Speech community
提高自己的语言能力
Introduction
Speech community refers to a group of people who form a community, e.g. a village, a region, a nation, and who have at least one speech variety in common.. In bilingual and multilingual communities, people would usually have more than one speech variety in common. It is a group of people who share a t of norms and expectations regarding the u of language. Speech communities can be members of a profession with a specialized jargon男士英文名, distinct social groups like high school students or hip hop fans (e also African American Vernacular English您好英文), or even tight-knit groups like families and friends. In addition, online and other mediated communities, such as many internet forums, often constitute speech communities. Members of speech communities will often develop slang or jargon to rve the group's special purpos and priorities.
Literal Review
车挂
juliusDefining ‘speech community’ has proved to be far from easy. Numerous definitions have been propod, most of them at least slightly different from the next. Exactly how to define speech community is debated in the literature. Definitions of speech community tend to involve varying degrees of emphasis on the following: a) Shared community membership; b)Shared linguistic communication.However, there has been considerable confusion and disagreement over exactly what a speech community is, as the following survey shows.
a) The simplest definition of ‘speech community’ is that of John Lyons(1970:326)
Speech community: all the people who u a given language(or dialect)
b) A more complex definition is given by Charles Hockett(1958:8)
吝啬的近义词
Each language defines a speech community: the whole t of people who communicate with each other, either directly or indirectly, via the common language.
c) flushThe next definition shifts the emphasis entirely from shared language to communicatio
翻译器英文翻中文n. A simple form of it was given by Leonard Bloomfield(1933:42)
A speech community is a group of people who interact by means of speech.
d) A later definition by Gumperz, however, introduces the requirement that there should be some specifically linguistic differences between the members of the speech community and tho outside it(1968)
The speech community: any human aggregate characterized by regular and frequent interaction by means of a shared body of verbal signs and t off from similar aggregates by significant differences in language u.
e) A different definition puts the emphasis on shared attitudes and knowledge, rather than on shared linguistic behavior. It is given by William Labov(1972a:120)
七月的英文The speech community is not defined by any marked agreement in the u of language elements, so much as by participation in a t of shared norms; the norms may be obrved in overt types of evaluative behavior, and by the uniformity of abstract patterns
of variation which are invariant in respect to particular levels of usage.
However, the relative importance and exact definitions of the also vary. Some would argue that a speech community must be a 'real' community, i.e. a group of people living in the same location (such as a city or a neighborhood), while more recent thinking propos that all people are indeed part of veral communities (through home location, occupation, gender, class, religious belonging, and more), and that they are thus also part of simultaneous speech communities. William Labov’s SpCom conception has been enormously influential. It is more empirically-rooted, less generalized, than Hymes’s or Gumperz’s. It emerges in the cour of a well-defined program of rearch on language structure and change, rather than in the context of sociolinguistic theorizing. Consider three aspects. 1) It is cloly bad on results from a ries of urban studies which established goals for later rearchers; its outlines emerge from a particular t of questions and answers, and may be inappropriate for others. 2) More than other theorists, Labov makes explicit and testable his conceptions of linguistic uniformity and normative sociolinguistic structure, which have been widely adopted and debated. 3) It is
allied to a rich array of methods, also commonly ud–often by rearchers with diverging assumptions and objectives.
Similarly, what shared linguistic communication entails is also a variable concept. Some would argue that a shared first language, even dialect, is necessary, while for others the ability to communicate and interact (even across language barriers) is sufficient.The underlying concern in both of the is that members of the same speech community should share linguistic norms. That is, they share understanding, values and attitudes about language varieties prent in their community. While the exact definition of speech community is debated, there is a broad connsus that the concept is immenly uful, if not crucial, for the study of language variation and change.A person can (and almost always does) belong to more than one speech community. For example, a gay Jewish waiter would likely speak and be spoken to differently when interacting with gay peers, Jewish peers, or his co-workers. If he found himlf in a situation with a variety of in-group and/or out-group peers, he would likely modify his speech to appeal to speakers of all the speech communities reprented at that moment.
