3. Language use under different social contexts

Language can be regarded as a code (Wardhaugh 1992, p.89). In different situations, people shift their register and/or code because of certain social norms; simply speaking, they need to speak appropriately. For example, when we are with our friends and family, we may speak with occasional slang or vernacular languages in order to maintain closeness and intimacy; while we are at university in lectures, we speak more formally in order to show our high profession. We choose a particular way to interact with others because those linguistics features function in a different way that matches the social norms under certain circumstances. In conclusion, the setting influences our choice of language (Edward 2009, p.4).

While monolinguals try to alter their content, register and tones of speaking, bilingual and multilingual can even shift codes according to the occasions (Gibson 2004, p.1-2). This phenomenon of code choice in bilingual and multilingual society reflects certain differences between the codes available. For one thing, a bilingual minority group is often said to have a “we” and a “they” code (Gumperz 1982; Lambert 1972; Zentella 1990). A “we” code is only used within the minority group for connection while the “they” code is spoken to relate to the rest of society. Valdés (2000) names the “we” code and “they” code as low and high languages respectively. While a low language means the language with a low prestige, high language is for the one spoken by a more powerful class and associated with wealth (Gibson 2004). In other words, a code is assigned a status in society that largely influence our practice of code-shifting. According to Spolsky (1999), we make assumption about the age, profession, education level, place of origin and so on about a person once he/she starts talking. We are aware of the people around us and how the others perceive us, and therefore we always want to induce an impression of our own by choosing the right code to speak.

References

Gibson, K. (2004). English only court cases involving the US workplace: The myths of language use and the homogenization of bilingual workers’ identities. Second language studies,22(2), 1-60.

Gumperz, J. J. (1982). Discourse strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lambert, W. (1972). Language, psychology, and culture. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Spolsky, B. (1999). Second-language learning. In J. Fishman (Ed.), Handbook of language and ethnic identity (pp. 181-192). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Valdés, G. (2000). Bilingualism and language use among Mexican Americans. In S. L. McKay & S.C. Wong (Eds.), New immigrants in the United States (pp. 99-136). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Wardhaugh, R. (1992). An introduction to sociolinguistics. Oxford & Cambridge: Blackwell.

Zentella, A. C. (1990). Returned migration, language, and identity: Puerto Rican bilinguals in dos worlds/two mundos. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 84, 81-100.