accent article- with theories

Audience: people who read the guardian and have an interest in everyones accents


                                Does accent have anything to do with your own socialect?

 

Many people associate the English language being ‘posh’ or ‘well-spoken’ when in fact only a small percentage of the country does so. Across the UK accents can sometimes change when people move around or when they are with different people.

Some people’s accents can be similar to their families as they might be influenced by their language choice because they live in the same house. This would be different if they are with other people such as close friends. You wouldn’t talk the latest slang to your family would you? Well… Unless they are up to date with the trend. At interviews, people tend to change their accent and dialect to persuade and encourage the interviewer that they are right for the job. At job interviews people might use this technique because of covert prestige which is the idea of changing your accent because it is ‘bad’. This then makes them more suited for the job as they think where they come from might have some low hope. People’s voice also tend to also change when they use the phone as they could be answering to someone who they have never met e.g. a teacher therefore they would be converging their language. Milroy’s Belfast study indicates that women talk differently when with different social groups. This means that there overall accent is weaker than men. It shows that women can speak how they are if they are travelling across the country, seeing family and even in a work environment and still have a small accent but not as recognised. This then creates dialect levelling.

When people are with their friends, dialect is changing as there could be more slang, banter and more influences. The media and the social group that you are in have a big impact on how every person’s sociolect/dialect is. This is because of the celebrity influences and also who you hang around with. Discourse communities make you feel like there isn’t much accent or dialect change until you are with other people such as your family. However when people meet new friends such as in school they might converge to make themselves sound friendlier but also close friends might also take the mick out of each other and then diverge their language. Cheshire’s reading study links as when in a social situation boys tend to use more non- standard forms compared to girls. This could be down to group pressure but also their own background. Milroy’s Belfast study also links as men have a closed network meaning they talk the same to everyone making their accent stand out more. Men tend to keep to the same group compared to women who like to be friends with multiple groups therefore weakening their accent.

Many people’s accents and dialect also change when people go abroad or move somewhere else in the country. For example if someone from Bristol went to University to Birmingham they could pick up some dialect and maybe accent if they are staying there for a while. This also links into dialect levelling as people could pick up dialect and it not change their accent therefore making all the accents merge into one. As a discourse community people tend to pick up more and be influenced to use it. When meeting new people, they could recognise where you come from by your accent. Gile’s theory suggests that rural accents are more trustworthy therefore people could find you more reliable and friendlier whereas RP is more convincing. Eckert’s theory also suggests that people using non-standard forms are the ones who are ‘likely to fail’ as people who use RP are considered ‘intelligent’.

Ed Miliband is a well-known politician who is considered intelligent and uses RP. This all changed when he met Russel Brand. The politician changed his accent and dialect to suit Russel’s as he probably felt more comfortable around him making his accent slip into Russel’s ‘infamous mockney’. Could he be doing this to be more influenced by the public? Y changing words such as ‘yes’ to ‘yeah’ and ‘aren’t’ to ‘aint’ suggests that he is informal and started picking up Russel’s idiolect. Glottal stops were also enforced when speaking making Ed’s own idiolect stand out too. Ed is not the first politician to change his accent/dialect as Margret Thatcher did the same to sound more convincing to the public. This figure of ‘prestige’ shows that everyday people have to change their way of speaking just so they are taken seriously nowadays.

gender blog entry- with theories

Audience: regular Guardian readers but also people with some interested in gender equality

In modern day it is said that gender equality has been cut down a lot since the recent years. However, is this really the case? We live in a friendly community where people are not badly discriminated against gender apart from some women who experience sexism on a daily basis? Is this really the case when men and women should have equal rights and opportunities in the world?
Men don’t seem to be getting the same level of sexism on a daily basis so… are the issues changing?

Theorist robin Lakoff suggested many ideas how men and women are treated and communicated differently. If this is put into modern day some of these could ‘normal’ for some people who have experienced sexism on a daily basis. It also gives the impression that language is changing as society grows. Women are stereotypically the ones who deal with sexism which means that men are the ‘powerful’ ones saying it. This indicates that the men are more direct and straight to the point as they don’t think before they say which is from Lakoffs findings. Men tend to tell more jokes and have a better sense of humour too which makes them more dominant to women. It also means that males don’t care about how they say it as they also use non-standard form when in a social situation. This however makes the female race seem weaker and that they can be easily interrupted. This could be because women use polite forms and tag questions such as ‘isn’t it?’ which softens the conversation to make other people feel included or like they need to listen. It would make it easier for men to ‘pick on’ women due to the easy target of polite forms.

