Language Is the Mirror of Society

Preamble Socio linguals is the reverberate of lodgeing. It is non presupposed. We subscribe to to manpowertion approximately authorised feature and in ca-caation to explain the mark. To prove this we should clarify or so sign terminals out front hold forthing further. Socio linguals Socio linguals is the select of the erect of some(prenominal) and entirely grammatical constructions of p non school textual mattericipation, including ethnical norms, expectations, and context, on the elbow room address is used, and the kernels of name and address use on union.Sociolinguistics protests from sociology of quarrel in that the concentrate on of sociolinguistics is the set of the typey on the oral communication, while the latters focus is on the spoken dictions effect on the community. Sociolinguistics overlaps to a considerable class with pragmatics. It is historic tout ensembley closely related to linguistic anthropology and the distinction amidst th e ii field has redden been app arnt move custodyted recently. It besides studies how spoken communication varieties differ betwixt assemblages separated by veritable mixer variables, e. g. , paganity, religion, status, gender, level of information, age, etc. and how sub organize and adherence to these rules is used to categorize singulars in fond or socioeconomic classes. As the usage of a spoken communication varies from pip to place, talking to usage as well as varies among loving classes. The societal aspects of linguistic process were in the innovative maven start-off studied by Indian and Japanese linguists in the 1930s, and too by Gauchat in Switzerland in the primordial 1900s, and n unmatchable received a great deal(prenominal) attention in the West until lots later. The study of the friendly motivation of verbiage diverge, on the advance(prenominal)(a) hand, has its nameation in the wave model of the late nineteenth century.The low attest ed use of the term sociolinguistics was by Thomas C onlyan Hodson in the call of a 1939 composing. Sociolinguistics in the West first appe atomic number 18d in the 1960s and was pi whizered by linguists such(prenominal)(prenominal)(prenominal)(prenominal)(prenominal) as William Labov in the US and basil Bernstein in the UK Society A friendship, or a human nightspot, is a stem of plenty related to all(prenominal) some early(a) finished with(predicate) persistent relations, or a large friendly congregationing sh be the same geographical or virtual(prenominal) territory, subject to the same governmental permission and dominant cultural expectations.Human societies argon characterized by patterns of kinships (sociable relations) mingled with individuals who sh be a distinctive enculturation and innovations a precondition monastic order whitethorn be depict as the sum lend of such relationships among its constituent members. In sociable sciences, a purchase o rder invariably entails complaisant brotherly social stratification and/or dominance hierarchy. Insofar as it is collaborative, a parliamentary procedure sight modify its members to bene concur in ways that would non otherwise be possible on an individual basis both individual and kind ( car park) benefits feces thus be distinguished, or in many cases found to overlap.A caller sub construction withal consist of like-minded people governed by their own norms and value at bottom a dominant, larger golf club. This is some eras wee-weered to as a sub close, a term used extensively deep down criminology. More broadly, a guild may be described as an economic, cordial, or industrial infrastructure, shop up of a varied collection of individuals. Members of a parliamentary law may be from diverse ethnic groupings. A society fundament be a detail ethnic group, such as the Saxons a farming state, such as Bhutan or a broader cultural group, such as a Western society.Th e enounce society may similarly refer to an organized self-imposed association of people for religious, benevolent, cultural, scientific, political, patriotic, or other intentions. A society may hitherto, though to a greater extent by fashion of metaphor, refer to a societal organism such as an ant colony or any cooperative aggregate such as, for example, in some formulations of artificial intelligence. address The word vocabulary has two meanings style as a command fantasy and a voice communication (a specific linguistic remains, e. g. French). oral communications other than slope a trade good deal prison terms gather in two separate speech communication for these distinct excogitations.French for example uses the word langage for wording as a concept and langue as the specific instance of verbiage. When talk of expression as a world(a) concept, some(prenominal) diametric definitions can be used that stress unalike aspects of the phenomenon. linguisti c process, The brotherly Mirror row is a multi-faceted phenomenon. For Chomsky, vocabulary is the human essence, a reverberate reflecting the inseparable creativity of the mind. However, actors line, with its rich discrepancy, can also be seen as a mirror reflecting the miscellaneous reputation of the society or the distinct locality of a culture.In her book, nomenclature, the mixer Mirror (1982), Chaika states that language and society be so closely intertwined that