January 2011
Dear friends
I have a strong feeling that 2011 is going to be a good SLICE year. Yesterday, on the last day of January and just in time for the End of January SLICE News, I received the two e-mail messages that I reproduce below.
Needless to say that I’d be happy to receive and distribute more such messages. And please do not hesitate to respond to Jan-Ola and Jacob with whatever comments and suggestions you may have – either directly to them or maybe preferably (for us to advance in this together) by using the SLICE mailing list as it appears in the address slot above.
Welcome to Jenny, and best wishes for 2011 to us all!
Tore
Message from Jan-Ola
I'm writing to inform you briefly that we are finally doing something to the media strand here in Swedish-language Finland. I was able to get a small sum of money to hire somebody to help me with the "infrastructure" of the media data, i.e. to collect and list a representative sample of radio and TV programmes from around 1970 until today.
I have now found such a person: Jenny Stenberg-Sirén, who has a master's degree in journalism and has worked for several years at the Finnish Broadcasting Company YLE. She will now be working for about two months looking at the archives to see what is there. She has not promised to continue working with the data and have this be the first step toward a PhD, but this is a possibility –
I don't know who else is working actively on issues related to the Media strand of the project. But if you have any good suggestions, we would naturally love to hear them as soon as possible. So far we've simply thought that we'll pick out a minimum of one radio programme and one TV programme every year 1970-2010 from as many different genres as we can think of: sports, news, entertainment, discussion programmes, etc. And we would also like to have a representative sample of programmes that have been regionally produced and those that are targeted at the "majority" Swedish-language population (i.e. in "standard" Finland Swedish).
But if you have more precise suggestions or comments on the feasibility of this, we would love to have your comments.
All the very best from Finland -
Message from Jacob
In November 2010, I started my post.doc. the project which is a collaboration between Lanchart and LARM. LARM has as its aim to make accessible for research the total radio archive of the Danish national broadcasting corporation, DR. When fully developed the archive will contain more than 1,000,000 hours of radio broadcasts dating back to the late 1920’s-early 1930s. The project is truly interdisciplinary. The researchers working on LARM come from a range of backgrounds including media studies, arts, literary studies, musicology, dramatology, design, information science etc.
My project is (for now) the only one with a (socio)linguistic aim. It has the working title “DR som sprogpolitisk aktør” [DR as a force in language policy]. It has two separate but interrelated strands. On the one hand, the official and unofficial language policies of the DR viz-a-viz standard and non-standard language, dialects, foreign loanwords etc. are investigated through studies in official and internal documents, radio programmes on the subject, and interviews with contemporary and former players. On the other hand, the actual spoken language of the programmes is investigated with 3 foci, 1) changes in the standard language and the style of a news broadcast, 2) changes in the proportion of dialect speakers and the degree of dialect in the speech of these, 3) changes in the proportion of loanwords in a news broadcast. Ideally, these developments should be traced back to the beginning of the DR around 1928, but archives are scarce from the earliest period, in particular when it comes to the mundane, everyday programmes which were considered not worth keeping in the time but are of course priceless now.
These first couple of months, I have spent getting a general idea of the content of the archives, in particular, the early news programmes (there are some, but it takes a bit of detective work to find them) and getting to know the language policymakers at the DR today, as well as reading up on the history of the DR, on historical (in particularly layman) “sociolinguistics”, (what were the most condemned linguistic innovations in the 1930s?), on Danish speech therapy of the period (which sounds were generally considered “unhygienic”) etc. etc.
Ari sends this good news
and his best wishes from Reykjavík
(... to which I add mine from Copenhagen, Tore)
There is some news to share from Iceland about the media strand. I received a modest research grant from the University of Iceland Research Fund 2011 to pay 2,5 months´ wages, starting this February, so Amanda Hilmarsson-Dunn and myself are presently starting a small project which is aimed at one aspect of written media. This project investigates the perception of Icelanders of the difference between Icelandic language registers, in a variety of written media texts. The hypothesis that we intend to prove false or true is that speakers share their judgments of the appropriateness of different text registers for different written media genres. We intend to have 120 people (one group of 18-19-year-old upper secondary school students, and one group of upper secondary school teachers) read and comment on 4 different texts, on the same topic, that uses different language registers. The register differences are triggered by language features which generally belong to formal/planned usage and informal/unplanned usage.
