Anda di halaman 1dari 6

Muhammad Ibnu Soim


People often use language to signal their membership of particular groups. Social status, sex, age ethnicity and the kinds of social networks people belong to turn out to be important dimension of identity in many communities. We will illustrate the way people use language to signal such affiliation.

Example 1 Telephone rings Pat Pat Pat : hello : hello, is mark there? : yes, just hold on a minute.

Pat (to mark) : theres rather well educated young lady from the Scotland on the phone for you.

When you answer the telephone, you can often make some pretty good guesses about various characteristic of the speaker, pat was able to deduce quite a lot about marks caller, even thought the caller had said nothing explicitly about herself. Most listeners can identify childrens voice without any problem. When the caller is an adult it is usually easy to tell whether a speaker is female or male. If the person has distinctive regional accent, then their regional origins will be evident even from a short utterance. And it may also be possible to make a reasonable guess about the persons socio economic or educational background.

Muhammad Ibnu Soim



Regional and social dialects

1. Regional variation There are many such stories some no doubt apocryphal of mistakes based on regional accent differences. To British ears a New Zealanders dad sound like an English persons dead, and bad sound like bed Americans and Australians, as well as new Zealanders, tell of British visitors who where given pens instead of pins and pans instead of pens. On the other hand an Americans god sounds like an English guard. And latter sound like ladder to many non American English speakers. There are vocabulary differences in the varieties spoken in different regions too. Australians talk of sole parents, for example while people in England use the term lone parents and new Zealanders call solo parents. British willies ( wellington boots) are new Zealand gummies ( gumboots ), while the word togs refers to very different types of clothes in different place. In new Zealanders togs are what you swim. In Britain you might wear them of a formal dinner. Pronunciation and vocabulary differences are probably the differences people are most aware of between different dialects of English, but there are grammatical differences too. Americans prefer do you have, thought this can now also be heard in Britain alongside the traditional British English have you got. Americans say gotten where people in England use got. American use dove while British English speaker say dived. American ask did you eat? While the English ask have you eaten? Are the American or the British usages predominant where you live

Muhammad Ibnu Soim

2. social variation In earlier centuries you could tell where an English lord or lady came from by their regional form of English. But by the early twentieth century a person who spoke with a regional accent in England was most unlikely to belong to the upper class. Upperclass people had an upper-class education. And that generally meant a public. (I.e. private) school where they learned to speak RP, RP stands, not for Real Posh (as suggested to me by a young friend), but rather for Received Pronunciation the accent of the best educated and most prestigious members of English society. It is claimed the label derives from the accent which was received at the royal court, and it is sometimes identified with the Queens English , although the accent used by Queen Elizabeth II is a rather old fashion variety of RP.

3. Social dialects The stereotypical dialects dialects speaker is an elderly rural person who is all but unintelligible to modern city dwellers. But dialects are simply linguistic varieties which are distinguishable in vocabulary grammar and pronunciation. The speech of people from different social, as well as regional, groups may differ in this ways. Just as RP is a social account, so Standard English is a social dialect. It is dialect used by well-educated English speaker throughout the world. It is variety used for national news broadcast and in print, and it is variety generally through in English speaking school.

4. Social status People can be grouped together on the basis of similar social and economic factors. Their language generally reflects groupings- they use different social

Muhammad Ibnu Soim

dialects. It is easiest to see the evidence for social dialects in places such as Indonesia and India where social divisions are very clear cut. In these countries, there are castes systems determine by birth. And strict social, rules govern the kind of behavior appropriate to each group. The rules cover such matter as the kind of job a person can have, who they can marry, how they should dress, what they should eat, and how they should behave in a range of social situation. Not surprisingly, these social distinctions are also reflected in speech differences. A persons dialect reflects their social background.s


The way you speak usually a good indicator of your social background. And there are many speech feature which can be used as clues. Sociolinguists have found that almost any linguistic feature in a community which show variation will differ in frequency from one social group to another in a patterned and predictable way. Some feature are stable and their patterns of use seem to have correlated with membership of particular social group in predictable way for many years. Stable variables tend to divide american and british english speaking communities sharply between the middle class and lower or working class. Not all variation is stable overtime, however. In fact, variations is often used as an inadicator of language change in progress. In exploring the relationship between language and society, this chapter has been concerned almost exclusively with the dimension of social status or class. It is clear from all the evidence disscused that the social class someone belongs to is reflected in their speech patterns. Many people how ever are not very concious of belonging to a particular social class. They are much more aware of other factors about the people they meet regularly than their social class membership. A persons sex and age are probably the very first things we notice about them.

Muhammad Ibnu Soim


Holmes Janet, 1995, An Introductions To Sociolinguistics, Longman, London and New York. Bright and ramanujan, (1966) on Indian Language, Feagin, (1979) data Anniston and west Virgina.] Petyt (1985) for West YorkShire dialect Data.