Margret Thatcher was the first female Prime Minister in the UK and has been the only one since. As she had power, and also being the first women to do so, it made her more influential to the general public. However, because she had to compete with the male audience she felt like she had to lower her voice just so she could feel accepted. This is why she took lessons to change her speech just so she could present the ‘male’ figure to society. Could she have done this to be as powerful as men? Or because she lived in a world where men were seen as the more confident and firm in what they believe in which Zimmerman and Wests theory didn’t denote? Zimmerman and Wests’ theory indicates that men are the more powerful out of the sexes. This is because they had research on interruptions within a college which said that men interrupted the conversation 46 times compared to women who did twice. So if Margret Thatcher was publicly speaking to a mix sex audience with no lower tone, would she have still got the attention she did?

Another example of a female who wasn’t treated equally was Jennifer Lawrence. She co-stared with male actors and earned more money than she did which was leaked. Some news magazines seen Jennifer’s option on the situation and said that she was yelling at the fact she earned less when she wrote she gave her option in a ‘clear and no bullshit way with no aggression’. Does the public feel like women are weaker and don’t deserve the same amount of pay? Or were the audience surprised that a successful celebrity was complaining about something without knowing that she had a voice? It is strange that the public found it shocking that a women had expressed her views about something when if it was from a male perspective people wouldn’t think much of it and that women are ‘complaining again’. Women are generally meant to use polite forms and emphatic language such as ‘so’ which creates a sweet, loving woman image as Lakoffs theory suggest as suppose to a direct and clear expression in which men are supposed to use.  It overall suggests that men think that they are better than anyone else.

We live in a world where society can change day to day, hour by hour on sexism. Stories and everyday sexism can always change regarding who the person/ people are. Do we live in a world where men are taking over society and becoming more dominant weakening women’s potential? Or do we live in a world where women’s opinions and opportunities make them less equal to men? Or do we live in a world where men and women should be treated equally regarding rights or equal amount of pay and not be surprised when either sex’s voice has to be heard?

Gender Speech - using theories

Audience: in a meeting staff room at middle class- people debating how different each other are regarding titles. 

 

As soon as we reach primary school, why is every child given a title such as ‘Miss’? Why should they be given a role at that age when they don’t understand the world and responsibilities yet? Why should there be one title for an ‘unmarried woman’ and only one for a man? Titles are something you give someone if you are getting married or have a degree such as Professor. Even then the roles are unmarked. Why are men and women titles differently when they both could allocate the same role in the same job?

When calling a man ‘Mr’ we presume that they are married however when we call a woman ‘Miss’ we assume she isn’t married and is single. By calling someone miss it gives the impression that they are still young as many young teenage girls are called miss when they receive letters or apply for jobs. This also gives the impression that they are weaker than being a ‘Mrs’. Women who are titled as ‘Mrs’ give the impression that they have a partner and therefore married. It also sounds grown up and sophisticated. Zimmerman and Wests theory indicates that men have more power over women and therefore when they are married she now has power as she is ‘apart of him’ and becomes a Mrs. However, other titles such as Doctor and Professor are unmarked as it is gender neutral. Having gender neutral titles indicates that the role is shared and there shouldn’t be a desired authority which states who is ‘higher’ in that role. By having roles like that it indicates that no one is superior to the other and the job is equal.

Men are stereotypically associated with having more power compared to women. This could be down to the one title of Mr compared to women who can have three- Miss, Mrs and Ms. By a man having a Mrs by his side it indicates that he has power over her as she has taken the role of his last name with Mrs. Zimmerman and Wests theory agrees as men are the more powerful ones in gender as they tend to interrupt more than women making them more superior. This could also be why men are known for being the ‘man of the house’ because they like to own everything and be direct compared to women who can be hesitant while using polite forms as Lakoff said in her theory. Because men have the power they tend to not listen to women more and interrupt them. This contradicts Beatties theory as his theory indicates that men and women are equal therefore there should be no higher roles when it comes to two people. With this being said men should be equal and just as important as their wife (and if so husband) and also have the same level of power regarding interruptions. However, same sex couples have the same allocated titles. This shows no power as both of the roles are equal.