February 2011
Dear SLICE friends in general – and contributors to SLICE vol. 1 in particular
I trust this belated End of February issue of SLICE News is right in reporting about massive writing efforts among us, as all promised contributions for SLICE volume 1 are due in the nearest future. (Deadline for revised ‘country reports’ is March 15). Nik and I are looking forward to receiving the results of your efforts.
March 2011
Dear friends, It is a pleasure to announce that the present edition of our SLICE news is all about progress in the media strand. I begin by giving the word to Jan-Ola in Finland, then pass it on to Jacob in Denmark, and finish with a few thoughts about a possible SLICE volume 3 on the role of the media in contemporary language standardisation processes.
Breaking news from Swedish-language Finland
This is just to let you know that we are indeed making progress on the media front in Swedish-language Finland. Jenny Stenberg-Sirén has now been working on extracting and digitalizing Swedish-language radio- and TV data from the Finnish Broadcasting Company YLE for several months, and she has become so inspired and interested in this and the project as a whole that she has decided to do her PhD on the topic. I'll supervise her and Tom Moring of the Swedish School of Social Science at the University of Helsinki will co-supervise her (Tom is a professor in communication and journalism - some of you may know him). What is more, we have even been able to secure funding for Jenny for about a year. So, now it's only up to us to make this work - with your help and assistance.
All the very best from Finland & Jan-Ola (Östman)
A Danish event, organized and reported here by our SLICE/LARM man Jacob Thøgersen
As you may know, the Danish SLICE/Media collaborates with the project LARM- Audio Research Archive which is a project aimed at making the archives of the Danish Broadcasting Corporation accessible to research.
On 11 April we held a seminar with the title “Language and Language Norms in Denmark’s Radio” (where “Denmark’s Radio” (DR) is also the name of the Danish national broadcasting company). Program and PowerPoint slides from the seminar (in Danish) are uploaded to the LARM-archive website (not available).
The speakers included our own Tore Kristiansen and Jacob Thøgersen of SLICE/LARM who spoke on the interrelationship between language change, language norms and the media and the SLICE and LARM projects.
Marianne Rathje and Anne Kjærgaard of the Danish Language Board presented their study of language quality in the DR, specifically regarding errors in written language, English loans and “foul” language, i.e. cuss words, rudeness etc. They concluded that “bad” language does occur and that it varies highly across genres leading to a discussion of whether “bad” language is bad or appropriate to the task at hand.
Jonas Blom from the University of Southern Denmark’s journalism program spoke on his PhD work on changes in syntactic complexity in Danish news broadcasts. Broadly speaking he finds that news language gets less syntactically complex through the years, in accord with the guidelines given to journalists in training.
We aimed at getting the media engaged in the debate, so we invited two participants from the DR.
Frans Gregersen interviewed Martin Kristiansen who is the DR “Language Consultant”. Kristiansen is trained in literary studies and as a classical singer. The discussion revolved around the concept of public service media and the role of language in this. Furthermore, the talk touched upon the quality of language which to Kristiansen and the DR is centred on reliability but also “musicality” in language, i.e. aesthetics.
Jacob Thøgersen interviewed Christoffer Emil Bruun who has for a couple of years managed a weekly program on language known as “Sproglaboratoriet” (for those interested, several years worth of Sproglaboratoriet are available as podcasts from the DR’s website). The talk revolved around the public’s interest in a program focused solely on language (in fact the DR has no fewer than three different program series dedicated to language, Sproglaboratoriet, Sprogminuttet and Sproghjørnet). The hunger for language programs seems insatiable, and the amount of response from the audience (in particular complaints about language use in this or any other radio or TV programs) is truly impressive.
The experience to take away is that the Danish media people were very interested in engaging in discussions with us and in explaining their policies and day-to-day decisions. The form, to have academics “interview” the media people seemed to work well.
Thoughts about a SLICE vol. 3 focuses on the role of the media in contemporary language (de-)standardisation
A short reminder: Our SLICE group consists of people who investigate Standard Language Ideology in Contemporary Europe. Our first publication SLICE vol. 1, which will appear later this year, is dedicated to establishing 'the scene' in terms of country reports and discussions of theoretical issues. Work-related to our 'experimental strand' is also scheduled to appear this year as SLICE vol. 2. Now the time seems to have come for considering the possibilities of a SLICE vol. 3 presenting work related to our 'media strand'. However, before making any decisions, we will need some feedback about possible contributions. The realistic and optimal schedule would probably be 2013. I'd be happy to receive any kind of reaction to this, as soon as possible. Also, as we know that several of our group will be at the Language in the media conference in Limerick (June 6-8), we intend to arrange a SLICE meeting to discuss these plans. I will not be able to attend the conference, but Nik will be there, and so will Jacob who will take the initiative to gather those of you who are present and interested.
