#sociolinguistics

linguist-breakaribecca:

Thirty Everyday Phrases that Perpetuate the Oppression of Indigenous Peoples

“Language isn’t neutral or objective. It is a vessel of cultural stories, values, and norms. And in the United States, everyday language plays into the violent, foundational myth of this country’s origin story—Europeans ‘discovering’ a virtually uninhabited wilderness and befriending the few primitive peoples who lived there—as well as other cultural myths and lies about Indigenous Peoples that are baked into U.S. culture and everyday life.

Cleve Davis (Shoshone-Bannock) points out that everyday language continues discrimination that is an extension of the centuries-long federal policy of genocide, assimilation, and oppression toward the original peoples of North America.

…

It might seem harmless when your boss mentions the need for a powwow among the company’s executives or an online quiz promises to reveal your spirit animal, but everyday language like this is a result of centuries of violence and continues to perpetuate stereotypes that have real-life impacts on Native communities.”

ForIndigenous Peoples’ Day, 2021

tiktokmuseum:

*pretends to be surprised*

I believe this person is referring to the research review done by Deborah James and Janice Drakich, which was published in 1993 but still couldn’t stop the myth while other popular linguists like Deborah Tannen kept insisting on “gender = speech patterns” instead of the reality, which is closer to “social power [which can include gender, race, class, etc] = valuation or devaluation of speech patterns”.

A review of 56 studies conducted by linguistics researcher Deborah James and social psychologist Janice Drakich found only two studies showing that women talked more than men, while 34 studies found men talked more than women. Sixteen of the studies found they talked the same and four showed no clear pattern.

I’ve been a Tannen apologist before, because linguists are still taught that there is such a thing as masculine and feminine speech ideologies. But then I paid attention to the real world!

Do Women Really Talk More Than Men?

madmaudlingoes:

anarchapella:

anarchapella:

I have thoughts about the whole feminist anti-interrupting thing. Like I agree, men do talk over people and it is disrespectful, but I also think there are cultures, specifically Jews, where talking over each other is actually a sign of being engaged in the conversation. It’s something I really struggle with in the south, because up in New York, even non-Jews participated in this cooperative conversation style, but down here, whenever I do it by accident, the whole convo stops and it gets called out and it’s a whole thing. Idk idk I feel like there’s different types of interruptive like there’s constructive interrupting where you add on to whatever is being said - helpful interrupting, and then there’s like interrupting where you just start saying something unrelated because you were done listening. I have ADHD so I’ve def done the latter too by accident, but I’m talking about being more accepting of the former.

I think a lot of the social mores leftists enforce around communication tend to be very white. Like Jews are not the only group of people that have distinct communication styles. Like the enforcement of turn-based communication, not raising your voice (not just in anger but also in humor or excitement), etc. it’s always interesting that the most pushback I get about how I communicate come from white people (mostly women actually, white men just give me patronizing looks because they don’t feel like they can call me out in same way). Like I’ve been teaching these workshops, and a few of them have been primarily black people, and I’ve noticed black people will also engage in cooperative interrupting (and I love it!). This isn’t a developed thought and I welcome feedback. Idk I think there should be space in leftist organizing for more diverse communication styles.

Here’s a source:

Interrupters: Linguist says it’s the Jewish way – J.

As a linguist: overlapping talk is not the same thing as an interruption!

An interruption is specifically intended to stop another person from speaking so you can take over. Other reasons that talk might overlap:

• close latching – how much time should I give between when you stop talking and when I start? Very close latching can feature a lot of overlaps.
• participatory listening – how do I signal to you that I’m engaged with what you’re saying and paying attention? Do I make any noise at all, or do I limit myself to minimal “backchannel” noises (mm-hmm, ah, yeah), or do I fully verbalize my reactions as you’re going? Maybe even chime in along with you, if I anticipate what you’re about to say, to show how well we’re vibing?
• support request – this can shade into interruption as a form of sealioning, but if someone interjects a request like “I didn’t catch that” or “What’s that mean?” it’s not really an interruption, because they’re not trying to end/take my turn away, they’re inviting me to keep going with clarification/adaptation.
• asides – if there’s more than two people involved in a conversation, a certain amount of cross-talk is probably inevitable.

