Monday, 19 October 2015

FR4207 - Language and Society

Types of Variation:

  • Interspeaker - difference between individuals
  • Intraspeaker - 'within' individuals - language allows us to sound different from moment to moment.

Interspeaker: 

  • Geographical factors in variation
    • More than one 'français' - standard, normalisé French exists alongside numerous 'français régionaux'
  • Regional French 
    • Regional French does not refer to separate languages, eg Breton.
    • Certain regional varieties are better perceived than others, eg Parisien is very well viewed
    • There is much more contact between languages these days (modern media), which may cause dialect leveling - when the characteristics of regional French disappear (Armstrong)
    • nivellement linguistique
  • Social factors in variation (sociobiographical) – Age
    • Generational differences - the young assume innovative characteristics that set them apart from their elders T
    • La langue des jeunes - use of language to express youthful identity
    • This leads to language change - there is an inflow of non prestige forms until the prestige forms die out - young people institute language change
  • Gender and variation  
    • Gender vs sex - biological differences, eg voice differences = sex
    • Socially conditioned differences = gender 
  • Social Class
    • Hard to define - based on concepts social mobility, education, residence, social network 
    • no longer defined just by what job you have, people no longer occupy just one job for life
    • no longer defined just by area - people move around much more as well
    • no longer defined just by social network - these days we have a much broader social network 
    • Indexing - based on various factors - people placed within middle or lower class based on their score on the index 

Intraspeaker:

  •  Stylistic factors - no speaker is 'mono-stylistic' - uses one style all the time
    • Their style varies depending on
      •  interlocutor (audience/speaking partner), topic and place 
      • mode - written vs spoken/media/type of discourse (conversation, interview, lecture)
  • Standard French - so many existing varieties, what is standard?
    • can the standard be based on geography? Eg Parisien French is more standard than southern French?
    • can the standard be based on age? Why is youth language 'less prestigious'?
  • Language register 
    • français cultivé/soutenu (formal, hyper correct French) 
    • français courant/commun (less standard but not incorrect, features ne deletion, l deletion)
    • français familier (contains incorrect French)
    • français vulgaire (sometimes offensive) 
  • It would be hard to decide a universal norm because there is no reason to give greater value to one variety of French over another 
    • eg metropolitan French vs Belgian or Quebecois French
    • Plurilinguistic approach - different French speaking societies can have different standards 
    • If the varieties of French are not recognised as standard then the 'français régionaux' are assigned a negative quality

Language Attitudes: Variation vs Standardisation

  •  There are various bodies devoted to the 'identification du bon usage' of French 
    • Academie Française (metropolitan) 
    • L'office de la langue française (Quebec)
  • There are also various laws intended to regulate the use of French
  • Loi Toubon '93 -  French must be used in all official public/government and commercial documents/contexts (advertising, interviews)
  • Loi Bas-Lauriol '71 - targeting anglicisms - banning foreign terms or expressions in public documents

Prescription vs Description 

  • Linguists attempt to describe linguistic norms of usage rather than prescribing (dictate) them
    • They do not attempt to suppress language variation - variation is natural and normal for a language 












Saturday, 17 October 2015

FR4207 - Key Concepts - Homogeneity vs Variation

The French language:

  • Some linguists claim it is varied - there are differences within the language in how it's used
  • Others describe it as singular or uniform, i.e. there is only one French language, which exists as a homogeneous entity. French doesn't differ that much within the French speaking world
  • Homogeneity = a characteristic of language. Examples of homogeneity:
    • "Je suis en train de lire le roman." - every French speaker would recognise this and understand it as correct
    • "Lire suis je en train de roman le" - no French speaker would produce this
    • There are totally incorrect things (wrong gender or number for article, or wrong verb ending for a pronoun) which no French speaker in any part of the world would ever say and this gives French its homogeneity 
  • Therefore it's clear that homogeneity is structural (to do with grammar). We must ask ourselves what is the same about all French speakers?
    • they have the same internal representation/underlying linguistic system of rules/ linguistic competence (universal grammar) which stable/unchanging/fixed/rigid
      • competence is the internal representation of the language and it is unvaried over time once learned 
  • The Noam Chomsky school of thought (generative linguistics) is based around the idea of knowledge in our heads which allows us to generate correct utterances and has no interest in linguistic performance