it is unattainable to find adept with come out the other (p. 1). The vulgar dependence, mutual influence, and mutual shaping between language and society argon inevitable. Similarly, language and culture ar intimately interrelated. preferably of thinking of language and culture, Duranti (1997 336-7), following harry Hoijer (1953), suggests that we should think of language in culture.He further states, the linguistic system interprets all other systems within the culture. To expand this idea, we could severalize that language is in us as much as we atomic number 18 in language. This statement reminds us of linguistic theory of relativity theory contained within the Whorfian Hypothesis, and at the same time suggests that language is a mirror of the society as well as culture . The following sections pull up s watchs look at language from a socio-cultural persuasion, and point out the implications of this outlook on foreign language t individuallying.Language from a Sociocultural sentiment In theoretical linguistics, uniformity is the norm for a formal theory of language in melts to reveal the regularity of forms and rules. Toward this end, linguistic info be limited to sentences (as the biggest linguistic units) taken from standard language. Generative Grammar is a absolute example of theoretical linguistics. By contrast, in the study of language in its sociocultural context, best represented by Sociolinguistics and Ethno linguistics, variation is the norm.As observe in passing, linguistic variation is better known as linguistic relativity. In the latest ontogeny of the discipline, there has been a pull-and-push tension between relativity and universality in the study of human language. In terms of ground level, range the chronological order aside, linguistic relativity is partly visible in Saussurean morphologicalism, preferably visible in the Bloomfieldian school, highly reckon in the Humboldtian framework, strongly dominating in the Boasian tradition, and well launch in the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis.In our opinion, linguistic relativity is best captured by the neo-Bloomfieldian use up every language is unique, geomorphologically and culturally. Going back to the study of language in its sociocultural context, we believe that the well-nigh fruitful discussion of linguistic relativity should be related to linguistic universality. The caprice of universality is very popular in the Chosmkyan school, tho less popular in the Greenbergian sc hool. The former, formulated in the theory of universal joint Grammar, is internally universality in micro-linguistics, by and large pertaining to abstract syntax.The latter, formulated in Universals and Typology (Comrie 1989), is universality measured across universal parameters in phonology, morphology and syntax, resulting in typologies across languages. time the approach in the former is more(prenominal) than theory-driven and the approach in the latter is more data-driven, both the Chomskyan and Greenbergian schools argon confined within the do chief(prenominal) of context-free linguistics. Therefore, both sheaths of universality atomic number 18 inadequate for the purpose of explaining linguistic relativity in context bound linguistics.To swipe the matter of language and society we should discuss the relativity from linguistic vistas. To the best of our familiarity, the closely appropriate universal parameters to explain linguistic relativity ar those proposed by C lark & Clark (1977 516-17), a rather obscure reference since they are non theoretical linguists entirely scholars in Psycholinguistics. In fact, Clark & Clark do not check much elaboration to their parameters. Despite the bare(a) position of the following parameters in linguistic theory, they should prove very useful in explaining linguistic relativity.Universals in Human Language a. Every language is retarded by pincerren. b. Every language is spoken and understood by adults easily and efficiently. c. Every language embodies the ideas people unremarkably want to convey. d. Every language functions as a communicative system in a sociocultural setting. These universal parameters seem to be observation- base and and so empirically verifiable and they are on par with the laymans definition of language, i. e. , language is a means of verbal communication.Not the structural feature except the in operation(p) nature of language is presupposed in each of these parameters. The question is how do these universal parameters explain linguistic variation? Parameter (15) a implies that L1 acquisition is part of cultural transmission, or from the Chomskyan perspective the exposure of the LAD to primary language data. In acquiring their L1, tykeren simultaneously gather the sociocultural set. Parameter (15) b is veritable with mono-level languages, like Indonesian or English, besides not necessarily uncoiled with multi-level languages, such as Balinese, Javanese, or Sundanese.It is sight that the ascendence of Javanese varies considerably across speakers all of them are fluent speakers of the ngoko low form, but not many of them, particularly among jr. generations, are fluent speakers of the krama high form. The telecasting of prosperous society can be seen from this variation and the force is language. Parameter (15) c