The norms around these kinds of overlaps vary – by context (we all use more audible backchannel on the phone; an interview is not a sermon is not a casual chat), by culture, and yes, by gender, which is why it’s a feminist issue. But gender doesn’t exist in a vaccuum! Some reasons overlaps might be mis-interpreted as interruptions when they’re not intended to be:

• norms about turn latching: someone who’s not used to close-latching conversation might feel interrupted or stepped on when talking to someone who is. The converse is that someone who’s expecting close-latching might feel the absence of it as awkward silence, withdrawal, coldness, etc.
• norms about backchannel: if you’re not expecting me to provide running commentary on your story or finish your sentences (or if I’m doing it wrong) then you might feel interrupted. But if you’re expecting that level of feedback you might feel ignored.
• neurodivergence: If I have auditory processing problems, I might take longer to respond to you than you’re expecting. If I have impulse control problems, I might blurt something out as soon as I think of it, but I don’t necessarily want you to stop. If I have trouble with nonverbal or paralinguistic cues, I might not latch my turns the way you expect, or my backchannel might be timed in a way you don’t expect.
• Non-native speakers of a language may need more time to process speech; may speak more slowly and with pauses in different places than native speakers; may not pick up the same cues about turn-latching and backchannel, resulting in a timing difference; may need to make more requests for support. 

Norms around conversation tend to be super white/Western/male/NT; even among linguists, the way we talk about analyzing talk usually presupposes discrete turns, with one person who “has the floor” and everyone else listening. It even gets coded into our technology – I thing the account’s gone private, but someone recently tweeted, “For the sake of my wife’s family, Zoom needs to incorporate an ‘ashkenazi jewish’ checkbox” because the platform is programmed to try to identify a “main speaker” and auto-mute everyone else. Most of the progress on this front in linguistics has been pushed by Black women and Jewish women, or else we’d probably still be acting like Robert’s Rules represent the natural expression of human instincts.

And it’s very White Feminism to recognize how conversations styles have disparate impacts across gender lines without also recognizing other axes along which conversation styles vary, once that empower us as well as oppress us. Just because I feelinterrupted doesn’t mean I aminterrupted, and it definitely doesn’t mean I have the right to scream “EVERYBODY SHUT UP!!” until I’m the only one talking.

I don’t … have a great way to end this? Just that it’s good to recognize competing needs in communication, and have some humility and intentionality about whose needs gets prioritized and how.

It’s Not All Relative: The Problem with the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis

What comes first, language or thought? A series of papers published in 1951 grappled with this very question and established itself in linguistic theory. The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, proposed by American linguist Edward Sapir and his student Benjamin Whorf is probably one of the most mainstream linguistic theories out there today, going so far as to set the stage for the 2016 film Arrival.

This linguistic theory has gone on to inspire studies in anthropology, sociology, and other related disciplines.

But as usual, time and the telephone game have largely stretched and changed this theory for the rest of us. It’s common for academic concepts to become simplified and watered-down over time. Because a powerful idea resonates in society, whether that person is a linguist or not. And this idea, the idea of language coloring our fundamental perceptions, is more than powerful.

Hi All,

Apologies for the lack of article reviews and/or pasta recipe comparisons these last few months, but this semester I’ve been solo teaching my first sociolinguistics course while collecting data for my dissertation on truthful and deceptive TripAdvisor.com hotel reviews! I designed a survey and experiment asking people about their dialect background then having them write a truthful and deceptive hotel review (here’s the survey if you’re interested in taking it or passing it along). While my dissertation is focusing only on survey respondents who are undergraduates, I’m hoping to get as many surveys from as many people as possible for future research! Hopefully this summer I’ll be back with some more articles as I work on my literature review chapter as well and thanks for your support! 

LL Recipe Comparison:

I’d say my survey reminds me of the recipe for Spaghetti Squash Pasta with Sundried Tomato and Garlic:

Just as my research looks at how language is used in truthful and deceptive hotel reviews, this vegan dish is deceivingly like pasta yet a delicious take on the usual sun-dried tomato take in other pasta recipes. The garlic and fresh basil work together to make zingy flavor that compliments the squash, just as I hope to discover if dialect differences may work together with language in shaping online deception. Good Cooking!

MWV 5/11/19

Hi All,

Apologies again for my lengthy delay in reviewing articles- just one more week till I defend my dissertation proposal and hopefully become ABD in time for 2019! I’ll have to continue my break until I get that sorted in early December, but in the meantime here’s an interesting article on what a linguist can learn from looking at a gravestone.

LL Recipe Comparison:

This article reminds me of the recipe for Linguine al Limone:

Much as you will be surprised to learn the amount of information linguists can glean from gravestones, you’ll find yourself surprised at the simple deliciousness of this easy yet luscious dish! This is a perfect complement to any kind of seafood main course or as a stand alone treat, much as this article will remind you that despite how we are buried alone our words will live on as a complement to our lives, and that’s something to be thankful for! Good cooking!

MWV 11/19/18

Hi All,

Apologies about the lack of article reviews lately, but I’m in the middle of suffering through writing a proposal for my PhD dissertation, which I will be defending halfway through next month (gulp gulp). I’m afraid I’ll need to take a bit of a break while I desperately write about narratives, reported speech, and deception. However, while I’ll be back to posting articles in a few weeks, in the meantime enjoy this article about how linguists could actually help us talk to aliens.