May 2011
Dear friends
Our SLICE is two years old this summer. I am happy to be able to announce that the child seems healthy and sound, growing stronger day by day even though all nursing has been taken care of locally. Even if no big caretaker has wanted to take care of SLICE so far, I think we may hope for the child’s potential to become more worthwhile to rich uncles as it continues to grow.
Here is a small picture of what SLICE looks like today, toddling along on two feet (the ‘experimental strand’ and the ‘media strand’).
(1) The basics for healthy growth were secured with your contributions to the collection of country reports and theoretical deliberations which will appear as SLICE volume 1 later this year.
(2) SLICE already stands pretty steady on its experimental foot…
(a) Experiments following the LANCHART approach [as described in Kristiansen, Tore. 2009. The macro-level social meanings of late-modern Danish accents. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia 41. 167–192)]
… have been, or are being, carried out in (in alphabetic order)
– Germany (in the Stuttgart region, by Christoph Hare Svenstrup)
– Ireland (in the Gaeltacht speaking areas, by Noel Ó Murchadha)
– Lithuania (covering the whole country, by Loreta Vaicekauskiene)
– Norway (in Western Norway, by Helge Sandoy, Ragnhild Anderson and co-workers)
…will be carried out this autumn in
– Norway (in Oslo, by Ingunn Indreboe Ims and Karine Stjernholm in collaboration. Both are PhD students at Oslo University and have paid visits to LANCHART this spring to prepare for these experiments. Karine does her PhD with SLICE old-timer Unn Royneland as her supervisor; Ingunn’s supervisor is Bente Ailin Svendsen).
– Swedish-speaking Finland (covering all Swedish-speaking areas, by Tomas Lehecka. To prepare for this work, Tomas visited LANCHART last week. He was accompanied by Jenny Stenberg-Sirén who will do SLICE/Media-related research in Swedish-speaking Finland, and by Jan-Ola Östman as the instigator and supervisor of both projects).
(b) Various experiments that illuminate the theoretical issues that preoccupy our SLICE group have been undertaken in…
– Austria (by Barbara Soukup)
– Belgium (by Anne-Sophie Ghyselen)
– Denmark (by ‘the language attitudes group’ at LANCHART)
– Iceland (by Ari Páll Kristinsson and Amanda Hilmarsson-Dunn)
– The Netherlands (by Stef Grondelaers and Roeland van Hout)
– UK (by Anne Fabricius and Janus Mortensen)
(c) SLICE volume 2 is in preparation and will contain chapters that report on most of the above-mentioned investigations. In addition, like volume 1, SLICE 2 will contain a second part with a particular focus on the theoretical and methodological aspects of studying Language Ideology experimentally. Contributors to this part will include Kathryn Campell-Kibler, Nancy Niedzielski and Dennis Preston, Barbara Soukup, and the editors (Stef Grondelaers and Tore Kristiansen).
Let me remind you that the deadline for contributions to SLICE volume 2 is July 1.
(3) SLICE’s media foot is gaining strength…
As I suggested at The End of April Newsletter, the time may have come for us to begin considering a SLICE volume 3. We can point to a growing number of media-related research activities in our SLICE communities, and there are even more researchers among our group who have signalled an interest in contributing to the media strand.
Several of the existing or planned-for projects take a quantitatively and diachronically oriented approach. This goes at least for projects in Denmark (Jacob Thoegersen), Lithuania (Laima Nevinskaite), and Swedish-speaking Finland (Jenny Stenberg-Sirén).
But there are also reports about research activities of a more synchronic and qualitative kind, e.g. in Lithuania (Giedrius Tamasevicius), and Swedish-speaking Finland (Jan-Ola Östman). On his part, Nik Coupland, as head of the media strand, has never tried to hide that his priorities lie with the qualitative approach.
Without daring to continue this categorizing exercise based on the little I know, I can also point to existing media-focussing research in Austria (Barbara Soukup), Ireland (Tadhg Ó hIfearnáin, Noel Ó Murchadha), and Norway (Agnete Nesse) – as well as projected research in other communities.
What I feel sure about, however, is that we should make an effort to see how far these two strands within the media strand can be developed in collaboration. As you could see in his May 27 mail, Jacob invites those of you who will be at the Limerick Language in the media conference next week to meet with him for discussions about how we best can stimulate the further growth of SLICE’s media foot.
