1 Bernard Spolsky (2001) defined sociolinguistics as, "the relationship between language and society, between the users

of language and the social structures in which users live (3). One of the fields of study that is of paramount importance to sociolinguistics is language variation, which according to Holmes (2001) is "the difference in language use [that] is used to express and reflecting differing social factors (4). Language varies linguistically on the levels of morphology, phonology, syntax, lexicon and pragmatics. However, Milroy and Milroy as quoted in Coulmas (1997), state that there are extra-linguistic features that influence linguistic variation (48). On the social level, language use is determined by several extra-linguistic factors among them gender, ethnicity and socio-economic class.

Language has many functions; one of which is that it is used to shape and maintain identity which is a social construct, meaning that is created by our interactions with society. Gender is also a social construct, therefore it is not surprising that gender which is a major part of ones social identity influences language use; Bonvillain (1997) states that language is used to teach and reinforce differentiated gender roles (166). Studies into the language use of males and females show that men and womens language use differs in the areas of pronunciation (phonology); grammatical choice (syntax) and vocabulary (lexicon).

As quoted in Bonvillain, John Fishers (1958) study in a New England town found patterns of variation in the morpheme ing; the variants being in and ing. Fishers research showed that because the variant ing was regarded as symbolizing compliance, formality and politeness; traits that traditionally and a bit stereotypically are seen as decidedly female characteristics it was more frequently used by girls than by boys in his test group.

2 In another study of adolescent boys and girls in Reading, England; Cheshire (1982) found that boys used the following non-Standard grammatical features more often than girls did. These features were as follows: 1) present tense s with non singular subjects Example: They lives on that street. 2) has with first and second person subject Example: You has to come early to school. 3) was with the plural subject and singular you Example: You was outside. 4) multiple negations Example: Im not going nowhere. 5) past tense never, replacing the Standard didnt Example: I never done it, it was him.

There is also a noted gender disparity in the use of certain word categories. Bonvillain asserts that women recognize colours by more specific terms (177) than men. For example, the female use of magenta versus the male use of purple and the female use or turquoise versus that male use of blue-green. Furthermore, Bonvillain quotes that research by Bailey and Timm (1976) and Jay (1980) into the gender related use of expletives found that given class and context, men use curse words with greater frequency and greater profane force than women do, women also tend to use milder expletives (177).

Ethnicity is another social factor that persuades linguistic variation. Holmes (1992) states that

3 ethnic groups use a distinctive language associated with their ethnic identity and where choice of language is available for communication, it is often possible for an individual to signal their ethnicity by the language the use (190). This variation can occur of all levels of language but oftentimes it manifests itself in lexicon and grammatical constructions.

In the United States, African American English or African American Vernacular English (hereafter referred to as AAVE), differs on levels of grammar from the General American English (hereafter referred to as Gen Am). For example: 1. there is the absence of the copula verb be AAVE She very nice 2. be is used to signal the present continuous tense AAVE She be at school on weekdays. Gen Am. Shes always at school on weekdays. 3. there is multiple negation. AAVE He dont live here no more. Gen Am. He doesnt live here anymore. In New Zealand, the native Maori people signal and maintain their ethnic identity through the use of: 1. Maori lexical items, for example tangi (funeral); kuia (old woman) and kia ora Gen Am. Shes very nice.

4 (greeting). 2. omission of have, for example in the sentence: Yeah well you ____ seen him dancing. 3. use of s in the present tense form, for example: I says you wanna bet. 4. use of pragmatic particle eh, for example: Yeah well you seen him dancing, eh.

In Britain, the language of Black Britons, especially those who have West Indian ancestry differs from the speech of white Britons. There language reflects their regional Standard English and an informal variety of English mixed with Patios and Creole. Hence their language varies in that it features: 1. Creole lexical items, for example lick (hit) and kenge (puny, weak) 2. stress and intonation patterns different from Standard English, for example pitch and stress are place on different syllables of the word:

tea

cher

stress pitch 3. the morpheme s is not used as a plural marker, for example five orange versus five oranges. 4. tense is not marked by affixation., for example walk walked. This does not happen.