LL Recipe Comparison:

This article reminds me of the recipe for Linguine with Gremolada:

Much as this article points out that we can’t assume we will know if aliens rely on sight to communicate, in making this recipe it would be good to assume that only a few people will know how to make Gremolada (minced garlic, parsley, and lemon zest FYI). The combination of the Gremolada with some orange zest and garlic is sure to spice up your day, similar to how we need to spice up our understanding of the possible ways that aliens communicate. Good Cooking!

MWV 10/25/18

Hi All,

Sorry about the few article reviews in the last few weeks- just began my first post-coursework semester as a Teaching Associate (whoo got my first mis-titled email addressing me as “Professor…”) and I’m about to head to Budapest to present a paper at the Second International Conference on Sociolinguistics! I’ll be back to reviewing articles in late September, but in the meantime here’s an interesting article about hyper-polyglots (people who speak crazy many languages),and a recipe comparison, of course. Enjoy and wish me luck presenting in Pest!

LL Article Comparison:

This article reminds me of the recipe for Savory Chocolate Pasta with Bucherondin, Hazelnuts, and Cherries:

Much as this article describes a language skill we all wish we could have (i.e. picking up a dozen languages, and being semi-fluent in more dozens), this recipe is a wish-list of decadence: unusual chocolate linguine, chalky goat cheese, and sweet cherries result in a savory-sweet delight. While we may envy hyper-polyglots for their amazing faculty in 11-plus languages, you will be the envy of all who behold you nomming on this pasta. Good Cooking!

MWV 9/3/18

Place reference in story beginnings: A cross-linguistic study of narrative and interactional affordances

By: Mark Dingemanse, Giovanni Rossi, and Simeon Floyd

Published by: Language in Society
Volume 46, Issue 2
Pages 129-158   

LL Abstract:

In this article, Dingemanse, Rossi, and Floyd look at the use of place references in narratives from 3 societies/languages (Cha’palaa, a Barbacoan language of Ecuador; Northern Italian, a Romance language of Italy; and Siwu, a Kwa language of Ghana). The authors find that place references are used in all three languages to set the stage or foreshadow events and to make the story cohere by anchoring elements of the developing story. This systematic study identifies possible uses of place reference that are generic to narratives across all three languages, suggesting that storytelling in conversation is a useful area to perform such comparative research.

LL Summary:

The article begins with noting the intersubjective notion of place referencing and by defining what exactly is a place reference: a possible answer to a “where-question” - in other words, a place that is logically connected to other places (recursive) and can be represented in a variety of forms. Dingemanse et al. then begin with an example analysis from a conversion in the British TV quiz show QI, demonstrating peoples’ normative understandings for how to begin stories as seen in the words of comedians Jimmy Carr and Sue Perkins. Observing how listeners in this orient to what place references evoke (i.e. inferences to a story’s point or a story’s later events) in this example, the authors introduce their aim in this paper: to identify the affordances of place references in narratives and to find cross-linguistic evidence for their use in conversational storytelling. The article then reviews previous literature from conversation analysis on the structure of story beginnings in various cultures and languages, introducing the background of the data in their current study: 108 narratives from videotaped natural conversations in the three languages of interest: Cha’palaa, Northern Italian, and Siwu. In 56 of these narratives, the analysts find place references that generally perform two affordances across all three languages: setting the stage and making the story cohere. Using a story about graveyard snakes from Siwu and 2 stories (about boar-hunting and women downriver) from Cha’palaa, the authors show how inclusion of place references serve to signal the start of a story and what it’s about (while it’s exclusion leads to sidebar conversation). Next, story beginnings from all three languages are analysed to show the second function of place references- making the story cohere, or providing a reference point for subsequent elements and developments of the story. Again, the authors use counter-examples to illustrate how the lack of a place reference in the appropriate place in a story leads to consequences (such as the humorous asides following one Northern Italian speakers’ lack of specificity). Dingemanse et al. argue that this and other examples reveal that references to places act as a binding technique to introduce and contextualise other elements and developments of the story. The article continues by introducing examples where place is under-specified, usually in narratives about the here and now, where narrators can draw on their current situation or elements of prior talk to make up for the lack of place in their narrative. In the final section, the authors discuss the differences between ‘location’ and ‘setting,’ how references can be ‘recognitional’ (known to the audience) or ‘non-recognitional’ (not intended to be known to the audience), and different language-specific practices for referring to place. Finally, they conclude that speakers flexibly use the interactional affordances of place references to meet the challenges of telling a story in conversation and call for further study of cross-linguistic features in this area of interaction.