Linguistic Variation: 

  • Heterogeneity in language = the opposite of homogeneity
  • Variationist linguists view language as highly creative, with a lot of linguistic choice
  •  Linguistic Performance is the counterpart of competence - how we use language (what we say vs what we know) 
    • Labov = a pioneer of the variationist approach (the opposite of generativist 
  • Examples of lexical variation 
    • voiture vs bagnole (register)
    • bourgestre vs maire (Belgium vs metropole)
    • le souper vs le dîner (Quebec vs metropole)
  • Examples of phonetic variation
    • les gens(.) arrivent vs les gens_arrivent (the choice of making the liaison or not)
    •  il y a vs y a (/l/ deletion)
  •  Examples of morphological variation
    • ne deletion - je comprends pas vs je ne comprend pas
    • future - je vais sortir vs je sors demain vs je sortirai
  • Language choice goes together with language change
  • Examples of syntactic change 
    • questions - avez-vous fini? vs vous avez fini?
    • passive vs active voice
  • Examples of Discursive/pragmatic variation
    • donc vs par conséquent - filler words
    • register
  • Variation and Homogeneity coexist in language - how can linguistics reconcile this
    • search for systematicity - a system within language
    • investigate language change - how the system changes 
    • search for a linguistic norm, if that exists - is there a standard, correct way of speaking French?
    • description vs prescription - linguists don't prescribe the correct way of using a language, they just describe the norms and standards

Monday, 28 April 2014

Intercultural Learning - Criticial Incidents, Culture Standards & Assimilator

Critical Incidents:- “der entscheidende Anstoß für das Entstehen eines Lernprozeßes hin zur interkulturellen Kompetenz geht aus von Erfahrungen in als kritisch erlebten interkulturellen Interaktions- (Begegnungs) Situationen und den darauf folgenden Reaktionen“
                    (Thomas, 2003: 146)
(Translation) The decisive trigger for the beginning of a learning process to intercultural competence comes from experiences in critically experienced intercultural interactions, situations and the subsequent reactions.

Critical Incident technique:
- a set of procedures for collecting direct observations of human behavior in such a way as to facilitate their potential usefulness in solving practical problems and developing broad pyschological principles.
- incident - any observable human activity that is sufficiently complete in itself to permit inferences and predictions to be made about the person performing the act
- critical - incident which occurs in a situation where the purpose or intent of the act seems fairly clear to the observer and where its consequences are sufficiently definite to leave little doubt concerning its effects
- originally used in maths and science, then psychology, then cultural psychology
- first to use it in cultural perspectives - Alexander Thomas

Culture Standards:
- orientation on what behaviours to expect in a foreign culture
- distinguish what behaviours are considered normal, typical and acceptable within members of a certain group
- work like implicit theories and are internalised by socialisation (Thomas, 1990)

Definition:
- types of perception, thinking, values, actions found to be normal & acceptable by majority of particular culture
- behaviour of self and others judged and regulated by these standards
- have a regulation function
- the way individuals & groups interpret CS behavioural rules varies within a certain area of tolerance
- modes of behaviour that move outside the borders will opposed & sanctioned by society

Generating culture standards: 
- critical incidents used to generate CS
- CIT Interviews are used: Question: Typical incidents are related that reveal a sense of strangeness, bewilderment and perhaps causing irritation in communication
- incidents are gathered + transcribed
- Analysed for running themes + grouped into categories
- given to experts from that culture for analysis
- Reasons and explanations provided by experts w/insights from the literary, cultural, political, religious history of the area in question
- CS generated

Limitations of Cultural Standards:
- Never describe a culture entirely
- Always seen through eyes of one particular group - relative to eye of beholder
- not static but changing (cultures change, => standards change)
- a help towards cultural orientation & basis for learning more about a culture (not definitive guide to every part of a culture)

Culture Assimilator:
- outward expression of cultural standards
- describes a CI + gives several possible explanations
- learner picks most likely explanation + is given feedback on appropriateness of answer
- description of the central CS in this case
- anchoring the CS in the culture's history


