Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-ndmmz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-30T12:52:41.083Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

2 - Approaching Norms and Margins on Different Levels: Going beyond the Standard/Non-Standard Divide

from Part I - Norms and Margins: Ideology and Concepts

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 March 2018

By
Sandrine Sorlin
Edited by
Linda Pillière ,
Wilfrid Andrieu ,
Valérie Kerfelec  and
Diana Lewis
Linda Pillière
Affiliation:
Aix Marseille Univ, LERMA
Wilfrid Andrieu
Affiliation:
Aix Marseille Univ, LERMA
Valérie Kerfelec
Affiliation:
Aix Marseille Univ, LERMA
Diana Lewis
Affiliation:
Aix Marseille Univ, LERMA
Get access

Summary

Norms and margins, as exemplified in the opposition Standard vs non-Standard English, are studied in this chapter from three different perspectives with the ultimate aim of transcending the dichotomy that has traditionally opposed one to the other. Adopting a three-level approach to norms and margins – the national, community and individual levels – this chapter first focuses on the historical context of norm-setting (national scale), then offers a literature survey of the deconstruction movement since the 1960s that has denounced the national ideology and promoted non-standard varieties (community speech level) and lastly highlights the recent evolution of variationist sociolinguistic theories from top-down to interactive approaches (local individual level)
Type
Chapter
Information
Standardising English
Norms and Margins in the History of the English Language
 , pp. 22 - 42
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2018