LL Recipe Comparison:

This article reminds me of the recipe for Linguine with Cauliflower, Pine Nuts, and Currants:

While Dingemanse et al. find similarities in the ways that three cultures use the same linguistic strategy (place reference) in storytelling, you will count yourself lucky that this recipe combines three different ingredients into the same delicious dish! The brown butter sauce in this recipe brings out the flavor of the savory ingredients, much as the research of Dingemanse et al. brings out the interesting aspects of what makes a story compelling no matter what culture you belong to. And just like a story is incomplete without a grounding in place, this dish would be incomplete without generous amounts of Parmesan! Good Cooking!

MWV 8/22/18

Rights and Responsibilities in Calls for Help: The Case of the Mountain Glade Fire

By: Geoffrey Raymond and Don Zimmerman

Published by: Research on Language and Social Interaction
Volume 40, Issue 1
Pages 33-61

LL Abstract:

In this article, Raymond and Zimmerman use a corpus of 40 calls to 911 about the same event - a fire on the Pacific coast - to examine how callers and call-takers negotiate rights and responsibilities in their talk and the ways these rights affect actions and trajectories of 911 calls. They identify problems in managing these calls that occur over time, showing how callers and call-takers cannot avoid the institutional constraints posed by the format of an emergency call. Suggesting that institutional resistance to change may stem from such routinized and embodied practices, the authors further consider the impact on emergency services due to shifting presuppositions in multiple calls produced during community-wide events.

LL Summary:

Raymond and Zimmerman begin by describing the emergency captured by their call corpus: a mountainside fire in a coastal community on the Pacific Coast that affected thousands of residents, allowing the researchers to track an ordered series of calls about the same event. They describe the questions driving their research, outlining their focus on the practices that organize calls and the ways that these practices embody an alignment of identities between a service seeker and service provider. Identifying a directionality to the information flow in emergency calls (where practices are designed to facilitate information into a dispatch center), they introduce three ways that these practices are altered over multiple calls: information flow is reversed, complication of the service seeker/provider relationship, and complication in the rights and responsibilities of that relationship. In the next section of the article, the authors review prior research on the organization and production of emergency calls, beginning with how calls generally have a monofocal character leading to brevity and order as callers are constrained to present service-appropriate matters. They describe the ways that callers are aligned to report problems and answer questions, while call-takers receive the report and ask questions, resulting in the a division of rights and responsibilities that provide the directionality of information they previously discuss. As deviations from the orientations, presuppositions, and activities have consequences for the emergency call, the authors note how the first two turns of a call set up the responsibilities for each party while positioning them to engage in a specific type of activity: reporting an event for the purpose of obtaining help for that problematic event. Using the first call about the fire, Raymond and Zimmerman show how the organization of 911 calls allow callers to use their first turn as a “slot” for presenting the trouble that led them to call (the “caller’s problem). Noting the compact opening and closing sequences of the first call, the authors illustrate the sequencing inherent in emergency calls that facilitates the orientations, presuppositions, and activities that enable callers to report emergencies. Next, Raymond and Zimmerman use examples from several calls to show how callers departed from the norms of an emergency call in reversing the directionality of the calls as the fire emergency progressed, demonstrating that both callers and call-takers maintained a tangential alignment with these norms despite these deviations. Here both call-takers and callers are shown modifying their practices in an effort to see if their call matches previously delivered information, resulting in modified service announcements and orientations to a caller’s right to report an emergency (e.g. when a caller’s first turn opens with a request for a call taker to confirm they already know about the fire, or a call taker provides “candidate locations” for the emergency). In addition to calls where reporting is sustained as the overall activity, the authors next examine calls where other projects are pursued, such as information or advice seeking calls. Here they show that callers orient to their limited rights as reporters yet presuppose that call takers know more about the event in question than the caller, reversing the activities in a typical emergency call. In calls seeking advice, the authors demonstrate that callers use location formulations to establish their proximity to the fire as a basis for pursuing information and advice. They conclude their analysis with two examples of calls where call takers struggled with requests for advice, as in these cases the call takers faced institutional limits on their own rights to provide information or advice (such as encouraging a caller to evacuate). The article ends with a discussion of how the calls systematically changed over time, from reporting the fire to seeking advice or information about the emergency, and the authors note that both the organization and distribution of rights and responsibilities in these calls changed as a result. Despite these changes, they underscore that callers and call takers attempted to preserve the ordinary structure of these calls, suggesting that institutional constraints make resistance to change problematic in such situations.

LL Recipe Comparison:

This article reminds me of the recipe for Feisty Shrimp Linguine:

While the authors of this article discuss different linguistic responses to a fiery situation, you will find yourself loving the fiery flavor of this linguine dish! The shrimp and red pepper of this recipe are a nice twist on the traditional seafood linguine approach, and the thick tomato sauce can be adjusted to your own heat preferences. Even though callers and call takers must deal with problems if an emergency steps outside the norm, you won’t face any problems putting this easy dinner idea together. Good Cooking!