Bonvillain (1997) defined social stratification as the hierarchal structuring of groups with a society (131). This structuring may be based on income, occupation, education and access to social, economic and/or political power (131). These factors stratify people into different socioeconomic classes that have an effect on language use since, speakers of socially ordered groups exhibit differences in frequency and use of certain sounds, words, and grammatical features

5 (131). Perhaps, the most famous study into the effect of socio-economic class on language use is William Labovs (1966) study in New York City. Coupland and Jaworski (1997) outlined Labovs study of the phonological variables including the (r) in postvocalic position in card, car, four, floor, fourth etc. This particular variable appeared to be extraordinarily sensitive to any measure of social or stylistic stratification (169). Labov targeted the sales people of three large department stores in Manhattan. Since the stores were ranked from top to bottom on the price and fashion scale, the customers would by extension be socially stratified. Labov chose the sales people as his test group because according to C. Wright Mills the salesgirls [salespeople] in large department stores tend to borrow prestige from their customers (170), therefore the highest ranked store would have the highest value of (r) and this would continue co-relationally for the other two stores. From the test carried out Labov found that sixty-two percent of Saks Fifth Avenue employees used all or some (r-1) as compared to fifty-one percent of Macys employees and twenty percent of Kleins employees.(See Figure 1 in appendix for a graphic representation of data). This (r-1) variable is the one that was supposedly the indicator of social class; thus the groups are ranked by their differential use of (r-1) in the same order as their stratification by extra-linguistic factors (175).

Coupland and Jaworski also noted Peter Trudgills (1974) study of the social differentiation of English in Norwich. In this study Trudgill looked at the phonological variable (ng) which is the pronounciation of the suffix ing in the usage of the different classes in Norwich. The classes were divided into the following: Lower Working Class (LWC)

6 Middle Working Class (MWC) Upper Working Class (UWC) Lower Middle Class (LMC) Middle Middle Class (MMC)

And the context of pronounciation was divided into: Word List (WLS) Reading Passage (PRS) Formal Style (FS) Casual Style (CS)

The following table shows the results of Trudgills test with the index ranging from 000 which represents the consistent use of [n] to 100 which represents the consistent use of [ ]. (See appendix for detailed analysis of the table) STYLE I II III IV V CLASS MCC LMC UWC MWC LWC WLS 000 000 005 023 029 RPS 000 010 015 044 066 FS 003 015 074 088 098 CS 028 042 087 095 100

Wardhaugh (2006) also noted studies that demonstrate a correlation between social class and linguistic variation. In Detroit, Shuy et al (1968) investigate the relationship between the linguistic variable and social class. The results show a co-relation between the use of multiple negation and social class. Wolfram (1969) also studied language variation and social class. Wolfram studied the phonological variables of consonant cluster simplification: medial and final th as in the words nothing and path; syllable final d; the occurrence of r post vocalically

7 and the absence of [z] when used as the third person singular tense marker. The result of his study on the absence of the [z] is detailed in the appendix and it shows a strong parallel between social class and the absence of this variable, as there is a decrease in the absence of this form in the speech of the upper classes .

Language is a dynamic social force that is influenced by many factors. These studies do not negate the use of one form of language over another but simply show as Milroy and Milroy posited that extra linguistic features influence language variation. It is my belief that all forms of language are equally valid because in spite of the factors influencing the variety; the language itself transmits the ideas of the speakers and accomplishes the purpose of understanding the words spoken. Edward Sapir perhaps concluded it best when he said, When it comes to linguistic form, Plato walks with the Macedonian swineherd, Confucius with the head-hunting savage of Assam.

_____________________________________________________________________________ _

8 Appendix

r-1 variable of salespeople in three New York City Department Stores

Macy

Saks Fifth Ave

Klein's

Figure 1 shows the results of Labovs New York City study.

Analysis of Trudgills (1974) Norwich study: The data shows an increase in the [ ] endings as we move from everyday speech to more styles (181).Social class differentiation is shown by the separation of pronounciation for each class. In FS the two MC groups appear to have the ability to control [ng] forms to a level nearer to more formal styles.

Table 2 shows the results of Shuys study for the absence of [z] as a past tense marker.

SOCIAL CLASS % OF ABSENSE OF [Z] FORM AS PAST TENSE MARKER Upper Middle Class 1.4 Lower Middle Class 9.7 Upper Working Class 56.9 Lower Working Class 71.4

Works Cited: Bonvillain, Nancy. Language, Culture and Communication: The Meaning of Messages. 2nd ed. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1997. Holmes, Janet. An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. 2nd edition. New York: Longman, 2001. Milroy, James and Lesley Milroy. Varieties and Variation. The Handbook of

10 Sociolinguistics.Ed. Coulman, Florian. UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 1997. 47-55. Labov, William. The Social Stratification of (r) in New York City Department Stores. Sociolinguistics: A Reader and Coursebook. Eds. Coupland, Nikolas and Adam Jaworski. London: Macmillian Press, 1997. 168-176. Spolsky, Bernard. Sociolinguistics. Oxford: OUP, 2001. Trudgill, Peter. The Social Differentiation of English in Norwich. Sociolinguistics: Reader and Coursebook. Eds. Coupland, Nikolas and Adam Jaworski. London: Macmillian Press, 1997. 179-182. Wardhaugh, Ronald. An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. 5th edition. UK: Blackwell Publishing, 2006.