Commodification of Language

LG632 Sociolinguistics II: Sociocultural Theory (Dr.
Vineeta Chand)
Udiana Puspa Dewi, MA Sociolinguistics
University of Essex (2014)

Commodification of Language and Language Ideology
in Globalization Context

University of Essex
2014

A. Introduction
The view of language as commodity is one of the ways to find out how variety of
language is differently valued both positively or negatively, in different context or places.
Language as commodity is strongly related to the concept of linguistic marketplace. The concept
of linguistic marketplace is explained by Bourdieu (1991), where he assumes that the
marketplace exists for language application, the way speakers use their linguistic capital is based
on the linguistic market. Different linguistics varieties are valued differently based on its
linguistic market. Same varieties can be valued positively in one linguistics market and
negatively in another linguistics market. This is the reason why language varieties have different
level of prestige in different places. Through this concept of linguistics marketplace language is
seen as a symbolic capital which underlines the reality that language practices are not equally
valued (Jaffe, 2009)
The process of valuing language in the linguistic market concept leads some researchers
(Coupland 2003; J. Milroy 2001; Jaffe 2009) to make observation in finding out the relationship
between language varieties and their social meanings through language ideology approach.
Copland (2007:74) sums up that language ideology research assumes that, in particular socio-
cultural environments, certain beliefs about the value of sociolinguistic features, styles and
practices are structures into peoples everyday understanding (Schieffelin, Woolard and
Kroskrity 1999; Lippi-Green 1997; L. Milroy 2004). The belief systems, which often
reinforce the dominance of a standard, provide a (if not the) lens through which speakers
interpret and understand the language variation that they encounter (Wassink & Curzan 2004:
175) and influence the global commodification of language variation. (Chand, 2009: 395)
Thus, globalization can be seen as one of the influence of the language ideological
change through the linguistics commodification within particular social-cultural environment.
Based on that explanation, this paper is intended to observe the existence of language ideology
LG632 Sociolinguistics II: Sociocultural Theory (Dr. Vineeta Chand)

behind the process of language commodification and its relation to globalization. The
observation is done by examining the result from the previous researches related to the
commodification of dialect and accent in the globalization context.
B. Ideologies of Language and Language Change
Research on ideology of language and linguistic marketplace concept is useful in
observing sociocultural theorizing and linguistics variation and change. Sankoff and Laberge
(1978) on their Canadian sociolinguistic research sum up that the concept of the linguistic
marketplace has important role in giving explanation of linguistic variation. Based on their
research, they found out that linguistic marketplace concept gives illustration of the impact of
several factors on language use; social context which is created by the linguistic market, power
as social pressure in the form of social control that is performed by the linguistic market, and
knowledge (a speakers linguistic capital (communicative competence) that enables him/her to
use the linguistic variety with the highest market value).
In its relation to linguistic marketplace concept, linguistic ideology also has important
contribution in explaining relation of language and sociocultural condition. Silverstein (1979)
points out that linguistic ideology is a crucial link which can be used to mediate the use of
linguistic form and social structure. Woolard and Shieffeling (1994: 2) stated that the observation
of language ideology provides linkages of fundamental social institution through ideologies
envision and enact links of language to group and personal identity, to aesthetics, to morality,
and to epistemology. In line with this statement, Jaffe (2009: 390) argues that through the
observation of language ideology, we can find the analytical models for taking the connections
between talk as social action and broader social and political structures and process.
The main focus in the language-ideological approach is the examination of the process of
social power forms and being formed through the ideas about language and discursive practices
(Hachimi 2013; Bourdieu 1991; Woolard and Schieffelin 1994). In this case, it becomes
interesting to see how language ideology and globalization are connected and captured through
the commodification of language. Globalization is seen as a discursive practice which can form
and being formed. Therefore, in the next part of this paper, the language ideology and its relation
to globalization will be explained through the case of commodification of language which has
previously observed in previous researches.