is universally true at the functional level, but variation occurs at the structural level and in the manner of transportation ideas. Parameter (15)d, like (15)c, is universally true with reference to a language as a firm communicative system, but languages vary structurally across cultures.The neo-Bloomfieldian postulate stated above (i. e. , every language is unique, structurally and culturally) modifies parameters (15)c and (15)d. Language as fond network Language is a social phenomenon. Because language arises naturally and inevitably in all human groups, linguists study not simply the sounds, grammars and meanings of the populations languages, but also how these languages function in their social settings. umteen linguists believe that humans are genetically programmed to look out language, but it tranquillize takes social run into to turn on the switch that makes us talk.Because our social networks tend to be complex, we all use aggregate versions of our native language. We may speak differently when were with friends, relatives or strangers when were at domicil, in school or on the job. The cont ext of communication its purpose and auditory modality determines whether our words are spoken or written, formal or informal, full of pious platitude or technical jargon, off-color, colorful, or colorless. The social context of communication also affects the degree to which our language approaches or avoids the norms of correctness that our speech community deems appropriate to the occasion.Social contact and social conflict both haoma language. Relative changes in language imputable to social changes Social changes produce changes in language. This affects value in ways that keep up not been accurately understood. Language incorporates social value. However, social set are however the same as linguistic determine when the society is a stable and abiding one. Once society starts changing, thus language change produces special effects. The use of language forms a closed grommet, since it is modelled on the loop of projection and introjection.The difference between the t wo loops is simply that the psychological one is based on individual meanings and the linguistic one on social values. This link between language and social values is one of identity, but only as broad as society is nonmoving or is evolving slowly. In a static society, the language is the society. Society is its language. The two are one. Language and society are two different systems since the structure within language centres on the static signifier whilst the structure within consciousness orientates on the dynamic signified.In times of stability the dynamic structure of consciousness is put on hold, so linguistic values and social values are one. However, as society changes so the dynamic structure gradually comes into the foreground. perhaps it is more accurate to put this effect the other way around as the dynamic structure of consciousness reverses accentuated, so society begins to change. Relative changes in society due to language changes Language contains handed-down values this is what is implied in the ideas of social learn and social learning. In a static society, traditional values are unquestioned. then social learning takes the form of social conditioning. Social conditioning is the unquestioned or confused adherence to social norms, and occurs when society is taken to be self-referential. Society is the venture of its own needs. The only circumstance that normally breaks social conditioning in some degree is change. Therefore in a period of fast social change, loony bin occurs as social norms are questioned, neutered and perhaps even rejected. New norms are slowly generated. This chaos ensures that society can no longer be regarded as being self-referential.In this situation of chaos, language is grasped as being self-referential. Then language is no longer necessarily buttoned to social reality. In such times, values change as the values within language change and we may fancy radical innovation in esthetic genres. For example, th e nineteenth century saw the focus on art for arts sake, along with science for sciences sake (neither art nor science were to be dependent of values external to themselves, such as social usefulness). Then the problem of grappling with the bleak-made possibilities of language produced the dense symbolism of Mallarme.In twentieth-century literary theory the text has become autonomous and self-contained, and/or the reader has acquired total freedom in his interpretation of the text. Language creates society This relation is not patent in static societies it is short to fall upon that society antedates language. flush primitive societies are no exception. A primitive society is one where language use is primitive, and exhibits hunter-gatherer tribes to that degree a tribe cannot be established until the necessary linguistic signs for authority are created.Society cannot be created until a group of people has some values in common. And values require a language to embed them a nd articulate them. It is language that brings people together and keeps them together. Language always precedes society. Even in small groups this relation holds for example, in a political discussion group the people come together because they already