MWV 7/13/18 

“I would suggest you tell this ^^^ to your doctor”: Online narrative problem-solving regarding face-to-face doctor-patient interaction about body weight

By: Cynthia Gordon

Published in: Narrative Matters in Medical Contexts across Disciplines
Edited by: Franziska Gygax and Miriam A. Locher
Pages 117-140

LL Abstract:

In this chapter, Gordon applies computer-mediated discourse analysis (CMDA) methods to explain how participants in a single thread on a medical discussion board jointly work to address the first poster’s description of an interaction where a doctor criticizes her weight. Using a small stories perspective, she identifies six intertextual linking strategies that posters use to co-create a small story that works through the first poster’s dilemma: posing information-seeking questions, paraphrasing and reframing, creating “constructed dialogue” (Tannen, 2007), using the board’s quotation function, pointing (i.e. using the ^ sign), and advice-giving. In mapping these strategies, this chapter shows how participants use linguistic strategies to attribute responsibility for a problematic interaction to both the doctor and original patient/poster.

LL Summary:

Gordon (2015) opens this chapter by introducing online discussion boards as similar to what Ochs, Smith, and Taylor (1989) suggest about dinner tables, in that both act as “opportunity spaces” for the possibility of joint action of participants. In the introduction, she situates her research focus on this discussion board thread by describing her small stories approach to exploring the metadiscourse in this thread about a doctor’s unwelcome comments. Gordon next gives an overview of the chapter, then reviews previous research on online discussion boards, small stories, and intertextuality. Describing a range of studies making up the theoretical background of the study, she begins this section by discussing research showing how online discussion boards often feature participants engaging in storytelling to manage health-related issues while connecting with others. Gordon then reviews the “small stories” perspective in narrative analysis, wherein collaborative, fragmented, or incomplete “narrative-like formats of talk” have been demonstrated to act as a form of problem-solving behavior. The theoretical background section ends with a discussion of intertextuality - the relationships linking language meaning to prior instances of that language - and current research on linking/quoting others while revealing awareness of language through metadiscourse (language about language). In the next section of the chapter, the author describes “FriendInFitness/FIF”, an app and website geared to users attempting to track their caloric consumption and expenditure (aka food intake and exercise). Gordon describes how she applied Herring’s (2004) sampling methods to identify a thread with 46 posts by 24 participants beginning with a post by “Alma_Michelle” about a doctor-patient interaction about her body weight. The chapter then presents Gordon’s analysis, starting with a description of the linguistic strategies used by “Alma_Michelle” in her original post, such as the use of constructed dialogue to voice the doctor and the providing of details and information about her personal health statistics. Next, Gordon provides an analysis of the 6 intertextual strategies she identifies in the thread responding the original post. The first, asking information-seeking questions, occurs early in the thread and is typical of problem-solving narrative episodes. With the second strategy - paraphrasing and reframing - Gordon finds that participants recontextualize select elements of the first poster’s language, sometimes reinforcing her perspective and sometimes offering new understanding. The author finds that posters use the third strategy of constructed dialogue to create hypothetical utterances, re-create past utterances from outside of the thread, and to tie back to words used earlier in the thread, essentially suggesting the reinterpretation of information. Related to constructed dialogue, Gordon next shows how the fourth strategy - using the board’s built in quotation function - to link posts and create coherence on the thread. The fifth strategy of pointing echoes the previous two strategies, as Gordon reveals that posters use symbols and deictic pronouns to vividly link back to prior posts and introduce advice by modifying understandings of those previous posts. Finally, the sixth strategy of advice-giving is presented by Gordon as an interconnected activity with narration, as she finds that posters move their tellings into the future (similar to what has been found for small stories in other contexts) via advice that helps solve the original poster’s dilemma. Gordon ends the analysis section by summarizing her findings about the six strategies realizing posters’ co-telling or co-problem-solving via narration, suggesting that these strategies facilitate the gradual gathering and sharing of information and multiple perspectives. The chapter ends with a discussion of the larger themes referenced by the small story evoked in this thread (aka about how doctors should communicate with patients), tying Gordon’s analysis to questions of identity and narrative problem-solving online and the ways that online discussion forums provide opportunities for collaborative sense-making.

LL Recipe Comparison:

This chapter reminds me of the recipe forLinguine with Kale and Tomatoes:

While Gordon finds that many discussion board participants had to work together to solve a poster’s dilemma, you will find that this recipe only requires one participant to make and will have no dilemmas about reaching for seconds! The fresh kale and tomatoes pair quite nicely with the light garlic sauce in this dish, much as online discussion boards pair nicely with soliciting advice about health. Good cooking!