As I will have to abstain from going to Limerick myself, I shall also abstain from trying to suggest any agenda for the deliberations there. I would like to suggest, though, that it might be a good idea to reread Nik’s original media-strand proposal. (It was worked out in continuation of our Exploratory Workshops and came with The End of September 2009 Newsletter; please find it attached to this newsletter). I think it offers a good framework for deliberations about how SLICE/Media can be conceptualised as one foot even if the development of its two muscles (survey/diachronic and discourse/synchronic) is uneven in the various local nurseries.
More news about the life of SLICE next month. In the meantime, take good care of her (I think it is a girl).
June 2011
Dear friends
Accompanied by the heaviest rains in 30 years, SLICE contributions are pouring down on Copenhagen these days. But don’t worry: while the Copenhagen sewer is overflowing, my mailbox can still hold more of the pearls that fall from your keyboards. I am looking forward to receiving them all.
As mentioned in the previous newsletter, some people planned to meet and discuss SLICE/Media business in Limerick at the beginning of June. Below you find Jacob’s report from that meeting.
With the best wishes for a sunny and relaxing summer to all!
Tore
SLICE/Media status June 2011
Some of the Slicers involved in the Media strand met at the Language in the media conference in Limerick (June 6-8) to exchange ideas for the road ahead.
We first outlined the place of the Media strand in the Slice project. Ideally, the Experimental and the Media strand would both rest on the same theoretical basis regarding standardization, destandardization, demonetization etc. The Media strand in other words must be informed by theoretical chapters in the previous Slice book(s).
Secondly, we discussed the potential for a common core for the SLICE/Media projects now popping up around us. We of course can’t put restrains on projects that are funded nationally, but we can suggest topics that may be interesting to compare across nations – and as Tadhg pointed out, it is probably easier for new projects to get local funding the more well-defined the SLICE strands appear. I refer here to Nik’s original proposal sent out with the last newsletter. The national projects could maybe find inspiration from looking at the first two suggestions for common core, i.e. a survey of the current distribution of varieties in the media, and/or a diachronic real-time study of language performance and/or language policy in the media. These issues seem to be in tune with the projects already underway. The third proposed common core theme, a common franchise, e.g. Strictly Come Dancing, is set aside for now, but could very well be brought up again later.
There was a consensus that it is worthwhile to work together, but the form of collaboration of course is governed by financial restrictions. We decided to go forward with a SLICE 3 book, maybe again at Novus, maybe with another publisher. You can expect a call for papers for this before too long. The book will necessarily be rather loosely connected, but we hope that the common core issues mentioned above can join the papers. Secondly, we hope to be able to meet with a larger group of media-interested Slicers for a more fundamental discussion on a true common project. As mentioned, a common European project with a well-defined research question may make local funding easier, but we don’t feel at the time that we can define such a project. After the publication of SLICE book 1 (with theoretical background), and after a long meeting, a project could start to solidify.
We suggest meeting after the publication of the SLICE 1 volume so that it can work as theoretical input for the meeting. A meeting could take place in the spring or summer of 2012 (we thought that some central participants may be in Germany for SS19 on August 22nd-24th which may make August a better choice). Since we are probably talking about only a 1 or 2 days meeting, individual funding shouldn’t be too problematic, but we will of course be on the lookout for possible channels for funding. Do let us know if you hear of anything along the lines of funding for Exploratory Workshops.
We will be collecting suggestions for a common SLICE/Media project as well as project descriptions of the national projects already running to document the progress of the media strand as well as ideas for further development. If you have ideas you want to contribute or if you are working on or know of a relevant project, please send information to Jacob, jthoegersen@hum.ku.dk, and he’ll collect it.
August 2011
Dear Friends
Although this summer ended by being the second wettest ever in Denmark, we have not drowned. The reason you did not receive an End of July issue of our newsletter simply is that votre vieux rédacteur forgot all about it at the time. He hastens to apologize to all of you who suffer from SLICE News withdrawal. (He seems to continue his bad habit of being a couple of days late with the issue, though!)
My good excuse for forgetting the End of July issue is that Nik and I were very busy editing SLICE 1. The whole process is now very close to closure. The book will appear in good time for it to become the favourite 2011 Christmas gift.
As to SLICE 2, the process is also well underway although less advanced. Stef and I still aim to get it out in 2011, but our advice would be not to bank on it as a Christmas gift this year.
As reported at the End of June news, some of our Media-strand people held a meeting at the ’Language in the media’ conference in Limerick (June 6-8) to exchange ideas for the road ahead. An initiative has been taken to follow up on this and will in all probability result in a proposal for a thematic panel at SS17 in Berlin next August. More about this in the next issue.
