency.

f.

g.

More realistic definitions a. Macnamara (1967) defines bilinguals as those who possessed least one of the language skills (listening, speaking, reading or writing) even to a minimal degree in their second language. b. Haugen (1969: 6-7) treats fluency as being a continuum. c. Diebold's definition of an 'incipient bilingual' allows people with minimal competence in a second language to be also classified as bilingual too. d. According to the definition cited by Lambert, Havelka and Gardner (1959: 81), a balanced bilingual is one who, "will be able perform and read works in both languages with similar speeds, to associate in both languages with similar fluency, to make active use of his vocabularies in both languages, and to be set to verbalise in both languages". e. Ferguson, Houghton and Wells (1977) also summarize the diversity of goals of the various types of bilingual education and while expanding on the Fishman and Lovas topology, they go on to list goals such as: i. To assimilate individuals and groups into mainstream society, ii. To unify a multilingual group, iii. To enable people to communicate with the outside world, iv. To gain an economic advantage for individuals or groups, v. To preserve ethnic and religious ties, vi. To reconcile different political or socially separate communities, vii. To spread and maintain the use of a colonial language, viii. To strengthen or embellish the education of elites, ix. To give equal status to languages on unequal prominence in society, x. To deepen understanding of language and culture.

a. Mackey (1970; 1976) proposes a typology in which he describes some 90 types of different forms of bilingual education. He classifies programmes in terms of patterns of language use in the home, which can be either unilingual or bilingual; and the curriculum, which Mackey describes as being either single-medium or dual-medium. b. All typologies ignore the factors that often determine the outcome of bilingual education: social, historical, cultural, ideological and social psychological in nature. c. An interdisciplinary approach combining all these factors simultaneously, would enable an understanding of the complex phenomenon of bilingual education. d. Tablets engraved with bilingual texts (in Sumerian and Eblaite) discovered in Syria, proved that ancient civilisations also used to their children to write and read in more than one language (Lewis, 1977). e. Providing education instruction in a language that is different from students' mother tongue is indeed a very ancient modus operandi, which may date back as early as 3000 B.C. (Mackey, 1978) f. Instruction in Greek was assumed to be "at least as good a foundation of the child's intellectual development as his mother tongue could be...and it was regarded as a satisfactory means of improving the child's control of his mother tongue" (Lewis, 1977), g. Concern that instruction via the Greek second language (L2) medium would induce potential detrimental effects on the young Roman child....??????? h. Different studies conducted during the 1920s and 930s showed that when compared with monolingual children, bilinguals were worse off. i. They "performed poorly at school, were generally inferior intellectually, suffered problems of personal identity, and experience alienation" and that "intelligence as measured by IQ tests, is generally negatively affected by the presence of bilingualism." (Hornby, 1980: 107). j. Earlier findings that had promulgated the belief that bilingualism reduced, rather than induced, positive outcomes for second language leathers, were flawed by serious methodological weaknesses, which consequently adversely affected the concluding results. It is of course an advantage to be familiar with two languages, but without doubt the advantage may be and generally is, purchased too dear. First of all the child in question hardly learns any of the two languages as perfectly as he would have done had he limited himself to one. It may seem on the surface as if he talked just like a native, but he does not really Peal and Lambert (1962), showed that ten year old British-Canadian bilingual children, performed significantly better than their monolingual peers. Bilingual students were shown to have higher leeks of verbal and non-verbal intelligence than the comparison group, (composed of monolingual students) matched on both socio-economic status, as well as gender. Bilingualism to have a positive effect on divergent thinking and creativity. An educational climate that no longer doubted the positive effects of bilingualism.

Over the past three decades, there has been a considerable incentive to implement various bilingual education programmes across international curricula.

10.4. Bilingual Educational Theories

a. Chomsky s Theory of Universal Grammar: Interlanguage Theory (1965) UG develops with the child's growing L2 skill acting as a filter as to what is acceptable in the target language and what is not... b. Swain (1972) proposed that all children learnt language using one language store, and that it was only later that bilingual children separated this store into two language systems. c. The Threshold theory: focuses on school-age children and offers a description of the process of becoming bilingual. d. Cummins (1978: 858) states that "The Threshold hypothesis assumes that those aspects of bilingualism which might positively influence cognitive growth are unlikely to come into effect until the child has attained a certain minimum or threshold level of competence in a second language. Similarly, if a bilingual child attains only a very low level of competence in the second (or first) language, interaction with the environment through that language, both in terms of input and output, is likely to be impoverished. e. Skutnabb-Kangas and Toukomaa (1976) brought attention to the fact that Finnish immigrant children in Sweden often appeared to educators to be fluent in both Finnish and Swedish but still showed levels of verbal academic performance in both languages considerably below grade/age expectations. Similarly, analysis of psychological assessments administered to minority students showed that teachers and psychologists often assumed that children who had attained fluency in English had overcome all difficulties with English (Cummins, 1984). f. An environment where the first language is dominant or enjoys a high-status, induces what Lambert (1974) described as 'additive' bilingual situation, where a second language is acquired without incurring any negative effect on the second language. g. Cummins (1984a) suggests that there exists what is known as the Common Underlying Proficiency. Cummins' Iceberg Model of Language Independence: at a point in time the two languages seem distinct but what you know in one language, benefits the other.