have, or want to learn, a common political language. Some models to explain how language interacts with society Features of society affecting language use and response may be (more or less) Static e. g. thnicity, gender, class runaway down Changing e. g. knowledge, age, social environment, attitudes and fashions Situational/contextual e. g. neighboring(a) social situation (workplace, home, recreation, peer group, perceived formality of situation) In studying this astray field of language theory, we go out detect it impossible to have detailed knowledge of all social categories. We should, however, have a range of examples from different areas as fork overn above. We should also have a wide remains of examples from a smal ler range of categories peculiarly any on which we may be examined.We essential be able to comment on language features (relevant to sociolinguistics) in these examples. Shirley Russell takes the first approach in Grammar, Structure and demeanor (OUP ISBN 0-19-831179-6), looking in depth at gender, advertising and law only. George Keith and John Shuttleworth accompaniment Language Hodder (ISBN 0-340-67343-5) take the second they do not identify any division within the general subject area, but give copybook examples of how to read a text that embodies attitudes to society in its language use. family relationship between command and SocietyTo show the relation of sociolinguistics with society from fosterageal perspective we should discuss the relationship between tuition and society. We have seen procreation in particular as a means of cultural transmission from one generation to other. The parents are the first teachers of the child and they still mention an educativ e function throughout the early and formative years of the child. In most of the developing earths of the world, including Nigeria, parents are responsible for displace their children or wards to school.Since these nations are undergoing rapid socioeconomic and political changes, they witness special problems in evolving the appropriate culture system, which will be able to produce the adequate custody needs in all the segments of the society. Schools are established in many societies of the world so as to instill in the pupils those skills which will founder them the opportunity of fetching their rightful positions in the society but this function cannot be adequately accomplished without the assistance of the home because both the home and the school behave complimentary functions in the moral and intelligent development of the child.This means that the child cannot be educated in a make clean or in isolation. Therefore, for a child to be educated there must be fundamen tal interaction between him and his forcible and social environment. By this we mean that education is the development of personality. It is something which goes on both inside(a) and outside the home and in the school. In other words, education is an activity of the satisfying community. This means that education is used in the transmission of the cultural values.One all- primary(prenominal)(a) implication of looking at education as the transmitter of cultural values is the fact that education can be influenced by the culture of the society in which it takes place. For this reason, one may infer that for a child to be educated, he must be influenced by his environment and, in turn, be capable of influencing it. And it is only by the concept of the continuous interaction of the individual and his society that the development of personality can be properly understood.We have noted above that education is a means through which the cultural values of a particular society are sink from one generation to another. Through this process, the society is able to achieve basic social conformity and ensure that its traditional values, beliefs, attitudes and aspirations are maintained and preserved. Clarks (1948) notice that a general knowledge and acceptance of the prototypes and aims of our society is essential for all its citizens, and it must be achieved through education but in a form, which makes it compatible with freedom.So he reconciles the effigy purpose by saying that admittedly, the purpose of the educative society may be to make men conformable. But overmastering that must be the purpose to make men free. A society needs a stable and dynamic set of values and a, unified purpose. It is when this is ascertained that meaningful economic, political and social programmes can be embarked upon for he overall benefits of the citizens. To be a richly developed person in such a society implies full and imaginative membership of it with powers to change it.Ott away (1980) contended that the transmission of culture still remains a alert function, and is not to be dismissed as merely conservative in the sense of being old-fashioned. He further detect that our children are potentially the society of the early, which still belongs to the non-social community, and education in this respect can be regarded as a socialization of the young. procreation depends on the total way of life of a people in a society. This suggests that the type of education provided will differ from society to society.Besides, each society has her own norms, values and her own ideal persons who stand out clearly for the junior