Intercultural Learning - Stereotypes & Perceptions of others

Selbstbild - self-perception - generally positive
Fremdbild - perception of others - less sophisticated

Stereotype:
- coined Lippmann (1922) - a picture in our heads
- we first make up our minds before we get the facts, while the ideal would be to gather and analyse the facts before reaching conclusions.
- we pick out what our culture has already defined for us, and we tend to perceive that which we have picked out in the form stereotyped for us by our culture because the attempt to see all things freshly and in detail, rather than as types and generalities, is exhausting and among busy affairs practically out of the question
- Linguistic definition: Ein Stereotyp ist der verbale Ausdruck einer auf soziale Gruppen oder einzelne Personen als deren Mitglieder gerichten Überzeugung. Es hat die logische Form eines Urteils, das in ungerechtfertigt vereinfachender und generalisierender Weise, mit emotionalwertender Tendenz, einer Klasse von Personen bestimmte Eigenschaften oder Verhaltensweisen zu- oder abspricht (Uta Quasthoff, 1973: 28)
(translation) A stereotype is the verbal expression of a conviction based on social groups or individual people as members of such groups. It has the logical form of a judgement, that, in an unjustifiably simplified and generalised way, with emotionally judgmental tendencies, assigns or denies particular characteristics or modes of behaviour to a class of person.

Intercultural Learning - Culture

Concept of culture:
- Weaver, Iceberg Model - visible/explicit culture above the surface and invisible/implicit culture below
- Samovar & Porter - advanced Iceberg Model - evident (visible) culture - socioeconomic situation, expression tool (language, art etc) vs deep culture - Human being & environment relations (legal, authority of state, company), Interpersonal relations (role of women, family, hierarchy), Basic convictions & values (Religion, Ideology, Traditions, Understanding of Time)

„Die Kultur einer Gesellschaft besteht in all dem, was man wissen oder glauben muß, um in einer für alle ihre Mitglieder akzeptablen Weise zu fungieren, und zwar in jeder beliebigen Rolle, die sie auch für jeden von ihnen selbst akzeptieren. Kultur...besteht nicht aus Gegenständen, Menschen, Verhaltensweisen oder Gefühlen, sondern sie ist vielmehr die Organisation dieser Dinge, vielmehr die Form dieser Dinge, die die Menschen in ihren Köpfen haben, ihre Modelle, wie sie sie wahrnehmen, in Beziehung zueinander setzen oder anderweitig interpretieren“ (Goodenough, 1964: 36).
- the culture of a society consists of everything that one must know or believe in order to act in a way that is acceptable to all its members and indeed in every arbitrary roll, that they also accept from themselves. Culture doesn't consist of artifacts, people, modes of behaviour or feelings, rather it is much more the organisation of these things, much more the form of these things that people have in their heads, their model, how they perceive themselves, how they place themselves in relation to other or otherwise interpret things.

Intercultural Communication:
 - a transactional symbolic process involving the attribution of meaning between people from different cultures (Gudykunst, 1984)

Intercultural learning process:
Intercultural education + intercultural encounters = intercultural learning -> intercultural competence

Bennet model of intercultural sensitivity
For Bennett (1993) intercultural learning or intercultural competence was exemplified in his model which illustrates moving from an ethnocentric to a ethnorelative stage of development. Intercultural learning is about processing cultural differences. This means an increasing decentralisation from one’s own culture and with that the constructive integration of the foreign culture experience.

Ethnocentric: evaluating other cultures according to preconceptions originating in the standards and customs of one's own culture.
Ethnorelative: acknowledging that another's values and beliefs, and resulting assumptions and behaviour, are logically connected, and that there is no absolute position from which to judge morals, knowledge, truth.