MWV 6/3/18

Hi All,

Apologies to those of you waiting anxiously in finals season for more article reviews, but I’ve been completely swamped these last few weeks finishing papers for my last semester PhD coursework (whoo SFL examinations of Trump White House emails) and taking my girlfriend to meet my grandmother in Italy. Now that summer has started, I have time to dig in to some articles- expect lots of narrative and social media discourse studies in the next few weeks! For those of you battling Imposter Syndrome in your programs, take heart from this sad tale of the Linguist Linguine- I found out a few weeks ago that I didn’t pass my second qualifying review paper, receiving instead a recommendation to submit a different paper that was better organized and/or publishable. While this would be terrifying news to any grad student, the reviewer said to treat this like a detour, not a roadblock, so I’m pedal-to-the-medal determined this summer to learn how to write journal articles in linguistics (and hopefully pass my next submission). Hopefully I’ll be able to let you all know what I learn as I deliver you more article reviews, but in the meantime here’s an interesting article about parents teaching their babies sign language as a fadand an accompanying recipe comparison. Enjoy, and good cooking friends!

LL Recipe Comparison

This article reminds me of the recipe for Linguine with Baby Heirloom Tomatoes and Anchovy Breadcrumbs:

Much as this article raises important points about the ability of language to include and exclude, this recipe includes just the right amount of savory ingredients to guarantee that no one will exclude this dish from their favorites! While learning ASL may be a fad to some people, I guarantee you will take it seriously after reading this article, much as you should seriously consider the benefits of anchovies in spicing up your pasta dishes. Bon Appétit!

MWV
5/23/2018

Hi All,

Sorry that my posts have been so sporadic these past few months, but it’s been death by blessings over here at the Linguist Linguine, if blessings were conference presentations I guess? I’ve just gotten back from TX for SALSA XXVI and am about to wade into the scary pools of finals, so please forgive my quiet for a bit. In the meantime, here’s an interesting article about WikiTongues, a project to save disappearing languages, especially as we may lose 500 in the next 5 years. 

LL Recipe Comparison:

This article reminds me of the recipe for Romano Chicken with Lemon Garlic Pasta:

Much like the National Geographic article, this recipe contains hidden treasures in its advice on how to bread chicken for a tasty and zesty dish. While losing the world’s languages may leave you bitter, you’ll find the lemon in this savory meal perfect for your pasta needs. Good Cooking!

MWV 4/24/18

Pre-empting reference problems in conversation

By: Jan Svennevig

Published by: Language in Society
Volume 39
Pages 173–202

LL Abstract:

In this article, Svennevig identifies how conversationalists deal with problems of reference as they are producing their turns at talk. The article discusses two ways that speakers change their turns in progress in order to introduce a reference to an interlocutor or to check their understanding of that reference. The author discusses previously-known processes of modifying or expanding a turn in order to accomplish this reference-checking, and proposes a heretofore-undescribed practice where speakers minimize disruption to surrounding talk by embedding referent information before a referring expression has been produced.

LL Summary:

Svennevig begins the article with some data introducing how establishing reference is a joint accomplishment between speaker and hearer. He notes that problems of reference may occur at two levels: at the level of linguistic
form (using an unfamiliar linguistic expression) or at the level of identification of the referent (when a place, a person, or an object may not be uniquely identifiable to the interlocutor). He ends the introduction by arguing that the insertion of an existential clause into an incomplete syntactic unit is a convention for dealing with emergent problems of reference. Next, the author describes previous research on references from the perspective of interactional sociolinguistics, outlining studies on the practices employed to check recognition of a referent that create intersubjectivity between interlocutors. Research from Auer, Schegloff, and others suggests that speakers prefer minimal or single reference forms yet create opportunities for the interlocutor to respond. In the next section, Svennevig provides background on theories of common ground where interactants rely on physical copresence, prior conversations, and community membership as resources for assessing the common ground. The author distinguishes between two kinds of referents signaling whether a linguistic expression is expected to be in the communal lexicon: those that are uniquely identifiable (like pronouns, definite noun phrases, and names) and those that are not uniquely identifiable (indefinite nouns). He uses some data from Norwegian to show how particles mark upcoming referents as not accessible, further outlining how subjects are often identifiable referents that are placed initially in utterances or introduced in existential clauses. Svennevig ends this section by identifying how the most common reference problem in spontaneous conversation is speakers overestimating common ground. He distinguishes between practices of expanding a turn before or after a problematic term has been produced, and identifies three preemptive practices speakers engage in to avoid problems of reference: marking the expression as unfamiliar, inserting background information, or checking what the interlocutor knows about the expression or referent. Next, Svennevig examines post-positioned turn expansions in data from a corpus of interviews in job centers for immigrants and Oslo sociolinguistic interviews. Excerpts from interviews with social workers and immigrants show how the workers suspend activity during explanations of referents in a marked way via a turn expansion. He uses another conversation to identify an “apokoinou construction” in which a syntactic constituent is integrated prosodically and syntactically with two different clauses, one preceding and one following like “they inject this…catalyst/ / catalyst they call it” in the conversation. This construction involves a shift in footing, as in a TV interviewer shifting from addressing a guest to addressing the public audience. The article continues with excerpts where interlocutors might not identify the referent of an expression used, leading to a speaker expanding their turn via apposition and expansion. Various excerpts show how speakers use intonation and parenthetical insertions to provide information relevant to identifying referents if a mismatch in encyclopedic knowledge was suspected. Next, Svennevig analyzes excerpts where speakers check if interlocutors know a referent or referring expression (such as by inserting a second metacommunicative question after a first question or by gaze before entering an expansion). The final section of the analysis deals with a new practice wherein speakers expand a turn in progress by inserting a clausal construction before a potentially problematic referring expression, paving the way for an explanation of meaning. Multiple examples from excerpts show how this strategy allows for delayed self-repairs where beginnings are not recycled but rather signal referent identification. These examples demonstrate how speakers can simultaneously perform conversational actions like answering questions while checking for understanding within expanded turns. The article then concludes with a discussion of these preemptive techniques used as part of recipient design in conversation as they provide answers to questions in advance. 