C. Language and Globalization
Globalization has become an issue which is being observed through various aspects and
approaches. McGrew (1990) defined globalization as multiplicity of linkages and
interconnections that transcend the nation states (and by implication the societies) which make
up the modern world system. It defines a process through which events, decisions and activities
in one part of the world can come to have a significant consequence for individuals and
communities in quite distant parts of the globe. This definition has lead into an understanding
that globalization create a social change as the consequence of global human contact across
cultural boundaries. That is why it is interesting to observe the relation between language
practice and globalization. Silverstein (1979) stated that the choice of linguistic forms is
determined in part by sociological and ideological factors that shape linguistic features of speech.
Thus, globalization has an effect on sociological and ideological factors which than resulted on
the change of linguistic practices.
The observation of relationship between language and globalization is observed under the
sociolinguistics of globalization approach (Blommaert 2003; Coupland 2003). Copuland (2003:
466) explains that the term globalization itself suggests a process of lifting suggests a process of
lifting events from one level to a higher one, a global one, or vice versa, and sociolinguistic of
globalization will definitely need to explain the various forms of interconnectedness between
levels and scales of sociolinguistic phenomena. Sociolinguistics of globalization observes the
social evaluation and transformation of language practices in global economies, wherein
language practices are used to instantiate and negotiate relations of social power and authority in
global and local settings (Vineeta, 2009: 395). That is why it is linked to language ideology,
because the process of transformation of language practice has impact on the why people value
the language itself.
The process of valuing language is related to Bourdieus concept of linguistic market,
where language is seen as a commodity. In the following part, I will use several researchers
about commodification of language, especially on dialect and accent commodification, which are
previously done by several researchers to see how they capture the language ideology and its
relation to the globalization.


C.1 The Commodification of Accent
One of researches that talks about ideology of standard language in globalization context
is a research by Milroy (2000) where he observes the ideologies about standard language in
United Kingdom and United States where accent are differently valued in the two countries. The
differences about standard language are based on the difference of language ideology operates
in two countries. Milroy (2000:57) states that historical events are proposed as critical to an
account of why these ideologies have been constructed in particular ways, so as to foreground
the language codes that index selected social groups and to render others somewhat less salient.
The finding of the research shows that in United States a standard language is seen as a
mainstream language practice. As long as someone does not have accent, they are considered to
speak standard language. Besides, the standard language in United States is not determined
by specific regional phonology which means that someone can use their specific regional
features and still consider talking in standard language. Those who are not speak standard
language is considered as non-mainstream. Meanwhile, in United Kingdom accent is seen
differently. The standard language is determined based on the accent. The accent has crucial
different interpretation in United State and United Kingdom. The non-standard speaker in United
Kingdom is considered as lower class, most of the speakers who do not speak in standard
language are identified as urban working class.
Shuck (2004) also observes the interpretation and process of valuing accent through
conversational performative. On his research, he captures the existence of the ideology of
nativeness. The ideology of nativeness deals with the assumption that the native speakers of
English language are only Americans and sometimes British people. This ideology makes people
assume that the other people who are not native of English language and not speak English are
seen as foreigner. In his research, he observes the language ideology through the performative
aspects of the speakers as the index of ideology. The speakers being observed in this research are
two middle-class, U.S. university students.
The ideology examinations were done through the way the speakers construct and
describe the identity of Saudi Arabia man in the flight as Others. The nativeness ideology is
captured through the way the speakers explain how different accent is really scary and relates the
speaker with different accent with negative character. The speakers focus on create the
differences between us and them. From the differences, the speaker later on relates them not