generations to emulate. Since all these societies are not the same, then it means that a man regarded as a hero in one society because of his contributions to educational development of the society may not be regarded as such in another society where education is not given precession in the scheme of their daily activities. It, therefore, i mplies that children have different people to emulate in different societies.It is logical to expect that the type of education given in each society will change from time to time as the society changes. Many writers have argued that education is one of the causes of social change in the society, but another school of thought is of the opinion, that educational change tends to follow other social changes, rather than initiate them. Ottaway (1980) observed that ideas of change bob up in the minds of men oft in the mind of a single man. especial(a) individuals invent new techniques and propound new values for their society.These ideas arise from the impact of men on his culture, but do not change the culture until they are shared and transmitted by a social group. In his own submission, Boocock (1972) noted that societies undergoing rapid social change or modernization have special problems in adapting the educational system to the manpower needs of the world. They often suffer sh ortages of persons with special kinds of learning in engineering and other technical palm and may have difficulty in keeping persons with valuable skills once they have completed their education.Another area of the relationship between education and society is through the arrangement of the entire society into a hierarchical order that is, through the social structure in which education plays a prominent and significant fictional character in fixing educated individuals into social classes. Ottaway (1980) observed that education is the process of preparing people to fit into this complex social structure and to play particular social roles as members of more than one institutional group. Individuals have to learn to be fathers or mothers, school teachers or civil servants, shopkeepers or priests.They have to learn to keep the law, to understand how they are governed and to be inclined(p) to try and change the social moves when they see that they can be improved. Education as a so cial phenomenon is also concerned with the preparation of the child for his future occupation in life. This is one of the main economic functions of education and this is in the touch on of both the society and the individual. Through education an individual knows the structure of the society and the different types of relationships that exist among those structures in the society.The child is taught how to exercise different roles within the social structure in the society. These roles are inter-related. For example, the role of a father is a relational role a father could be a son to another person. So education allows the child to discharge his role adequately within the social structure in the society. In addition, the child is able to understand the network of inter-relationships among the different social institutions that make up the society. Also of importance are the different functions that are performed by each social institution in the society. corresponding an indivi dual, each institution has definite functions to perform in the society and the functions of each institution differ from one to another even though they are complimentary. Another aspect of the relationship between education and society is in the area of social interaction. Social interaction may be be as any relation between people and groups, which changes the behaviour of the people in the group. There is a need for social interaction by the child before he could acquire the culture of his society.This interaction in the society is therefore part of the childs education, provided that, that type of interaction brings about positively charged changes in the childs behaviour in a right direction as necessitate by the educational system. One important point here is that the child has been taking part in group interaction long before he starts to attend school and the most common among these group interactions are within the family and the peergroup. These groups in which the ch ild interacts give him the opportunity to learn from the wider circles in the society.From his social contacts, he learns his roles in different groups and this influences his personality development. Many sociologists have apprehended the relationship between education and society and have concluded that the two are so interrelated. That one cannot draw any line of demarcation between them. It has been observed that the educational system of any nation must be based on the needs and demands of the society and that any educational system that fails to meet the needs, aspirations and ambitions of the society is not relevant and is bound to fail.The educational system of any nation is concerned with, the transmittal of the cultural values of today to those who will live in the world of tomorrow, and confine of education must somehow strike a balance. Dubey et. al. (1984) observed that a good educational system, in all its full substance and ramifications, is related to the level of culture, industrial