Regional, social, occupational

The particular set of features, which identifies a language variety, does not represent the features of the language as a whole. Variety features depend on the presence of certain factors in a social situation. Classifications of these factors vary, but we may group them into two types according to most general dimensions: sociolinguistic and stylistic factors.

Sociolinguistic factors are connected with very broad situational constraints on language use. They chiefly identify the regional and social varieties of the language. They are relatively permanent features of the spoken and written language, over which we have comparatively little conscious control. We tend not to change our regional or social group way of speaking in every-day communication and usually we are not aware of using it.

Stylistic factors relate to restrictions on language use that are much more narrowly constrained, and identify individual preferences in usage (phraseology, special vocabulary, language of literature) or the varieties that are associated with occupational groups (lawyers, journalists, scholars). These are features, over which we are able to exercise some degree of conscious control.

As David Crystal, a famous British linguist puts it, regional language variation of English provides a geographical answer to the question 'Where are you from, in the English-speaking world?'

English is considered mother tongue in the UK, US, Australia, Ire­land, New Zealand, Caribbean nations. In Canada and South Africa

4.3. Language varieties: regional, social, occupational

English is one of the two native languages. Speakers of these countries _use different kinds of English in different areas within these countries. These are regional varieties of English that are sometimes called re­gional dialects. We can see some differences in the use of English on the example of regional varieties of American English. In the speech of educated southerners one can hear such forms as seed, seen instead of saw or clam, dim, dome, doom, dum instead of the standard climbed. Bostonians use cleanser instead of dry cleaner's (compare examples from Russian — парадное used in St.-Petersburg for подъезд or гаманок used in the rural Urals and Siberia for кошелек).

Social language variation provides an answer to a somewhat different question 'Who are you?' or 'What are you in the eyes of the English-speaking society to which you belong?' (33, p. 393). Actually social variation provides several possible answers, because people may acquire several identities as they participate in the social structure. One and the same person may belong to different social groups and perform different social roles. A person may at the same time be described as 'a parent', 'a wife', 'an architect', 'a feminist', 'a senior citizen', 'a member of Parliament', 'an amateur sculptor', 'a theatre-goer'; the possibilities may be endless.

Any of these identities can have consequences for the kind of language we use. Language more than anything else will testify to our permanent and temporary roles in social life.

Some features of social variation lead to particular linguistic con­sequences. In many ways our pronunciation, choice of words and constructions, general strategy of communication are defined by the age, sex and socio-economic aspects. Choice of occupation has a less predictable influence, though in some contexts, e. g. medicine or law it can be highly distinctive.

Chapter 4. The T heory of Functional Styles ___________

—------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ■----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Adopting a specific social role, such as making a congratulatory speech or conducting a panel talk, invariably entails a choice of appropriate linguistic forms.

Differences in language choices that correlate with the subject of discussion, the audience, the genre, the occasion and the purpose or the medium of communication are called registers.

In other words, we identify the uses to which language is put: the subject it treats, the circumstances in which it is used, the social rela­tionships among its users and the purposes of its use. We adapt what we want to say or write to the circumstances in which we are commu­nicating. We use different words in discussing politics, sports, theology or computer technologies. We arrange our sentences differently in talking to babies, bosses, close friends or making announcements, etc. Sentence structure differs between recipes, telegrams, stock-market reports and thank-you notes. English is pronounced differently from a pulpit or over the counter of a fast-order restaurant. The medium of communication is also relevant: when listening on the phone we have to make frequent responses: I see, oh, yes, well to let the person know we are still there and paying attention. They tell little about us as persons but a good deal about how we respond to the circumstances of communication. Regional and social variations depend on who we are, register depends on who we are communicating with, where, how, and about what. Registers are functional options available to us in social and personal communication.

We adapt our language to the occasion for which we use it. An important dimension of variation in English is the degree of formality of a language event stretching from the coronation of a British sovereign to a relaxed get-together of alumni. The continuum of formality may be arbitrarily divided into any number of subsegments

4.3. Language varieties: regional, social, occupational

for purposes of discussion. For example, a presidential inauguration address may be labeled as ritual, a request to city officials for action as formal, a discussion among members of a civic club as collegial, a conversation between good friends as familiar, comments of husband and wife watching TV as intimate. Hardly any aspect of language -phonetic, lexical or grammatical - is the same in the five situations. Each of these situations calls for its own kind of language. The variety used in the intimate kind of talk would be ridiculous or even grotesque in a ritual speech and vice versa.

Across the world attitudes to social variation differ a lot. All countries display social stratification, though some have more clearly defined boundaries than others and therefore more distinct features of class dialect. Britain is usually said to be linguistically more class-conscious than other English-speaking countries.

In Great Britain the grammar and pronunciation used by educated people from the south of England, called Received Standard, have informally achieved highest status. Fostered by the public schools Winchester, Eton and the like as well as the two great universities, Oxford and Cambridge, Received Standard became the accepted national standard. Used normally by upper-class families RS as taught in the public schools to children of the newly rich has been one of the ways for the established order to accommodate the new wealth. RS was adopted as the usual model for teaching English to native speakers of other languages. The educational systems of the Commonwealth in Asia and Africa have been modeled on British practice and in Europe there still is a notion that RS is "better" or 'more elegant" than American English.

For example, in England one accent has traditionally dominated over all others and the notion of respectable social standing is usually

Chapter 4. The Theory of Functional Styles ___________

associated with Received Pronunciation (RP), considered to be the 'prestige accent'.

However today with the breakdown of rigid divisions between social classes and the development of mass media RP is no longer the j prerogative of social elite. Today it is best described as an 'educated' accent which actually has several varieties. Most educated people have developed an accent, which is a mixture of RP and various regional features that sometimes is called 'modified RP'.

This is one example that shows a general trend in modern English-regionally modified speech is no longer stigmatised as 'low', it can even be an advantage, expressing such social values as solidarity and democracy. A pure RP accent, by contrast can even evoke hostility, especially in those parts of Britain that have their own regional norms, e. g. Scotland and Wales.

Occupational varieties of the national language are normally associated with a particular way of earning a living. They belong to the group of stylistically determined varieties and differ from both regional and social sublanguages.

Features of language that identify people's geographical or social origins, once established can hardly change over a short period of time. It would be very difficult to change your accent if you move from one part of the country to another with a different regional norm; it is equally difficult to transform the linguistic indicators of our social background (vocabulary and structural expression).

Occupational varieties are not like that. Their linguistic features may be just as distinctive as regional or social features, but they are only in temporary use. They 'go with the territory'—adopted as we begin

4.4. An overview of functional style systems

work and given up as we finish it. People who cannot stop 'talking shop' even when they are not at work are rather an exception to the rule.

Any professional field could serve as an illustration of occupa­tional linguistic identity. There are no class distinctions here. Factory workers have to master a special glossary of technical terms and administrative vocabulary (seniority labels, term of ser­vice, severance pay, fringe benefits, safety regulation) in order to carry out professional communication. To fulfil their tasks they de­velop jargon and professional slang, which set them apart from outsiders. The more specialised the occupation and the more se­nior or professional the position the more technical the language. Also, if an occupation has a long-lasting and firmly established tradition it is likely to have its own linguistic rituals which its members accept as a criterion of proficiency. The highly distinc­tive languages of law, government and religion provide the clear­est cases, with their unique grammar, vocabulary, and patterns of discourse. Of course, all occupations are linguistically distinc­tive to a certain degree. In some cases it involves only special terms; in others it may be a combination of linguistic features on different levels as will be shown in the last section of this chapter.