September 2011
Dear friends
Two good news to report this month:
… Slice 1 to the publisher… and … Proposal for a thematic panel at SS19
Best wishes
Tore
Slice 1 to the publisher
Our first SLICE volume was sent to the publisher this month and is scheduled to come out in Mid November.
In case you should need or want to refer to your contribution before the book is out, I include the necessary information here:
Tore Kristiansen and Nikolas Coupland (eds.). 2011.Standard Languages and Language Standards in a Changing Europe. Oslo: Novus.
Contents
Introduction
Nikolas Coupland and Tore KristiansenSLICE: Critical perspectives on language (de)standardisation
Part 1
Community reports (alphabetically ordered by name of community/ language)
Barbara Soukup and Sylvia MoosmüllerStandard language in Austria
Frans GregersenLanguage and ideology in Denmark
Peter Garrett, Charlotte Selleck and Nikolas CouplandEnglish in England and Wales: Multiple ideologies
Pirkko Nuolijärvi and Johanna VaattovaaraDe-standardisation in progress in Finnish society?
Jan-Ola Östman and Leila MattfolkIdeologies of standardisation: Finland Swedish and Swedish-language Finland
Philipp Stoeckle and Christoph Hare SvenstrupLanguage variation and (de-)standardisation processes in Germany
Stephen Pax Leonard and Kristján ÁrnasonLanguage ideology and standardisation in Iceland
Tadhg Ó hIfearnáin and Noel Ó MurchadhaThe perception of Standard Irish as a prestige target variety
Loreta VaicekauskienėLanguage ‘nationalisation’: One hundred years of Standard Lithuanian
Stefan Grondelaers and Roeland van HoutThe standard language situation in The Netherlands
Helge SandøyLanguage culture in Norway: A tradition of questioning standard language norms
Mats ThelanderStandardisation and standard language in Sweden
Elen RobertStandardness and the Welsh language
Part 2
Theoretical contributions (alphabetically ordered by name of author)
Jannis AndroutsopoulosLanguage change and digital media: A review of conceptions and evidence
Peter Auer and Helmut SpiekermannDemonetisation of the standard variety or destandardisation? The changing status of German in late modernity (with special reference to south-western Germany)
Allan BellLeaving Home: De-Europeanisation in a post-colonial variety of broadcast news language
Stefan Grondelaers, Roeland van Hout and Dirk SpeelmanA perceptual typology of standard language situations in the Low Countries
Jane Stuart-SmithThe view from the couch changing perspectives on the role of television in changing language ideologies and use
Proposal for a thematic panel at SS19
Jacob Thoegersen (aka the Danish ‘SLICE media strand’ man) formulated the first draft of the proposal, and also its final version after having received helpful comments from Nik Coupland and Jan-Ola Oestman. If accepted, we hope the panel can serve as the ‘foundation stone’ for a SLICE 3 volume based on work within and related to our ‘media strand’.
Changing linguistic norms in the audiovisual media
The specific role of radio and television in language change has been debated throughout the history of sociolinguistics (Milroy & Milroy 1985, Chambers 1998). By now it seems generally accepted that the media do play a role in language change, but an indirect one. The media present viewers with language features they may not be exposed to in their daily interactions, and in this way enhance the construction of shared knowledge of varieties, norms of usage, and stereotypical characteristics of the users of different features (Stuart-Smith et al. 2007, Tagliamonte & D’Arcy 2007, Coupland 2009).
The panel will continue the discussion of the role of the audiovisual media in linguistic change, but it will do this indirectly by zooming in on the changing norms of language in the media, and the image of language that the media promote.
In many studies of the role of the media in language change, media language is either seen as
monolithic or focus has been on how a single (type of) program has promoted certain linguistic varieties and stereotypes for the listener or viewer. Examples of the monolithic type are when national broadcasting media are seen as propagating the standard language, e.g. RP through the BBC or GA through the news networks of the U.S.A. An example of a single influential program is the British East Enders which is perceived as promoting certain images of users of th-fronting which spread the use of this feature into new areas. However, few studies have empirically investigated the linguistic output from audiovisual media and how this output and its concomitant norms vary across genres and change over time. Presumably different genres have always given room for different language norms. The panel welcomes participants who compare the language of different genres, in particular variations in the traditional sociolinguistic sense of accents and dialects.