10.5. Weak vs. Strong forms of bilingual education

Baker (1998) makes a distinction between weak and strong types of bilingual education: dual language schools, international schools, and heritage language bilingual schools. a. Dual language schools contain a balance of language majority and minority children. Such schools use two languages approximately equally in the curriculum, so that children may become bilingual and biliterate. b. International schools teach the curriculum through the majority language, whilst also incorporating a local language into the curriculum.

c. Heritage language schools cater primarily for language minority students. By the time that students leave an elementary heritage language school, children are usually bilingual in the heritage and majority language as well as being biliterate. These three types of schools are strong-forms of bilingual education. Weak forms of bilingual education programmes include Submersion programmes, Transitional programmes, and Withdrawal classes. These are not additive programmes. a. Submersion programs seek to assimilate language minority speakers into q majority language or culture. Submersion may be termed as making children learn to 'swim quickly' by throwing them into the deep end. A child is submerged in an English language environment, and is expected to progress in that environment as quickly as possible. b. Transitional bilingual education programmes allow the child to use his or her own language for two or three years in the elementary school. However, the ultimate aim is for the child to move into the mainstream majority language classes as soon as possible. These classes serve primarily language minority students, and hence the students who are already struggling to 'fit' into a new education system, have the added burden of suffering in terms of low self-esteem, regarding themselves as inferior individuals.

10.6. Immersion Programmes

Few bilingual programmes have achieved the success and rapid popularity of immersion programmes. Immersion education is the best method to help children achieve second language acquisition. It was successful not only in the town of origin in Montreal, but also within an international framework. The curriculum content delivery through of a second language is not a 20th century development. The rise of nationalism fostered the culture of educating citizens, through the medium of the national language. Although the national tongue does give a person his identity, one of course becomes aware of the accruing benefits of knowing a second or third language. Such a realization that led to the inception of the first immersion programme in 1965. A study carried out by Lambert, Hodgson, Gardner and Fillenbaum (1960) show French language's inferior status when compared to the status enjoyed by the English language. Making use of the Matched-Guise technique, Lambert and his colleagues had asked a group of French-speaking citizens from Montreal to listen and 'rate' people who spoke either French or English. The French-speaking listeners were unaware of the fact that they were listening to the same individuals in both English and French. Analyses of the ratings or attitudes of the French-speaking listeners showed that they reacted more favourably to the English 'guises' than the French. The French Canadians also had a more favourable opinion of the English guises to the French. Lambert concluded that language was an important symbol of ethno-linguistics group membership, and that members of the minority group often internalize negative attitudes felt and expressed towards them, by members of the majority group. Resultant cultural and linguistic inequities led the French-speaking population to seek a relationship that is at par with that of the English-speaking community.

French Canadians demanded greater language rights. The strength of the feeling for greater recognition of the awareness for the rights of the French-speaking populace, was such a particular period it was known as the Quiet Revolution. The English-speaking Canadians were also becoming more aware than ever, of the inadequacy of their local second language education system, a system which was not yielding the linguistic results demanded by the parents. The importance of French grew, so did the realization of the importance of the French language. Consequently, a group of middle-class British Canadians began to voice their dissatisfaction with the results achieved by their essentially monolingual children. On realizing how valuable French was becoming socially, culturally, economically, and psychologically, the parents turned to their school board to plead for bilingual education. The parents teamed up in the 1960s to form what we know as the St. Lambert Bilingual School Study group. These proactive also read the different accounts of the various forms of bilingual education that might serve as alternatives to what was being offered to. Their children and they also approached academics at McGill Uni. This conserved effort brought about a very different second language education program me which would offer, from the very first day, maximum second language exposure. Lambert (1977) regards the Canadian immersion programmes as being additive Bilingual programmes, since a second language is being added to the child's linguistic repertoire without there being any loss incurred to the first language as part of the acquisition. Immersion differ greatly from other bilingual education programmes that are subtractive rather than additive, since a second language is not being acquired at the cost of a child's proficiency and competence in his or her native tongue. Students who enrolled in a French immersion programme came from a majority language background, where their native tongue enjoyed high status both in the community and in the national context. Their participation in such a second language education programme is thus one of the pure choice rather than a decision which is enforced by political or economic necessity. It is a political or economic necessity that spurs children from a minority language background to learn the second language, since they often feel confines by the limitations of a language that. Only guarantees social exclusion and restricted opportunity. Moreover the dominant position enjoyed by a majority language, ensures that the second language learner's L1 (the mother tongue) continues to be maintained and developed. There are other factors that have enabled immersion programmes to be widely regarded as ideal for majority language children. Canadian immersion teachers are bilingual in both the child's native tongue, as well as the target second language. Although teachers don't address students in their native tongue, they are nonetheless able to understand their pupils' language and have developed ways of achieving adequate means of communication. Immersion programmes are bilingual in the sense that although there is no first language instruction for the first two years of primary school, when students reach the second grade, students begin to receive academic instruction through the use of their first language. Subsequently the time devoted to first language instruction gradually increases until the sixth grade when both languages are used to an equal extent throughout the delivery the curriculum content areas.