only as foreigner but also associates them with fear and negative things by exaggerating the
reality.
In the conclusion, Shuck (2004: 219) assumes that this kind of ideology of nativeness
and the construction of Other will create several consequences related to language practice and
policy. In small scale will result on the effort of making foreigner to speak normal, for
example pronunciation courses required of all nonnative English-speaking students. On a much
larger scale it will result on the rise of monolingualist language policies in the United State and
other countries.
The issue related to the commodification of accent was also observed by Rahman (2009).
On his research, he observed the commodification of English in Pakistan. The object of the
research is the use of English with a near-native (American or British accent) in the Pakistan call
center. The call center in Pakistan is operated in several big cities in Pakistan as result of
globalization. The call centers are established to receive telephone calls from Western costumer
nad to call the client in order to offer them several services to their costumer and other people
outside the country.
In this research, Rahman tries to find out the describe the language policies and practices
of Pakistans call centers in relation to language ideologies in Pakistan society in general and in
the call centers in particular and observes the accent used by the workers as realization of the
commodification of language. The finding of this research shows that the language use in
Pakistan call center has hierarchical order; English as the highest, second is Urdu, and followed
by other mother tongues. The language ideologies captured in this research shows the entailment
of language discrimination for the call center workers and Pakistani English-using elite who do
not have English native accent. Thus, Rahman (2009:250) concludes that accent, then, is the site
of an ongoing struggle for the construction of new, globalized identities in the call centers od
Pakistan.
As it is argued by Johnstone, et al (2006) and Agha (2006) through the observation of
dialect or accent as indexicality, in the three paper presented above, (Milroy 2000, Shuck 2004,
and Rahman 2009) has captured the social and stylistic meaning in the globalization context. It
shows the fact that a small scale local meaning of accent become a significant thing in the board
sociolinguistic marketplace of globalization. Based on the three observations done by Milroy
(2000), Shuck (2004), and Rahman (2009), it can be seen that the way language practice, in this

case accent, valued is related to the local social condition, historical context, and economic
situation and how it has effect on global level.
The different language ideologies operated in one to another place caused different
interpretation of language practice, as Blommaert (2003) mentioned that language ideologies
affect language change, including forms of transformation now captured under the label
globalized. In the research by Milroy (2000) accents are valued differently in United Kingdom
and United States, In Shuck (2004) the accent is valued as negative thing in America, and in
Rahman (2009) American accent is appreciated very positively in Pakistan call center. The
different way of valuing language in the three cases can be related as the effect of globalization,
where one variety of language and practice will be interpreted differently when it is brought to
other places which have different social condition.
Blommaert (2003: 609) explains that the world is not a uniform space and that
consequently, globalization process need to be understood against the background of the world
system. This world system, as Immanuel Wallerstein has extensively argued, is a system built on
inequality, [] (e.g. Wallerstein 1983, 2001). Thus, the system is marked by both the existence
of separate spaces (e.g. states) and deep interconnectedness of the different spaces, often,
precisely, through the existence of worldwide elites. Inequality, not uniformity, orginazines the
flows and the particular nature of such flows across the globe. Consequently, whenever
sociolinguistics items travel across the globe, they travel across structurally different spaces and
will consequently be picked up differently in different places.

C.2 Commodification of Dialect
Ibrahim (1999) makes an observation on how an identity acquired in the new language
setting by language learners and how it is related to language acquisition. His focus on this
research is on the French speaking African youth who learn and acquire their English language
in Canada. In Canada, they are not identified as French speaking African but Black American.
This process of identification is the result from hegemony of constructed representation.
This process of identification later on influences their linguistic and cultural learning
during the ESL learning process. The result of the ESL learning that they had been through in
Canada causes the identification of these French speaking African to have tendency into the
American Black identity which they previously did not have. They becomes black from the