Developmental model:
- 6 stages
- transition from an inward looking, ethnocentric position, to an outward ethnorelative view
- 1st 3 stages - ethnocentric
- reactions to cultural difference
-  Denial - one’s own culture is experienced as the only real one. Other cultures are avoided by maintaining psychological & physical isolation from differences. Uninterested in cultural differences
- Defense - one’s own cultureis experienced as the only good one. The world is organised into "us and them," where "we" are superior and "they" are inferior. Threatened by cultural difference, highly critical of other cultures
- Minimisation - elements of one’s own cultural world view are experienced as universal. Because these absolutes obscure deep cultural differences, other cultures may be trivialised or romanticised. Expect similarities, insistently correct others’ behavior to match their expectations.
- 2nd 3 stages - ethnorelative
-   Acceptance - one’s own culture is experienced as just one of a number of equally complex worldviews. Acceptance does not mean agreement but the judgment is not ethnocentric. Curious about and respectful toward cultural difference.
- Adaptation - experience of another culture yields perception and behavior appropriate to that culture. One’s repertoire of culture behavior is expanded. Able to look at the world "through different eyes", intentionally change their behavior to communicate more effectively in another culture.
- Integration - experience of self is expanded to include the movement in and out of different cultural worldviews.  People at Integration often are dealing with issues related to their own "cultural marginality." This stage is not necessarily better than Adaptation in most situations demanding intercultural competence, but it is common among non-dominant minority groups, long-term expatriates, and global nomads.“

Levels of human interaction:
- cognitive (thought process)
- affective (emotions)
- behavioural (resulting actions)  


Intercultural Learning

Year Abroad

Benefits: Linguistic, Academic, Personal, Professional, Intercultural, Cultural

Berry - Domains of adaption:
Adaptation to the physical environment (e.g. climate, clothes, food)
Socio-cultural adaptation to norms and values of the host country
Adaptation to academic life
Psychological adaptation

Stages of adjustment:
U-curve (Lysgaard) - adjustment is felt to be easy and successful to begin with; then follows a „crisis“ in which one feels less well-adjusted, somewhat lonely and unhappy; finally one begins to feel better adjusted again, becoming more integrated into the foreign community



 Berry - Reactions to living abroad:

Assimilation (adjust to foreign culture, not maintaining own culture)
Integration (adjust to foreign culture and maintain own culture)
Separation (maintain own culture, not adjusting to foreign culture)
Marginalisation (not maintaining own culture or adapting to new one)

Culture Shock:
- Oberg 1960 - anxiety that results from losing all our familiar signs and symbols of social intercourse i.e. words, gestures, facial expressions, customs or norms
- shock = misleading term - gradual phenomenon
- symptoms = extreme reactions to minor issues, especially anger, general fear and mistrust, retreat from other people, hostility towards the host culture and its people, increased desire for sleep, increased attention to hygiene, increased consumption of food and drinks

Coping Strategies:
- be prepared
- destressing methods -  listening to music, taking short vacations, jogging or sports in general, talks with friend

Quote:
Der aufgeschlossene Reisende tritt in eine fremde Welt, die dann rückwirkend auch die Selbstverständlichkeit seiner eigenen fremden Welt in Frage stellt. Er beginnt das Leben der anderen zu betrachten. Seine soziale Existenz ist gebrochen, und der Bruch wird zum Ansatzpunkt der Erkenntnis (Dahrendorf, 1963: 15).
(Translation) The open minded traveller enters a foreign world that then retroactively puts the implicitness of his own foreign world in question. He begins to contemplate the lives of others. His social existence is broken and this break acts as a starting point for awareness.






Monday, 24 March 2014

List of German dative verbs

Common verbs which take the dative case:
antworten - to answer
danken - to thank
fehlen - to be missing
folgen - to follow
gehören - to belong to
gefallen - to please/make happy
glauben - to believe
helfen - to help
Leid tun - to be sorry
passieren - to happen
verzeihen - to forgive
weh tun - to hurt
befehlen - to order
begegnen - to encounter
bleiben - to stay
dienen - to serve
drohen - to threaten
einfallen - to occur to, think of
erlauben - to allow
gehorchen - to obey
gelingen - to succeed
misslingen - to fail
geraten - to turn out well
geschehen - to happen
gratulieren - to congratulate
nützen - to be of use
passen - to fit, suit
raten - to advise
schaden - to harm
schmecken - to taste
ver/trauen - to trust
widersprechen - to contradict/disagree with

+ separable verbs taking a 'zu' prefix, e.g. zuhören, zustimmen