Within the last decade, the Internet has made it possible for media institutions to make their archives available to the public, and to an increasing degree institutions are exploiting this possibility. A case in point is the BBC online archive (www.bbc.co.uk/archive). For sociolinguistics, this means access to data that allows us to investigate the language of the media diachronically. It is reasonable to expect that the language in the media changes along the same lines as language in the society at large, but the media’s role as either prime movers or as a conserving force is open to investigation. In addition to diachronic changes in the media language as reflective of linguistic changes in the community, the social norms of the media have also changed from the early broadcast media viewed as an educator, to a more modern view of the media as entertainers. The panel thus also welcomes participants who compare the language of the media across time, and also participants who will make theoretical suggestions about the changing role of the media and its effect on the linguistic output of the media.
On a more general level, the panel explores the role of the media in a variety of processes of standardizing (national) languages all through the 20th century and their more recent role in language destandardisation. The conference theme “Language and the City” is only peripherally touched upon, but we note that the language norms of the media have traditionally been associated with the linguistic norm(s) of the city – the city standard for news and “serious” media, and the city vernacular for entertainment and soap operas. This picture is now being challenged through (organizational) regionalizations of the media institutions and a greater emphasis on listener and viewer participation in the media.
Discussion questions
● to what extent is change in the national, standard language reflected, promoted or counteracted in the media language;
● to what extent have changes in the media landscape and media norms affected the linguistic norms of the media;
● in what way is a standard language (and its concomitant ideology) implicitly and explicitly
communicated by and through the media?
References
Chambers, J.K. 1998. TV makes people sound the same, in L. Bauer & P. Trudgill (red.), Language Myths, London: Penguin: 123-31.
Coupland, N. 2009. The mediated performance of vernaculars, Journal of English Linguistics 37: 284-300.
Milroy, J. & L. Milroy. 1985. Linguistic change, social networks and speaker innovation, Journal of Linguistics 21: 339-384.
Stuart-Smith, J., C. Timmins & F. Tweedie. 2007. ‘Talkin’ jockey?’ Variation and change in Glaswegian accent, Journal of Sociolinguistics 11/2: 221-260.
Tagliamonte, S. & A. D’Arcy. 2007. Frequency and variation in the community grammar: Tracking a new change through the generations, Language Variation and Change 19: 199-217.
October 2011
Dear friends
Two headlines this time:
SLICE ‘media strand’ boss Nik Coupland to be rewarded a 2011 honorary doctorate by Copenhagen University
The ceremonial event takes place on November 18. The day before, a symposium is held where several Denmark-based SLICE colleagues and friends of Nik’s will talk to him before he talks to us. – I attach the programme of the symposium FYI and invite you to come by of course if you happen to be in Copenhagen that day J.
No decision yet regarding our proposal for a SLICE ‘media strand’-based panel at SS19
My good excuse for being late with the End of October News is that we thought we would receive the decision about our proposed ‘media panel’ at SS 19 (see End of September News), which could then be passed on to you in this issue. This logic was based on the announcement that submissions for panels would begin in October. However, we have now been asked to be patient as the review process will take about two more weeks. I’ll be back to you with a special SLICE News issue as soon as we have the decision.
We have received messages from several of you that you will be interested in submitting proposals for the panel if it happens. Among those also a message from Ari – with substantial comments that I reproduce here:
As regards the paragraph that starts with: “In many studies of the role…”
I agree that “few studies have empirically investigated the linguistic output from audiovisual media and how this output and its concomitant norms vary across genres”, and this prompted me to compare the language of two different genres in Icelandic radio, i.e. radio talk shows on the one hand, and radio news on the other. My basic assumption was that since most linguistic features are possible, as such, in all situations, the general rule is that the difference between text genres, such as talk shows vs. news, surfaces as different relative frequencies of the language forms in question (which may be described as if the two text genres were opposite ends on a continuum where various linguistic features are more frequent close to one end than to the other end). Out of some dozen linguistic features I looked into, some four types seemed to belong to the set of features which characterise Icelandic radio talk shows (e.g., the preference of certain relative clause conjunction), while two types of linguistic features belong to the set of linguistic features which characterises radio news (e.g., relatively high frequency of nouns compared to finite verbs). The rest of the linguistic features that I looked into were distributed somewhere else on the continuum between the two “opposite ends”, i.e. they were not unequivocally clustered at one or the other end of the scale between these two particular radio text genres.