way they style their English into Black English practices, the consumption of black culture such
as hip hop music and specific clothing.
Ibrahim argues that this is a proof that ESL somehow is not neutral from its politics and
pedagogy of desire and investment. Later on in the conclusion, he relates his finding to Bourdie
(1991) that wittingly or unwittingly, schools sanction certain identities and accept their
linguistics norm by doing nothing more than assuming them to be the norm; we as teachers
should remember that these identities are raced, classed, sexualized, and gender (1999:366).
Johnstone on her paper Indexing the Local (2010) also talked about the
commodification of dialect. In this article she talks about the emerging of local dialect awareness
in the globalization context. Johnstone (2010: 390) summarizes previous researches related to the
awareness of regional dialects by Coupland (1985, 2001, 2007, 2008) on the exploration of the
use of Welsh English features by radio and television personalities to project local personae. She
also mentions local dialects by Beal (1999) where the uses of local dialects in Newcastle and
Sheffield are contrasted. In Newcastle, the use of local dialect is associated with the with
working class, while in Sheffield, the use of local dialect is linked more to Yorkshire county, not
the city itself. This different interpretation of dialect is somehow resulted by to the histories of
metadiscourse. Beal (2009: 139) mentioned that Industrial Revolution caused geographical
mobility which then resulted to the endangerment and change of local dialect and the way those
dialects are valued and interpreted.
On the article Johnstone later on assume that through the observation of the case of
dialect contact and dialect awareness she states that when it comes to language, renewed
attention to the local is not a nostalgic or desperate reponse to globalization but an inevitable
result of globalization.changes attendant upon globalization geographic mobility, the
increased heterogeneity of local demography, and economic change that forces people to re-
image themselves-are precisely the conditions that most effectively foster dialect and language
awareness.
In all issues of dialect observation mentioned above, the process of dialect
commodification were done through various social factors such as language course, economic
activity, geographical mobility, media, and historical events. From the Beal (2009) on local
dialect disappearance, it can be seen that a movement from one space of linguistic and
communicative resources causes an effect on the value of the linguistic skills and repertoires of

speakers, which then lead into the change of dialect to be fit to the host dialect or language
practice. The same thing happen to French Speaking African youth described in Ibrahim (1999)
paper, where the use of AAVE dialect in their process of learning has effect on their identities.
Those cases are related to Blommaert, et al (2005: 203) argument that a movement from one
linguistic marketplace to another linguistic marketplace involves the imposition of the sets of
norms and rules as well as the invoking of potentially meaningful relations between one scale
and another (e.g., the local versus the national or the global). This has effect on what people can
or cannot do (it legitimizes some forms of behavior while disqualifying or constraining other
forms), the value and function of their sociolinguistic repertoires, their identities, both self -
constructed (inhabited) and ascribed by others.
From the observation of commodification of dialect, then, the relation of globalization
and language ideology reveals. The social and geographical mobility and dialect contact as the
result of globalization increased speakers awareness of local dialect and dialect leveling, how a
dialect are valued and which dialect represented their identities well. The awareness has effect
the existence of ideological difference among the use of language varieties through increased
popular attention to variation.

D. Conclusion
The case of accent and dialect commodification mentioned in the previous segments
shows that the way accent and dialect valued in certain context capture the language ideology
exist within that context. As Silverstein (1979: 193) mentioned that language ideology is sets of
beliefs about language articulated by users as a rationalization and justification of perceived
language structure and use. In the context of globalization, the commodification of language
happens as a result of different language ideology and different way of valuing language in one
place and another place. Therefore, there always be a language ideology exist in language
commodification because people aware that their language practices will be valued differently. It
shows that people have varying language abilities repertoires and skills with languages but [
] the function and value of those repertoires and skills can change as the space of language
contact changes . (Blommaert et al. 2005 : 211)
Blommaert (2009: 609) explained whenever sociolinguistics items travel across the
globe, they travel across structurally different spaces and will consequently be picked up

differently in different places. This statement is proved on Milroy (2000) and Shuck (2009)
where the accent used by speakers is interpreted differently in different country. From that, it can
be seen that the operation of ideology of language within a society is related to globalization.
When social, economic and geographical condition change as the result of globalization, the way
people valuing language practice change as the consequence. This is in line with the definition of
commodification of language by (Heller, 2003) where she defines the commodification of
language as a shift from the way people valuing of language based on its basic communicative
function and its relation to national and cultural identity to valuing it for what it means in the
globalized world, as commodity.


References
Agha, A. 2006. Language and Social Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Beal, J. C. 1999. Geordie Nation: Language and regional identity in the north east of
England. Lore and Language 17: 33 48.

Beal, J. C. 2009. Enregisterment, commodification, and historical context: Geordie versus
Sheffi eldish. American Speech 84: 138 56.

Blommaert, J., Collins, J., and Slembrouck, S. 2005. Spaces of multilingualism. Language and
Communication 25 (3): 197 216.