Within the work environment there are many people with different titles such as Mrs, Miss, Mr and Sir. They all do the same job but are they still equal? When people come to a job interview and present themselves as Miss, people could associate them with being weaker and use intensifiers and emphatic language. This makes them sound weaker than the males and could be paid less. The title also tells the interviewers or colleagues that they might not have the same experience as a ‘Mrs’. By women using empty adjectives and the lack of humour, they might weaken themselves. Lakoffs theory indicates that women tend to do this compared to the males as they are more direct and have better sense of humour. This could mean that men are more outgoing and therefore earned the title of Mr. This shows power as they have worked hard for themselves but also as they are treated as the ‘norm’ in the sexes. So how come men are the ‘norm’ and are supposably paid more? With men being more direct shows they know what they are talking about and have ideas but in Lakoffs theory it indicates that they swear more and also interrupt more. Would you want this man working in your environment? How come men can get some work done and slack off by using covert prestige towards fellow work colleagues but women can work hard by using empty adjectives and get paid less? The titles ruin the modern life in how everyone is treated and respected at work.

stereotypes - cambridge elevate 13.5.5

G- Newspaper article

R- People who are interested in the guardian magazine, not stood out with a picture and isn’t a main headline so people might miss this article, because its short it might draw attention rather than reading a full page, it could cause some issues due to not everyone being a sports fan in Britain etc.,

a- people reading the guardian paper- teens-older adults, it could also be anyone who is hooked by the words ‘British stereotypes’ as it might be different to the rest of the page, people interested in what a British magazine has to say about their own stereotypes

p- Is to say that within Europe people are categorised differently and everyone stereotypically assumes each country is like that, in the main article it goes onto say about how much each European country drinks rather than talking about how we see people, is to inform people that they are more than the ‘stereotypical image’,

e- the reader would expect to agree with the article as the known stereotypes of each country are ‘correct’ and what people normally assume relates to that country, they might be surprised when reading it as it is only a small article in the corner of a page but the main article talks more into Europe’s alcoholic drinking, they might be surprised when reading this extract then reading the main one as this extract stops suddenly and doesn’t give much point about war or drinking.

‘So we know....’ - Third person, talking on behalf of the Britain’s, everything the writer is saying is ‘true’

 

 

This text is an extract from the main article from The Guardian online newspaper. The audience reading it might be mainly adults who read the news but also anyone else who might grab the attention of the extract title as it mentions ‘British Stereotypes’. This grabs the attention of the audience due to it being a small extract rather than a headline story. People might want to read about the former stereotypes as it is a short article rather than a page full with no images (whereas people might move on and get bored). People could be interested in the fact that the headline might be a different topic to the other stories on the page and this could stand out more. The writer also uses ‘Brits’ at the start of the article. This is an abbreviation of the noun ‘Britons’ which is also a noun of ‘Britain’. This implies that he is using slang to describe the ‘British’ and is less formal than the rest of the text. It makes it seem that he is connecting with the readers because Britons might use ‘Brits’ as slang when describing themselves. Due to it being about ‘British’ people in the title, people might be interested to what fellow Britons have to say about themselves and how us as a country are stereotypically known. The writer of this article is British too as he talks about how ‘we’ as a country are known. By using ‘we’, it implies that he is interacting with the audience using third person as he sounds like the main spokesperson for the Britons and everyone agrees with his point. When he says ‘us’, it implies that every Briton is the same therefore we all must do the same stereotypical things such as being a ‘drunk football fan’. This also links to rest of the text as he goes onto say that other countries are known for different stereotypical things too therefore we associate them to be the same too. Although this is mainly an opinionated extract, some readers might have some issues with this because not every person in Britain is generally a ‘sportsfan’ or ‘bingedrinker’.  The purpose of this extract is to inform the readers that Britain is known for being the ‘bingedrinking’ country however in the main article it talks about how much each European country drinks rather than how each country stereotypically see each other. The secondary purpose is to inform people that countries all around the world are stereotypically known for something such as the French for wearing ‘striped shirts’. It shows that people are more than an image. The expectations that the readers might have from this article is that they would believe most of the things that were said. This is due to the media and also modes as people always believe that the stereotypes are true. It would also be what most people assume each country is like before visiting or in the media. However, because this is a short extract people might be surprised when they finish it as it ends quickly without giving much point other than naming some stereotypes. When the audience read the online article, the might be surprised again because it goes into depth about alcoholic drinking within each country and says that Britain is ‘obsessed with the war’ even though it doesn’t mention the war in the extract. When reading the short extract they might be confused why a small extract is in the corner when it doesn’t give much of a gripping storyline other than the title

