Poststructuralist Theory and Sociolinguistics: Mapping the Linguistic Turn in Social Theory

This paper provides an overview of research on discourses on language and citizenship in contemporary Europe. Particular attention is given to the implementation of language requirements and/or formalized language testing for citizenship procedures that have become widespread since the turn of the 21 st century. Scholars have focused on the discursive justification of these shifts in language policy and they have analyzed related discourses on diversity, cohesion and integration in multiple European Union memberstates. This paper underlines the need for further engagement with the concept of linguistic authority and it calls for research that explores the negotiation and contestation of these policies from 'top-down' and 'bottom-up' perspectives in a wider range of European Union member-states.

Section: Third Phase Of Language Policy and Citizenship Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Discourses on Language and Citizenship in Europe

Horner

2015

“…The inclusion of previously understudied individuals and communities also necessarily relies on interdisciplinarity and building on work from related areas. As Phillip Carter notes in his paper “Poststructuralist theory and sociolinguistics: Mapping the linguistic turn in social theory,” a number of scholars including Mallinson () and Mendoza‐Denton (), inter alia , have made strong arguments that sociolinguists should deeply engage with the literature of sociology and anthropology, among other disciplines. This is especially the case for sociolinguists who study identity and social structures, since they have much to gain from frameworks such as intersectionality theory (Crenshaw, ; Hill‐Collins, ) and practice theory (Lave & Wenger, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multiracial identity and racial complexity in sociolinguistic variation

Holliday

2019

What is the relationship between ethnolinguistic communities and ways of speaking? Who is an authentic speaker of an ethnolinguistic variety? In a time where scholarly and public conceptualizations of race and ethnicity are variable and rapidly changing, potential effects on both self‐identification and ways of speaking present an area ripe for study. However, linguistics and allied fields have often overlooked individuals and communities that do not neatly conform to well‐defined racial categories. As multiracially identified individuals are one of the fastest growing demographic groups in the United States, researchers will necessarily need to address the way that traditional methodologies have excluded individuals and groups who fall outside of these racial and ethnic categories. This presents a unique challenge for sociolinguistics in particular, since we are interested in how people draw on linguistic variation to perform aspects of their identities, including their races and ethnicities. This article examines the ways in which race and ethnicity have been traditionally conceptualized in linguistics and allied fields and draws on research from other social sciences to see how they have begun to study individuals who fall outside of traditionally preexisting social categories. The article also briefly discusses the results of one of the first major sociolinguistic studies on multiracially identified participants, which found substantial effects of self‐conceptualization and self‐identification on linguistic behavior of these participants, a result which informs how future work should consider individuals who identify as two or more races. Finally, it will address future directions for research at the intersection of personal identity, race, and language.

“…Sociolinguistic research over the past 20 years has been characterized by an increasingly sophisticated use of social theory and, as a result, the development of a more nuanced understanding of the relationship between individuals, society, and observed patterns of language variation and change (see, e.g., Carter 2013). Many (though certainly not all) of the theoretical innovations in this regard first appeared in work devoted to the study of language, gender, and sexuality before spreading to other areas of sociolinguistic inquiry (Queen 2014), including the argument that language variation can be a form of strategic social practice (Eckert 1989a(Eckert ,1989bEckert and McConnell-Ginet 1992;Holmes and Meyerhoff 1999), that such practice is made possible by virtue of an already existing network of ideological links between linguistic forms and social meanings (Gal 1978;Ochs 1992;Barrett 1997), and that it is through engaging in this type of semiotic maneuvering that speakers materialize relevant presentations of self in interaction (Livia and Hall 1997;Cameron andKulick 2003, 2005;Bucholtz andHall 2004, 2005).…”

Section: Introduction: the Inadequacy Of Isolated Categories In Sociomentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As Carter () notes, one of the principal benefits of sociolinguistics' engagement with contemporary social theorizing has been the ability to overcome a false dichotomy between ‘structure’ and ‘agency’ in our analyses. What this means is that we do not have to view linguistic practice either as a reflex of pre‐determined social categories and forces or as resulting from the autonomous actions of individuals behaving solely in accordance with their own beliefs and desires.…”

Section: Introduction: the Inadequacy Of Isolated Categories In Sociomentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrating Intersectionality in Language, Gender, and Sexuality Research

Levon

2015

In this paper, I argue for the need to integrate intersectionality theory more fully in language, gender, and sexuality research. I outline the basic principles of what an intersectional approach to identity and identity‐linked speech entails, focusing particularly on the belief that an adequate description of lived experience, and hence social practice, requires us to consider the ways in which multiple systems of social categorization (e.g., gender and sexuality, race/ethnicity, social class, and place) intersect with one another in dynamic and mutually constitutive ways. I review research on the linguistic perception and production of gender and sexuality that has adopted an intersectional perspective to date and argue that while certain aspects of the theory have long had a foothold in work in this area, the field's engagement with the full ramifications of intersectionality as an analytical framework has been partial. I conclude with suggestions about how to anchor a more comprehensive approach to intersectionality in sociolinguistic research.