About the 3rd discussion question in the proposal, i.e. in which way standard language (and its concomitant ideology) is implicitly and explicitly communicated by and through the media, I think it is extremely important to stress that (at least some of) the various norms of language and language use in a speech community are presented through the audiovisual media to a large number of people at the same time. I.e., in your words: “media present viewers with language features they may not be exposed to in their daily interactions, and in this way enhance the construction of shared knowledge of varieties, norms of usage, and stereotypical characteristics of the users of different features”. And as you point out, more and more scholars have realised that the layman’s assumption, that language use on the radio can influence the language use of radio listeners, is not altogether false. As regards Icelandic in particular, I have argued (2003, 2009) that such influence from radio and television can be found in the lexical domain irrespective of text genres, but that grammatical and phonological influences are probably more limited to the context of closely related speech genres. However that may be, my point is that we will probably need to make a distinction between levels of language here. Consequently, radio and television as language planning tools used - implicitly or explicitly - for propagating a standard, are more likely to have an effect at the lexical level than at the grammatical and phonological levels, when it comes to the linguistic practice of the audience. This is not to say that the audiovisual media have little or no effect at those levels, only that there probably are different constraints at work in the lexical domain than at the other ones. Last but not least, we may never underestimate that the media are most certainly likely to propagate lg. ideologies, whether the ideology in question is that of standardisation, destandardisation or demonetisation.
November 2011
Dear friends
Three good news this time:
1. SLICE volume 1 is out
If it has not already happened, contributors should receive their author’s copies before long. The volume can be purchased from Novus at http://www.mamut.net/novus/shop/. May I recommend that you recommend it to a library close to you J
2. ‘Media-strand proposal’ for SS 19 accepted
Papers should be submitted to the SS 19 organizers. It seems unclear at the moment whether the submission period has started, and also how you go about submitting for a particular panel. Anyhow, it will close on January 15. Please check for more information coming up at http://www.sociolinguistics-symposium-2012.de/.
I reproduce here the proposal that was also sent to you in the September newsletter:
Changing linguistic norms in the audiovisual media
The specific role of radio and television in language change has been debated throughout the history of sociolinguistics (Milroy & Milroy 1985, Chambers 1998). By now it seems generally accepted that the media do play a role in language change, but an indirect one. The media present viewers with language features they may not be exposed to in their daily interactions, and in this way enhance the construction of shared knowledge of varieties, norms of usage, and stereotypical characteristics of the users of different features (Stuart-Smith et al. 2007, Tagliamonte & D’Arcy 2007, Coupland 2009).
The panel will continue the discussion of the role of the audiovisual media in linguistic change, but it will do this indirectly by zooming in on the changing norms of language in the media, and the image of language that the media promote.
In many studies of the role of the media in language change, media language is either seen as monolithic or focused has been on how a single (type of) program has promoted certain linguistic varieties and stereotypes for the listener or viewer. Examples of the monolithic type are when national broadcasting media are seen as propagating the standard language, e.g. RP through the BBC or GA through the news networks of the U.S.A. An example of a single influential program is the British East Enders which is perceived as promoting certain images of users of th-fronting which spread the use of this feature into new areas. However, few studies have empirically investigated the linguistic output from audiovisual media and how this output and its concomitant norms vary across genres and change over time. Presumably different genres have always given room for different language norms. The panel welcomes participants who compare the language of different genres, in particular variations in the traditional sociolinguistic sense of accents and dialects.
Within the last decade, the Internet has made it possible for media institutions to make their archives available to the public, and to an increasing degree institutions are exploiting this possibility. A case in point is the BBC online archive (www.bbc.co.uk/archive). For sociolinguistics, this means access to data that allows us to investigate the language of the media diachronically. It is reasonable to expect that the language in the media changes along the same lines as language in the society at large, but the media’s role as either prime movers or as a conserving force is open to investigation. In addition to diachronic changes in the media language as reflective of linguistic changes in the community, the social norms of the media have also changed from the early broadcast media viewed as an educator, to a more modern view of the media as entertainers. The panel thus also welcomes participants who compare the language of the media across time, and also participants who will make theoretical suggestions about the changing role of the media and its effect on the linguistic output of the media.
On a more general level, the panel explores the role of the media in a variety of processes of standardizing (national) languages all through the 20th century and their more recent role in language destandardisation. The conference theme “Language and the City” is only peripherally touched upon, but we note that the language norms of the media have traditionally been associated with the linguistic norm(s) of the city – the city standard for news and “serious” media, and the city vernacular for entertainment and soap operas. This picture is now being challenged through (organizational) regionalizations of the media institutions and a greater emphasis on listener and viewer participation in the media.