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Transcript analysis

Libby: I work in a hairdressers (.) and um (.) I answer the phones (.) do the tills and stuff

Louise: what stuff

Libby: like answer the phones (.) like makes sure when people come in give them enough time for the hairdresser (.) to do their hair (2) has to be good quality and cant have four people come in at once (.) I um (.) wash (.) hair aswell (.) gotta makes sure you got the right shampoo (2) and um (.) yeah (.) great

Libby used the most air time in this transcript as the topic of conversation was jobs and she was the only person who has one so she can talk about it. Although she is the main speaker she seems confident in what she is saying and gives a lot of examples and roles that she does within her job. Throughout the transcript she uses a lot of filler such as 'um'. This tells us that she is thinking on what else to say next or reassure other people in the conversation the responsibilities of a job. As well as fillers she also uses hedges such as like. This could be down to being embarrassed from recording as people don't like the pressure (especially if they are the only one talking). It also means she wouldn't be the powerful speaker as they are usually confident and direct however if you are embarrassed your not.

My part in the transcript was very short as I don't have a job and didn't have much to say. At the start however I interrupted Libby by saying 'what stuff?' so she could elaborate her responsibilities to us.
I hold power to her as I wanted to find out more about her job however there wasn't much power as I was generally talking to her like a friend/classmate.

language and representation

 Years and Years - Eyes Shut Lyrics (first part of song)

Throw your heart to me
Let it fall and hit the ground
Let it go
Your timing was so wrong
I just want to be found

In this song the band talks about a possible breakup or loss of someone as they would want to be 'found' again. This suggests that they are now lost without them and don't know what to do anyone because they are missing a part of someone or something.  'Throw' demonstrates a metaphor as they gave all they could to them but it was at the wrong time. It also is exaggerated and sounds like it was forced for them to do so. In the second line it also seems like they want the heart to be left on the ground (not only because it was bad timing for them) but also because it sounds like the heart is now worthless and unwanted. 'Your' also states that they are putting all the blame on them when it would of been an equal decision if it was a breakup or one betrayed the other badly. It is also a personal pronoun as they would be directly aiming the whole song at someone. Overall this would make the reader seem sad as it is a slow song anyway but also want to know how bad the lead singer felt after betrayal. It could also make the audience think that something so simple such as love can be broken and hurt at anytime so it must be looked after and not 'hit the ground'.

gender research - hallas absense

Beattie’s challenge to Zimmerman and West

Geoffrey Beattie studied and recorded that within a conversation there were 557 interruptions within 10 hours of discussion. Zimmerman and West recorded 55 interruptions. Beattie also found that men and women interrupt an equal amount- an average of 34.1 men and 33.8 women. This made men interrupt more however not as much as Zimmerman and West shown.

John Grey's popular book 'Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus'

In the book, men and women differ in the language they use when communicating. The main points in the book and theories are:

• Language and communication matter more to women than men.
• Women are more verbally skilled than men
• Men focus about getting things done in the conversation. Men are more factual whereas women want to connect and make a relationship out of the conversation.
• Can lead to miscommunicating between the sexes and could cause misinterpretations

This book makes it seem like men are the bullies in the conversation and women only care about feelings and connecting with others. It is also patronising to men to read it as they sound like bullies too. This can also make women sound less ‘powerful’ than men because men want to get the conversation over with whereas women want to enjoy the conversation and enjoy it. Today, the sexes would be equal so I think the language is slightly diverged.

Mary Beard

She believes that men have more power over vocal compared to women and that women are not treated equally. This is because she thinks that women do not speak authoritative however men come across as ‘deep voiced with connotations of profundity’. Men also appear to always get the last word even if women come up with the ‘excellent suggestion’. In the old punch cartoon she talks about how younger children would be influenced by the behaviour and looks into how women speak in today’s society.

Dale Spencer

The research is based upon the book ‘Men made language’. She argues that men have more power over women over all societies and classes. They also believe that they are the dominant gender and disobedient women who fail certain tasks are then labelled as ‘frigid’ or abnormal’. This is also down to the low toned masculine tone of voice.

Dale Spencer and Pamela fishman challenges to other theories

Pamela- she conducted research upon young American couples by listening to 50 hours of pre-recorded conversations between them. She found that five out of the six subjects were going to graduate school. The subjects included feminists, were white or between the ages of 20-30. She mainly found the women’s language use a lot of tag questions such as ‘you know?’

Dale- she also looked into tag questions such as ‘isn’t it?’ however she believed that this was down to gaining conversational power.