Blommaert, J. 2003. Commentary: A Sociolinguistics of Globalization. Journal of
Sociolinguistics 7: 607-23.

Bourdieu, P. 1991. The economics of linguistic exchanges. Social Science Information. 16, 645-
668.

Chand, Vineeta. 2009. [v]at is going on? Local and global ideologies about Indian English.
Language in Society 38, 393-419.

Coupland, N. 2003. Sociolinguistic authenticities. Journal of Sociolinguistics 7 (3): 417 31.

Coupland, N. 1985. Hark, hark the lark: Social motivations for phonological style - shifting.
Language and communication 5: 153 72.

Coupland, N. 2001. Dialect stylization in radio talk. Language in Society 30: 345 75.

Coupland ,N. 2007. Style: Language Variation and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.

Coupland, N.2008. Post - industrial voice in Wales. Paper presented at the Sociolinguistics
Symposium 16, Amsterdam

Coupland, N. 2003. Introduction: Sociolinguistics and Globalisation. Journal of Sociolinguistics
7: 465-72.

Hachimi, A. 2013. The Maghreb-Mashreq language ideology and the politics of identity in a
globalized Arab world. Journal of Sociolinguistics 17(3): 269296.

Heller , M. 2003. Globalization, the new economy, and the commodification of language and
identity. Journal of Sociolinguistics 7: 473 92.

Ibrahim, Awad El Karim M.1999. Becoming Black: Rap and Hip-Hop, Race, Gender, Identity
and the Politics of Esl Learning. TESOL Quarterly 33: 349-69.

Jaffe, A. 2009. The production and reproduction of language ideologies in practice. In Coupland,
Nikolas and Adam Jaworski (eds.) The New Sociolinguistics Reader. Basingstroke: Palgrave
Macmillan.

Johnstone, B . 2010. Indexing the Local. In The Handbook of Language and Globalization (ed N.
Coupland), Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford, UK.

Johnstone, B, Andrus, Jennifer and Danielson, Andrew. 2006. Mobility, indexicality, and the
enregisterments of "Pittsburghese". Journal of English Linguistics 34, 77-104.

McGrew, A. 1996. A Global Society. In Stuart Hall, David Held, and Anthony McGrew (eds),
Modernity and Its Futures. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1990.

Milroy, J. 2001. Language ideologies and the consequences of standardization. Journal of
Sociolinguistics, 5 (4): 530-55.

Milroy, L. 2000. Britain and the United States: Two nations divided by the same language (and
different language ideologies). Journal of Linguistic Anthropology 10: 56-89.

Rahman, T. 2009. Language ideology, identity and the commodification of language in the Call
Centers of Pakistan. Language in Society 38: 233-58.

Sankoff, D., and Laberge, S. 1978. The linguistic market and the statistical explanation of
variability. In D. Sankoff (ed.), Linguistic Variation: Models and Methods, 239-50. New York:
Academic Press.

Shuck, Gail. 2004. Conversational performance and the poetic construction of an ideology.
Language in Society 33: 195-222.

Silverstein, M. 1979. Language structure and linguistic ideology. In P.R. Clyne, W.F. Hanks, and
C.L. Hofbauer (eds), The Elements: A Parasession on Linguistic Units and Levels, 193-247.
Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.

Woolard, K. A. and B.B. Schieffelin. 1994. Language ideology. Annual Reviews in Anthropology
23:55-82.

LG632 Marking Rubric
10 /References (10)
Your paper is backed by an appropriate number (minimum 3, 7-10 ideal) and range of academic references which are appropriate
in depth for a postgraduate sociolinguistics paper (e.g. not dictionaries or textbooks designed for undergraduates). The paper
cites references using a consistent and reasonable format both within the text and at the conclusion of the text, within a
bibliography. There is a complete match between references within the text and those listed in the bibliography. Each reference
is used to move the main thesis forward in a distinct way and does not have undue overlap with other references. References are
appropriately distributed across the topics covered within the essay.