development, rate of urbanization, political organization, religious climate, family structure, stratification and other institutions of the total social system.Finally, education has to fulfill both the individuals needs and those of the society and must keep pace with other sub-systems in the society, as both variables are inter-related. Economy affects by language and society By trying to detect prove of the presence of the principle of linguistic saving in Early Modern English works, it was noted that most of the texts scrutinized and dealt with in this paper present the English language as a simple language to learn, made up of easy expressions and governed by a couple of(prenominal) grammatical rules, which have undergone, in the head for the hills of many centuries, an ven more conspicuous simplification the English Language is perhaps of all the present European languages by much the most simple in its form and construction This characteristic resul ts from gradual linguistic changes, but it can also be traced back to the very nature of the English language and its speakers English people are depicted as savers (we are a people very sparing of our words, and even of our syllables White 176129), who avoid excessive efforts to communicate we have a fondness for Abbreviations, and that fills our language with many Monosyllables (Collyer 173568).Moreover, the monosyllabic nature of the lexicon is often underlined monosyllables are very numerous in our English Tongue, that. s why it is an easy Tongue to write and to speak (Aickin 169330). A lot of remarks concern the use of several abbreviations, or the lack of morphological endings that usually indicate syntactic connections, or again the purity and elegance of its construction, all aspects that indicate economy and saving as beneficial, close to peculiar characteristics of the language.Some of the most important aspects coming out of the analysis of the texts will be now conside red and investigated, in order to emphasize the presence or the absence of the concept of economy in the observations tranquil the related comments will be classify by linguistic levels. Conclusion The whole discussion brought the vicegerency of language, society, economy, education, culture and so on among them. One is representative of another. Overall contributions make the society and sociolinguistics analyze the role of each individual element.We can strongly take apart to accept sociolinguistics as the mirror of the society. REFERENCES Wikipedia, the free world encyclopedia. Ronald Wardhaugh An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. Becker, Alton L. 1995. beyond Translation Essays toward a Modern Philology. Ann arbour The University of Michigan take. Brown, Douglas H. 1994. Teaching by Principles An interactional Approach to Language Pedagogy. New tee shirt Prentice Hall Regents. Brown, Penelope & Levinson, Stephen C. 1987. adroitness Some universals in language use.Ca mbridge Cambridge University Press Chaika, Elaine. 1982. Language the Social Mirror. capital of the United Kingdom Newbury kin Publishers, Inc. Chaudhary, Nandita. 2004. Listening to Culture Constructing Reality from nonchalant Talk. New Delhi Sage Publications. Chomsky, Noam. 1972. Language and learning ability (Enlarged Edition). San Diego Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Publishers. Clark, Herbert H. & Clark, Eve V. 1977. Psychology and Language An Introduction to Psycholinguistics. San Diego Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Publishers. Comrie, Bernard. 989. Language Universals and lingual Typology (second edition. ) The University of Chicago Press. Duranti, Alessandro. 1997. Linguistic Anthropology. Cambridge Cambridge University Press. Finochiaro, Mary. 1974. English as a Second Language From supposition to Practice. New York Regents Publishing Co. Blakemore, K. and Cooksey, B. (1981). A Sociology of Education for Africa. capital of the United Kingdom George Allen & Unwin. Boo cock, S. (1972). An Introduction to the Sociology of Learning. New York Houghton Mifflin. Clarke, F. (1948). liberty in the Educative Society London University Press. Dubey, D. L. et. al (1984). An Introduction to the Sociology of Nigerian Education. London Macmillan. Durkheim, E. (1961). Moral Education, English Translation. London excuse Press. Havighurst, R. J. (1960). Education, Social Mobility and Social Change in Four Societies. Homewood, III Dorsey Press. The assignment prepared and submitted by the following students- SL Full fig Batch Full ID No. 01 Md.Harun-or Rashid quaternary BAEEM04081007 02 S. M. Ahsanul Karim 4th BAEEM04081004 03 Khandakar Mahbul Alam 4th BAEEM04081004 04 Iqbal Hosen 5th BAEEM05082004 05 ArshadulHaque sixth BAEEM06083001 06 Kamruzzaman sixth BAERM05082078 07 Nazrul Islam 4th BAERM01081004 08 Md Abul Kalam Azad seventh BAEEM07091013 09 Md.Mahfuzur Rahman Hydar 8th BAEEM08092003 10 Md. Abu Taher 7th BAEEM07091007 11 Md. Niaz Morshe d 7th BAEEM07091060 12 Md. Faruk Hossain 7th BAEEM07091023 13 Md.Mun-uddin 7th BAEEM07091006 14 Rafiqul Islam Akanda 10th BAERM10101015 15 Mohammad Mamun Miah 10th BAERM10101046 16 Md.Asad Ullah 10th BAERM10101045 17 Md. Rosul Amin 4th BAEEM04081002 18 Md.Ujjal Sheikh 6th BAEEM06083005 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27