LL Recipe Comparison:

This article reminds me of the recipe for Prosciutto-Chicken Pasta:

Much as this article discusses how people preempt trouble in conversation about references, this recipe preempts any demands you might have for delicious flavor and blended tastes! Svennevig identifies how people insert existential clauses to check if others understand their references, and this recipe’s use of broccoli, chicken, and linguine will check all your savory boxes as you check out this dish. Good Cooking!

MWV 4/2/18

Hi All,

Apologies again for my long delay in posting, but it’s been a terrible month of prepping papers for conferences and hustling to get my second qualifying paper in. I’m about to attend my first AAAL (American Association for Applied Linguists) meeting in Chicago this weekend, so I’ll be back to posting hopefully at the end of this month. Until then, here’s an interesting article about whether we live in the best time in history to learn languages, ever.

LL Recipe Comparison:

This article reminds me of the recipe for Fastest Pasta with Spinach Sauce:

Just as the article mentions how young people learn new languages quickly, you’ll find that you can make this dish incredibly quickly! The kalamata olives pair very well with the spinach and red pepper flakes, and the way that it’s all done pretty much in one pot reminds me of the article’s mentioning that technology allows us to learn languages pretty much all on one digital space. Good Cooking!

MWV 3/21/18

Oh-prefaced responses to inquiry

By: John Heritage

Published by: Language in Society
Volume 27
Pages 291–334

LL Abstract:

In this article, Heritage (1998) looks at the appearance of the discourse marker “oh” in a particular context - turn-initial position in responses to questions - and demonstrates how the use of “oh” generally suggests a change of state in the speaker. He shows how this oh-prefacing may mark a previous question as problematic or indicate that a speaker is reluctant to pursue a conversational topic. After exploring a wide range of examples where oh-prefaced turns are produced, the article concludes that while “oh” generally shows its producer has undergone a cognitive “change of state,” people rely on the contextual aspects of their utterances to determine the sense of this change.

LL Summary:

Heritage begins with several examples from conversations to show how “oh” generally shows or registers that its producer has undergone a change in state of knowledge or information. He then specifies the focus of this paper: oh-prefaced turns that are produced as the second pair in a sequence, aka those that are produced in response to a question. The author continues by characterizing “oh” as indicating that a question has occasioned a marked shift of attention, meaning it was unexpected or problematic in some way. In this section, Heritage discusses an interview with Princess Margaret and excerpts between students and teachers to conclude that one function of “oh” prefaced responses is to indicate that the question to which they respond is inapposite. In the next section, he expands on inapposite inquiries by distinguishing between cases where the question indexes something “already known” by participants because of prior talk or joint understandings, and cases where questions are poorly fitted to the sequential context they are produced in. The author looks at examples of women and men and finds a pattern of assertion -> query -> oh-prefaced reassertion that is produced when matters from prior talk are questioned. Looking at reported speech, Heritage shows how some oh-prefacing indicates that a question’s answer is self-evident from the physical or cultural/individual knowledge context, or that there is some element of the social environment that makes the question problematic. After using examples of the functions of oh-prefacing in troubles-telling, questions, and problematic questions, he notes that in some contexts, the exploitation of oh-prefacing as a method of emphatic response to questions has become quite common. In the following section, the article explores cases where oh-prefacing is used to project reluctance to talk about the topic raised by an inquiry. Heritage identifies three ways that this reluctance is shown in the data: oh-prefaced responses are minimal or unelaborated in the matter of the inquiry, producers of oh-prefaced responses unilaterally shift topic immediately after the response or shortly after, or these producers withhold on-topic talk (aka remain silent). In the final section of the article, Heritage examines responses to personal state inquiries like “How are you?” Building on Jefferson’s (1980) work on troubles talk, where she proposes that this troubles talk is marked by a general tension between attending the trouble or “business as usual,” the author shows that oh-prefacing can intensify the downgrading of downgraded responses (like “oh pretty good”). Finally, Heritage concludes by restating his argument that oh-prefacing uniformly conveys the sense that the prior question has occasioned a shift in attention to the matter of the question, so that its central use is implying the inappositeness of this question.

