1
Linguistics 661.02. An Introduction to Quantitative Sociolinguistics. Fall 2004.
Instructor: Donald Winford.Office: 207 Oxley Hall.Tel. 2-0362
Office hours: WF 1.30 -2.30 pm or by appointment.
Course Description:
This is a graduate-level introduction to the study of language in its social context. The course will focus primarily on quantitative sociolinguistics, and the frameworks and methods of analysis that sociolinguists working in this area have developed. We will discuss some of the major findings of sociolinguistic research on the nature of linguistic variation and its relation to language structure. The frameworks of analysis to be considered include the Labovian model and related approaches, as well as the implicational model.
Texts: 1. J.K. Chambers. Sociolinguistic Theory. 2nd. edition (2003).
2. Milroy & Gordon, Sociolinguistics. Method and interpretation.
3. Packet of readings available from Instructor.
Objectives.
1.To introduce students to the methodology of quantitative sociolinguistics.
2.To provide students with an understanding of the theoretical issues raised by approaches which use quantification to explore variability in linguistic systems.
Requirements:
1.Five brief (2-3 page) summaries of required readings, with critical evaluation and discussion of the questions that you think the paper raises. (See guidelines for summaries) (25% of final grade).
2.Class presentations of two of the assigned readings, to serve as a basis for discussion in class (schedule to be decided in class). (15% of grade).
3. Analysis of selected variable features in a tape-recording of natural speech (either from transcription to be provided by instructor or from student's own research). Submit preliminary 4 - 5 page progress report by end of week 5. (See suggestions for research papers). This project will be discussed in class from week 1 on. (20% of grade).
4. A final research paper that develops the mid-term report. To be presented in class in week 10 (15 minute presentation, with discussion after). Typed version, approximately 12-15 pages (2000 - 2500 words) long, to be submitted by end of examination week. (40% of grade).
Schedule of Topics and readings (Starred items are required reading)
Week 1: Linguistics and Quantitative Sociolinguistics;
9/28-30Rationale for the study of language in its social setting.
The linguistic variable.
Reading:
*Chambers Text, Chap. 1
*Labov 1972a, "The study of language..." (Packet).
*Milroy & Gordon text, Chap. 1.
Week 2: A.The methodology of the quantitative paradigm;
10/5-7Community, sample, and data;
Reading:
*Chambers Text. Chapter 2, Sections 2.1 – 2.2.
* Milroy & Gordon, Chapters 2 – 3.
*Labov 2001, Chapters 2 and 6 (Packet).
B.Social variables and linguistic variation.
Reading:
*Chambers text. Chapter 2, Sections 3 – 5; Chapter 3.
*Eckert 2000, Chap. 1 (packet)
10/7Discussion of variation project.
Week 3: Phonological variables.
10/12-14Reading:
*Milroy & Gordon Chapter 6
*Eckert 2000, Chapters 4 and 5 (packet).
Morpho-phonological variables.
The copula in Afro-American English;
Analysis of final -t/-d deletion.
Reading:
*Labov 1969 (Packet)
*Guy 1980 (Packet)
Week 4:Quantifying linguistic variables. A brief look at statistics.
10/19-21VARBRUL and variable rules.
Reading:
*Bayley 2002 (packet)
Practicum: Using VARBRUL.
Reading:
*Paolillo 2002. Chapters 1-4 (Packet)
Week 5:Testing hypotheses via VARBRUL analysis.
10/26-28AAVE: Testing the creole hypothesis.
Reading:
*Baugh 1990 (Packet)
*Winford 1992 (Packet)
10/28Mid-term reports on variation project.
Week 6:Issues raised by morphosyntactic variation.
11/2-4Implications for synchronic description.
The question of semantic equivalence.
Reading:
*Milroy & Gordon, Chapter 7
*Romaine 1984 (Packet)
*Winford 1996 (Packet)
Week 7:The implicational model
11/9-11Reading:
*Bickerton 1971.
*Rickford 1987
*Rickford 2002
Week 8:Socially-based explanations of variation.
11/16-18Issues of identity. Social networks
Reading:
*Milroy & Gordon, Chapters 4-5, 8.
*Eckert 2000. Chapters 7 and 8. (Packet)
*Labov 1963. “The social motivation…” (packet)
*Labov 2001. Chapter 10. (Packet)
Week 9:Variation and theories of change
Reading:
Labov 1994. “Principles I” Chaps 3-4
*Labov 2001, “Principles II”Chapters 2, 4, 5.
Kroch, A. 1978. “Toward a theory…” (Packet)
Week 10:Unfinished business.
11/30-12/2Summary and overview;
Class presentations of research papers.
Guide to Variation Analysis:
This project will be based on transcriptions of tape-recorded data supplied by the instructor or from subjects recorded by the student.
Your task is to analyze at least one variable feature, e.g. past tense marking, present copula forms, pronominal forms etc., using a quantitative approach. The number of variables you choose will depend on the richness of their incidence in the data. You need to choose variables that will yield data adequate to the length of the paper.
The paper itself should describe at least, but not necessarily only, the following: (1) the variable(s) you've examined, how you identified them, their variants, and their populations; (2) why the phenomenon you examined is of interest; (3) what tentative conclusions you can draw from the study; (4) any alternative interpretations of your data, or limitations in your data base; (5) how your analysis might be improved, extended or expanded in a wider study.
I will be available to help you choose a variable, as well as to provide any information you may need. We will also discuss the variation project in class, to clarify what needs to be done.
Guidelines for summaries.
1.Summarize the central theme or message or aim to the paper in a couple of sentences.
2.Provide a summary of the main points of information or argumentation, (i.e., summarize the paper, explaining the main ideas it tries to convey).
3.Evaluate the paper as far as you can. Is the information clearly presented? Is the main point (theme) well supported or argued?
Which points of information or argumentation are strongest? weakest?
How is the paper related to central concerns in the field of Contact Linguistics? What light does it shed on them for you?
An evaluation shouldn't consist of vague or general statements to the effect that, e.g., "This paper was well organized; the author presented her views clearly; It was a good overview of the subject" etc.
Your evaluation should comment specifically on what you see as the strengths and weaknesses of the paper, and how well it conveyed or failed to convey a clear picture of the subject matter. You should also discuss what it contributes to your understanding of the "broader picture." You should interpret "broader picture" to mean those particular aspects of sociolinguistic investigation that the paper is relevant to, and the issues they raise.You should assess how far the paper sheds light on these issues, or contributes to your own understanding of them.