9 /Organization (15)
Your essay is organized and well structured (there is a beginning, a body, and a conclusion). The essay exhibits a clear strategy
for persuasion and pattern of development (chronological order, spatial order, comparison/contrast, etc.). Reflections on cited
research are academically rigorous, coherent, allow for critiques of the research and relevant to thesis development. Essay does
not digress from central point(s) and all examples are clearly explained and relate to thesis. Introductory section is interesting, to
the point, provides a succinct overview of the tasks undertaken within the essay, and clearly addresses the chosen writing topic.
Concluding section is satisfying, draws together arguments and evidence posited within the paper and shows how the evidence
has built up the main thesis or argument.

6 /Thesis and Argument Development (15)
Your submission clearly and fully responds to one of the assigned topics, and includes all topical areas and additional elements
(e.g. charts) required within the assignment. It relies on academic linguistic and cultural evidence, not on personal opinions or
judgments (though drawing on personal experiences is permitted, when pertinent previous literature does not exist). The essay
has a thesis and/or a topical focusa single, central point that is interesting, original, striking and substantial, which is clearly
relevant to one of the assigned topics. The central idea is developed in the essay through well-chosen, appropriate, concrete
details that show originality and freshness. Author shows rather than merely tells. Generalizations and assertions are defended
and/or cited. Arguments are logical.

12 /Required Components & Self-Assessment (15)
Your essay includes all required elements (topical and task-based, e.g. compare and contrast X & Y). These can be found in the
original assignments. Paper includes completed self-assessment sheet.

9 /Topical Evidence, Knowledge (15)
Your essay demonstrates your mastery of the topic as a nuanced, complex phenomenon which relates in specific ways to other
themes, phenomenon and perspectives within sociolinguistics. Past research findings introduced are an appropriate level of
complexity, pertinent to thesis, succinctly yet fully explained, and directly contribute to the argument development and/or the
interpretation of new data. Visual aids (e.g. charts, graphs, maps, spectrograms) are appropriate in quantity and quality and
help illustrate a phenomenon and build uponnot only mirrorevidence provided in surrounding text. Any presentation of new
data (e.g. that collected by author) includes adequate discussion of data collection and analysis methodologies and the
appropriate use of visual aids in explaining, demonstrating or circumscribing the dataset and findings.

9 / Style (15)
Sentences are mature and are rhetorically effective. The essay is written in a style and tone appropriate to the audience, topic
and purpose. Words are appropriate and well chosen. Writer avoids jargon and sexist language. Overly vague and/or
ungrounded elements (where it is not clear what is being referred to) are completely absent. Writer seems to be speaking in an
authentic voice, and successfully introduces past literature/findings without excessive use of quotations. Paper is enjoyable
and interesting.

12 / Grammar, Spelling, Mechanics, Length (15)
Papers is free from grammatical, spelling and mechanical errors. Paper has clearly undergone proofreading and spell-checking.
Paper fits within assigned word count range.

67 /100 Total Grade

Please treat each sentence within each section as equally weighted. Therefore, if there are 5 sentences under a heading,
and that section is worth 15 points, then each would be worth ~3 points. If the failure to complete one aspect of a
heading seriously hinders the essay from completing other aspects, this should be taken into account for the overall
score for that section.

Marking Guidelines based on a 10-point scale:
Lowest Score (0-2): Essay fails in this regard. Task is either not accomplished or is done to a very
limited degree. Level at which this task was accomplished hinders the effectiveness of the essay as a
whole.
Below Average (3-4): Essay is striving in the direction of addressing this task, but is still not meeting
basic expectation.
Average Score (5-6): Essay makes a clear attempt to fulfill this task, but there is clear room for
improvement.
Above Average (7-8): Essay is overall fulfilling this task (only very occasional deviance). Paper meets
all expectations for postgraduate level work with respect to this task.
Highest Score (9-10): There are no possible improvements to make. Essay fulfils this task at the level
of a published journal article. Essay provides an original contribution to the field.

Commodification of Language

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Commodification of Language

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

LG632 Sociolinguistics II: Sociocultural Theory (Dr.

Anda mungkin juga menyukai