LL Recipe Comparison:

This article reminds me of the recipe for Lemon-Asparagus Linguine with Garlicky Panko:

While Heritage identifies multiple functions of oh-prefaced responses in his article, the recipe for this dish will leave you swooning over its simple steaming ingredients! Much as we use oh-prefaced responses to suggest a range of social cues, this dish has a range of flavors - asparagus, lemon, garlic, that suggest a crisp and zesty bite. Good cooking!

MWV 2/12/18

PS Apologies for the delays in posting, all! About to finish a qualifying review paper by March so going underground until that’s done- will post short updates until that’s over! Bon Appétit until then!

Hi All,

I hope you all are having a chance to take a break from work as 2018 approaches! I’ll be back to reviewing articles after the LSA annual meeting in January, but until then here’s an interesting article about gentrification and bilingual education to tide you over. Enjoy!

LL Article Comparison:

This article reminds me of the recipe for pasta mista:

Much as this Italian recipe elevates pasta that Americans might throw away, the article discusses how middle-class white families are beginning to elevate their perceptions of bilingual education. However, unlike the worrisome implications of this strain on those students who might be pushed out of multilingual instruction, you’ll find this recipe for an usual type of pasta, chickpea, and basil dish has only delicious implications if you give it a go. Good cooking, and see you in 2018!

MWV 12/29/17

tlbodine:

capricorn-0mnikorn:

And it’s a better fit for here:

I used to be confused about why “Handicap” became offensive, too (as I remember it, the movement to stop using it started picking up steam in the early 1990s). And then, a few years ago, I went on a deep dive into the history of it for part of a book I was working on (My main source for this info was an article in an academic journal I found online that’s now behind a paywall {sigh}).

But this is what I remember. I love it as part of word history, because it says so much about how we perceive things, and how we choose the words we do.

Anyway:

The Folk History of the word says that’s because it comes from the phrase “Cap-in-Hand” – in other words, begging, and gives the suggestion that the only thing disabled people are good for is begging.

The true history of the word is that it started out associated with sports (Golf, and Horse Racing) and referred to an extra difficulty the stronger competitor had to deal with in order to even up the stakes for the weaker competitors.

Around the turn of the 20th century, it started being applied to children with intellectual impairments, and framing their lives as being burdened by their limitations. It might have started out as neutral at the time, but it quickly morphed first to a term of pity porn, and a derogatory term (The children are burdened by their impairments, and they are, in turn, a burden on Society).

At the end of World War 1, the word “Handicap” began to be applied to all disabilities, especially to the wounded soldiers coming back from the War, and applying for government assistance. And then, the military system spread to the civilian sector, and the way states ran their welfare systems.

And so, by the middle of the 20th century, the word “Handicap” came to be associated with bureaucracy and having to submit to “experts” examining us, to decide how much help we deserve, and how many hoops we have to jump through to get it (some things never change). And so that feels like begging with “Cap in hand,” even if that isn’t where the word actually comes from.

And then, by the ‘90s, the “Social Model of Disability” began to take hold – that’s the idea that we’re not only disabled by our own impairments, but also by how our society is built (lack of accessible housing, inflexible employment requirements, etc.) and the word “Handicapped” implies that our impairments are burdens we carry for ourselves, and “Disability” doesn’t.So that’s why the consensus was gradually reached that “Disability” was the better word.

(Sorry this got long; I’m something of a word and history geek)

I’ve always thought it was a bit of a shame this developed this way. Because I don’t blame anyone for rejecting the term with all this associated baggage. But “handicap” in the horse racing sense is such an excellent counterpoint to privilege.

Like in horse racing, a horse might be made to carry extra weight on the saddle as a handicap, to even the odds for betting. This is not something natural to the horse. It’s something allocated to him by a third party serving its own interests — the handicapper wants to make betting more exciting and lucrative for the gamblers.

To me that’s such a good metaphor for the ways systemic oppression create problems for the disabled. It’s not that you are inherently any less than anybody else, it’s that you have this extra burden placed on you but are still expected to compete in the same race. Accommodations could eliminate that handicap, but gosh, then the system wouldn’t get advantages for outsiders now would it?

So yeah. It’s a problematic and outdated term to be sure but it makes a neat metaphor.

Real time vs apparent time studies are only going to become more common as we enter the future, and I’m excited