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Althusser, L. (1976). Positions, Paris: Editions Sociales.Google Scholar
Anderson, B. (2006). Imagined Communities, 3rd edn, London: Verso.Google Scholar
Auer, P. ed. (2007). Style and Social Identities: Alternative Approaches to Linguistic Heterogeneity, Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Bell, A. (1984). Language style as audience design. Language in Society, 13, 145–204.Google Scholar
Bex, T. and Watts, R. J., eds. (1999). Standard English: The Widening Debate, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, P. (1982). Langage et pouvoir symbolique, Paris: Editions Fayard.Google Scholar
Butler, J. (1997). Excitable Speech: A Politics of the Performative, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Cameron, D. (1990). Demythologising sociolinguistics: Why language does not reflect society. In Joseph, J. E. and Taylor, T. J., eds., Ideologies of Language, London: Routledge, pp. 79–93.Google Scholar
Cameron, D. (1995). Verbal Hygiene, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Coupland, N. (1988). Dialect in Use: Sociolinguistic Variation in Cardiff English, Cardiff: University of Wales Press.Google Scholar
Coupland, N. (2001). Language, situation and the relational self: Theorising dialect style in sociolinguistics. In Eckert, P. and Rickford, J.R., eds., Style and Sociolinguistic Variation, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 185–210.Google Scholar
Coupland, N. (2007). Style: Language Variation and Identity, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Crowley, T. (2003). Standard English and the Politics of Language, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Crystal, D. (2004). The Stories of English, Woodstock, VT: Overlook Press.Google Scholar
Eckert, P. (2001). Style and social meaning. In Eckert, P. and Rickford, J. R., eds., Style and Sociolinguistic Variation, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 119–126.Google Scholar
Eckert, P. (2009). Communities of practice. In Mey, J., ed., Concise Encyclopedia of Pragmatics, 2nd edn, Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 109–112.Google Scholar
Eckert, P. and Rickford, J. R., eds. (2001). Style and Sociolinguistic Variation, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fitzmaurice, S. (2000). The spectator, the politics of social networks, and language standardisation in eighteenth-century England. In Wright, L., ed., The Development of Standard English 1300–1800. Theories, Descriptions, Conflicts, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 195–218.Google Scholar
Gellner, E. (2009). Nations and Nationalism. New Perspectives, 2nd revised edn, Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Giles, H. (1973). Accent mobility: A model and some data. Anthropological Linguistics, 15, 87–105.Google Scholar
Giles, H. and Powesland, P. (1975). Speech Style and Social Evaluation, London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Honey, J. (1997). Language and Power: The Story of Standard English and its Enemies, London: Faber and Faber.Google Scholar
Hope, J. (2000). Rats, bats, sparrows and dogs: Biology, linguistics and the nature of Standard English. In Wright, L., ed., The Development of Standard English 1300–1800. Theories, Descriptions, Conflicts, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 49–56.Google Scholar
Johnson, S. (1755). A Dictionary of the English Language, two volumes, London. Reprinted in facsimile, Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1868.Google Scholar
Jones, D. (1907). Phonetic Transcriptions of English Prose, Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
Labov, W. (1966). The Social Stratification of English in New York City, Washington DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
Labov, W. (1972). Language in the Inner City: Studies in the Black English Vernacular, Oxford: Basic Blackwell.Google Scholar
Lahire, B. (2004). La Culture des individus, dissonances culturelles et distinction de soi, Paris: La Découverte.Google Scholar
Lahire, B. (2011). L'Homme pluriel. Les ressorts de l'action, Paris: Pluriel.Google Scholar
Lass, R. (1994). The Cambridge History of the English Language III: 1476–1776, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lave, J. and Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lowth, R. (1762). A Short Introduction to English Grammar, 2nd edn 1763, London: A. Millar, R. and J. Dodsley.Google Scholar
Macaulay, R. K. S. (1977). Language, Social Class and Education: A Glasgow Study, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Marx, K. and Engels, F. (1970). The German Ideology, 1st edn 1932, London: Lawrence and Wishart.Google Scholar
McWhorter, J. (1998). Word on the Street: Debunking the Myth of ‘Pure’ Standard English, New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Milroy, J. (1999). The consequences of standardisation in descriptive linguistics. In Bex, T. and Watts, R. J., eds., Standard English: The Widening Debate, London: Routledge, pp. 16–39.Google Scholar
Milroy, J. (2002). The legitimate language: Giving a history to English. In Watts, R. J. and Trudgill, P., eds., Alternative Histories of English, London: Routledge, pp. 7–25.Google Scholar
Mugglestone, L. (2003). Talking Proper: The Rise of Accent as Social Symbol, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mugglestone, L. (2005). Lost for Words. The Hidden History of the Oxford English Dictionary, New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Murray, L. (1795). English Grammar, Adapted to the Different Classes of Learners. With an Appendix, Containing Rules and Observations for Assisting the More Advanced Students to Write with Perspicuity and Accuracy. Reprint 1809, New York: Collins and Perkins.Google Scholar
Özkirimli, U. (2010). Theories of Nationalism. A Critical Introduction, 2nd edn, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Rickford, J. R. and McNair-Knox, F. (1994). Addressee- and topic-influenced style-shift: A quantitative sociolinguistic study. In Biber, D. and Finegan, E., eds., Sociolinguistic Perspectives on Register, New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 235–276.Google Scholar
Rickford, J. R. and Rickford, R. J. (2000). Spoken Soul: The Story of Black English, New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Rousse, J. and Verrac, M. (1992). Section 3: Grande-Bretagne. In Auroux, S., ed., Histoire des idées linguistiques 2. Le Développement de la grammaire occidentale, Liège: Pierre Mardaga, pp. 339–358.Google Scholar
Sheridan, T. (1761). A Dissertation on the Causes of the Difficulties. Which Occur, in Learning the English Tongue. With a Scheme for Publishing an English Grammar and Dictionary, upon a Plan Entirely New, London: R. and J. Dodsley.Google Scholar
Smith, A. D. (1998). Nationalism and Modernism, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Sorlin, S. (2012). Langue et autorité. De l'ordre linguistique à la force dialogique, Rennes: Presses Universitaires de Rennes.Google Scholar
Sweet, H. (1877). Dialects and prehistoric forms of Old English. Transactions of the Philological Society 1875–6. London, 543–569.Google Scholar
Tieken-Boon van Ostade, I. (2011). The Bishop's Grammar. Robert Lowth and the Rise of Prescriptivism, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Trudgill, P. (1974). The Social Differentiation of English in Norwich, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Trudgill, P. (1995). Sociolinguistics. An Introduction to Language and Society, revised edn, London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Walker, J. (1791). A Critical Pronouncing Dictionary, London: G. G. J. and J. Robinson and T. Cadell.Google Scholar
Watts, R. J. (1999). The social construction of Standard English: Grammar writers as a ‘discourse community’. In Bex, T. and Watts, R. J., eds., Standard English: The Widening Debate, London: Routledge, pp. 40–68.Google Scholar
Watts, R. J. (2000). Mythical strands in the ideology of prescriptivism. In Wright, L., ed., The Development of Standard English 1300–1800. Theories, Descriptions, Conflicts, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 29–48.Google Scholar
Watts, R. J. and Trudgill, P., eds. (2002). Alternative Histories of English, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Wenger, E. (2000). Communities of Practice, New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wolfram, W. (1969). A Sociolinguistic Description of Detroit Negro Speech, Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
Wright, L., ed. (2000). The Development of Standard English 1300–1800. Theories, Descriptions, Conflicts, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wyld, H. C. (1907). The Growth of English, London: Murray.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×