Discussion questions
● to what extent is change in the national, standard language reflected, promoted or counteracted in the media language;
● to what extent have changes in the media landscape and media norms affected the linguistic norms of the media;
● in what way is a standard language (and its concomitant ideology) implicitly and explicitly communicated by and through the media?
References
Chambers, J.K. 1998. TV makes people sound the same, in L. Bauer & P. Trudgill (red.), Language Myths, London: Penguin: 123-31.
Coupland, N. 2009. The mediated performance of vernaculars, Journal of English Linguistics 37: 284-300.
Milroy, J. & L. Milroy. 1985. Linguistic change, social networks and speaker innovation, Journal of Linguistics 21: 339-384.
Stuart-Smith, J., C. Timmins & F. Tweedie. 2007. ‘Talkin’ jockey?’ Variation and change in Glaswegian accent, Journal of Sociolinguistics 11/2: 221-260.
Tagliamonte, S. & A. D’Arcy. 2007. Frequency and variation in the community grammar: Tracking a new change through the generations, Language Variation and Change 19: 199-217.
3. ‘Experimental-strand proposal’ for SS 19 accepted
An ‘experimental-strand panel’, proposed by Danish SLICERS Marie Maegaard and Nicolai Pharao, has also been accepted for SS 19. Here is an invitation from Marie and Nicolai:
Hello all
As part of the experimental strand of SLICE, we've been working at LANCHART to develop our matched guise experiments. We thought it would be interesting to gather a group of sociolinguists to discuss their experiments and the goals of the experimental approach further. Therefore, we proposed a thematic session for the Sociolinguistics Symposium 19 in Berlin 2012, August 22 to 24, and it was accepted. The abstract is attached, and we hope you will be interested in submitting a paper.
As you may know, this year all submissions are subject to peer review by the organizers of the conference in addition to the organizers of the specific thematic session. In other words, this is just an invitation to submit an abstract, not a definite invitation to give a paper. We have been allocated a time slot that allows for 4 papers (20 minutes each) and a half-hour discussion session.
We hope you'll be interested in participating, and that you will submit an abstract via the conference homepage: https://www.conftool.pro/sociolinguistics-symposium-2012/ - unfortunately, the organizers of SS19 haven't provided the details of how exactly you go about indicating that you would like an abstract to be considered for participation in a particular thematic session, but we will let you know once we hear more from them.
best, Marie Maegaard and Nicolai PharaoLANCHART, University of Copenhagen
December 2011
Dear friends
The season for my annual disappearance on skis in the Norwegian mountains is very close. (I hope the snow will arrive there before me!)
So once again there will be no End of December SLICE News. Here is a few Mid-December news instead.
1. SS 19 panels now open for submissions – deadline is January 31
As reported at the End of November News, both a ‘Slice/Media strand’ related panel and a ‘Slice/Experimental strand' related panel were accepted at SS19, Berlin 2012. You can find the two calls attached to this mail.
You will find the call for papers as well as information about the sessions on the conference website: http://www.sociolinguistics-symposium-2012.de/. To submit an abstract, you will have to create a ConfTool account and choose the submission track (the session) you want to contribute to.
Depending on the number of submitted papers, the panels will probably be either a half day or a whole day.
Please note that the deadline for abstracts is January 31 (not January 15 as previously announced).
2. Lithuanian SLICE visiting Copenhagen
Report from Jacob:
The Copenhagen group (Tore and Jacob) have again had the pleasure of a visit from Lithuania (Laima, Loreta, Giedrius and Ramune).
We talked about the potential for a formal collaboration between Copenhagen and the emerging field of sociolinguistics in Lithuania, the progress of the Lithuanian experimental strand, and about methodological issues regarding the use of Praat etc. But we also had time to get into the progress of the media strand in our respective countries. Once again it was surprising and uplifting to hear how many of the same issues are relevant to the two relatively different communities, e.g. formality vs. informality/spontaneity, monological vs. dialogical presentation etc. And we continued the discussion about how these overall issues can be investigated in (socio)linguistic terms, e.g. speaking rate, turn taking, assimilations, vowel changes and so on.
3. SLICE volume 1 – authors’ free copies should be out
The last couple of days I have received messages from contributors to SLICE 1 that they have received their two free copies of the book. I hope this holds for all of the authors. If there are authors who have not received their free copies, please address Novus about this.
The rest of you will have to buy it as a Christmas gift for yourselves, I’m afraid. It can be obtained from: http://www.mamut.net/novus/shop/