1 / 14

"Investigating speech samples as 'dialect in discourse': Discourse analysis, phonetics and language attitudes.&quo

"Investigating speech samples as 'dialect in discourse': Discourse analysis, phonetics and language attitudes.". Anne Fabricius Roskilde University Essex University, Thursday 3 rd February 2005. Structure of the talk. Introduction Language attitudes methodology

cerise
Télécharger la présentation

"Investigating speech samples as 'dialect in discourse': Discourse analysis, phonetics and language attitudes.&quo

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. "Investigating speech samples as 'dialect in discourse': Discourse analysis, phonetics and language attitudes." Anne Fabricius Roskilde University Essex University, Thursday 3rd February 2005

  2. Structure of the talk • Introduction • Language attitudes methodology • The role of Dynamism: Danish examples • The empirical study: data collection • The narratives: phonetics and discourse • Results • But what does it all mean?

  3. Introduction (1) • An ongoing project on RP in England/U.K. • (1)Looking at phonetic variation synchronically and diachronically • (2)Looking at attitudes to the accent • standard accent vs élite accent

  4. Introduction (2) • RP’s attitudinal place • Attitudinal Place of RP speakers • ”anti-toff class prejudice” (CM, IK)

  5. Introduction (3) • A diversion: how do we look at RP sociolinguistically • The systematic ambiguity • Native-RP and Construct RP • Forms and norms change at different speeds (TE clip) • Here looking at C-RP

  6. Language attitudes methodology • Social observation (BJ, IK, JM) • Direct methods (C. Sin 2005) • Indirect methods • The matched guise technique • Arguments against it • A renewal underway

  7. Status Gifted/intelligent Ambitious Independent Efficient Solidarity Pleasant Trustworthy Interesting Straightforward Status and Solidarity (Zahn and Hopper 1985)

  8. Superiority Status Dimension Gifted/intelligent Ambitious Solidarity Dimension Pleasant Trustworthy Dynamism Status Dimension Efficient Independent Solidarity Dimension Interesting Straightforward Superiority and Dynamism (Kristiansen 2001)

  9. High versus Low Copenhagen • (Study 1998) Regarded by regional speakers as ’two standards’: one for the school/establishment (High), one for the media (Low). • Low Copenhagen as the voice of Dynamism • RP and Estuary English?

  10. Data collection • 6 passages interview speech (male, female; London, Regional, RP) • Presented to 161 secondary schools in York, March 2002 • Set of adjectives plus open-ended questions • Quantitative and qualitative results

  11. The narratives • (Transcripts on Handout) • RP speaker • Regional speaker

  12. Phonetics RP speaker: U-RP and mainstream RP Regional Speaker Discourse Bird’s eye narratives Contrasts between the texts Characteristics

  13. Results • Quantitative results • Qualitative results • (see tables on handout)

  14. Discussion • The interplay of accent and discourse: lasting impressions • Working with dialect in discourse: the gestalt • A new alignment of superiority and dynamism in regional versus RP speech • Social class (and another story…)

More Related