Langusge irt &c-I

Fasold, R.W. 1984. Sociolinguistics of society. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Fishman, J.A. 1972 b. The sociology of language. In Giglioli. 1972.

Giglioli, P.P. 1972. Ed. Language and Social context. Marmondsworth: Penguin.

Mdson, R.A. '1980.Sociolinguistics. Carnbridge:Cambridge University Press.

Labov, W. 1966. The social stratification of English in New York City.

Washington D.C.: Center for Applied Linguistics.

Milroy, L. 1980b. Social network and language maintenance. In Pugh, Lee, and
Swann. 1980.

Pride, J.B. and J. Holmes. 1972. Sociolinguistics. selected readings,

Hamondsworth, Penguin Books.

Trudgill, P. 1983. Sociolinguistics. 2ndedition. Harmondsworth. Penguin.

Wardaugh, R. 1986. An introduction to sociolinguistics. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

LTNIT 2 SPEECH COMMUNITY AND
MULTILINGUALISM
Structure

2.0 Objectives
2.1 Introduction
2.2 On defining a speech community
2.3 Some problems relating to the definitions
2.4 Bi/multilingualism and the notion of speech community
2.5 The individual and the speech community
2.6 Letussumup
2.7 Key word;
2.8 Questions
2.9 Bibliography

- -

2.0 OBJECTIVES

In the previous unit we made you aware of the importance of social factors in any
linguistic analysis. In this unit we will explain the concept of speech commmity in a
multilingual framework. You will, therefore,

0 understand the notion 'speech community'

appreciate some of the problems that the notion entails
a be able to problematize the notion and look at its different dimensions
understand the possible ways of characterizing speech communities
0 get an insight into the ways in which individuals locate and identify
themselves in relation to their speech community.

2.1 INTRODUCTION

Social scientists tend to categorize human groups into convenient discrete units such
as 'community'. Community implies certain shared characteristics obseivable to the
outsider, as well as, tacitly acceptable to the members of the community. Human
groups or communities may, thus, share cultural traits such as customs, manners,
food-habits, dress, belief-systems, etc., and the members of such groups may perceive
themselves as belonging to one community as distinct fiom another community.
Traditionally, religion and occupation have provided two universally acceptable
bases of demarcation of communities. Thus, one may talk in terms of the Christian or
the Hindu,cornmunity, an agrarian or sbepherd community or the business
community, etc. For the linguist, another major bases for the demarcation of
communities is language (or speech). Hence the notion 'of "speech community", or a
human group whose members share among other things a language. In the following
sections we shall examine this notion in some detail and discuss some of the
problems that this apparently simple notion leads us into.

2.2 ON DEFINING A SPEECH COMMUNITY

The terms 'speech community is probably derived from The German

Sgraclgcmeinschaft and refers to a group of individuals who share, inter alia,
use-1 certain linguistic features and who might be said to speak the same language (or
dialect or variety). While theoretical linguists like to use this term to denote a
completely homogeneous group in which all members speak the same language (with
peti~apsthe same degree of competence and fluency) with hardly any individual ,
differences, for the sociolinguist the term denotes a 'real' group of people living in a
'real' world. Such a 'real' group would obviously consist of individuals who are
different from one another in several respects such as age, sex, education, social
class, etc. All these impinge on language and, hence, these individuals would differ
from one another in the matter of language too. And yet, despite all these
differences, all these individuals like to identify themselves with this or that speech
community. Such a group or community may be simply defined as "all the people
who use a given language (or dialect)" according to John Lyons (1970). Earlier
Charles Hockett (1958) had provided another definition of speech community.
According to him "each language defines a speech community: the whole set of
people who communicate with each other, either directly or indirectly, via the
common language". The two definitions given above focus on common language
and communication.

A further dimension is added by another definition according to which a speech

community is "any human aggregate characterized by regular and frequent interaction
by means of a shared body of verbal signs (language/dialect/variety)and set off from
similar aggregates by significant differences in language use" (Gurnperz, 1968).
From the foregoing it is clear that the three major components for any definition of a
speech community are:

a) a common language
b) frequent interaction and communication
c) distinguishable from other communities/groups.

Thus, any group of people who perceive themselves as belonging to one community
on the basis of some shared values, customs, manners, etc. may qualify to be called a
speech community if they also share a common language and see themselves as being
different from speakers of other languages. Hence, one may talk about the English
speech community, the Spanish speech community, the Hindi speech community, the
Telugu community, the Bangla speech community and so on.

2.3 SOME PROBLEMS RELATING TO THE

DEFINITIONS
I

While the notion of speech community may appear to be rather simple from the I

definitions given in 2.2 above, on closer examination we find that these, and several
other definitions, give rise to several problems and leave many questions unanswered. I
In the following pages we shall discuss some of these problems and questions.
i

'
While the statement "all the people who use the same language" may appear very
attractive, it can only account for very small, localized communities, like some small
tribal groups living in relative isolation from the rest of the world, and using a
language that does not have any variation on the basis of geographical area (dialect)
or social class (sociolect). The members of this small, isolated, relatively uniform
I
and geographically restricted community may truly be said to use the same
I
language. However, when we come to some of the major languages of the world we
find not only that the speakers of these languages are infinitely larger in number but
also that they are distributed in different geographical areas (even different nations)
~
and also there is great deal of social differentation among them. To illustrate this
point, perhaps the best example one can cite is that of the English speech community.
Now English is spoken and used by billiolis of people world-wide. Even if one were
to say that only native speakers of English are to be counted as members of tlie Speech Community
English speech community, we are still left with a huge popdation spread over and Multilingualism
America, Canada, The United Kindom, Australia and Nea Zealand which taken
collectively constitutes the English speech community. Within this extremely large
speech community one can immediately see divisions which are universally
acknowledged and often asserted by the members of this community. Thus we often
hear people talk about the American or Canadian or British or Australian English
speech communities.

Furthermore, within the British English speech dommunity, we often hear of

distinctions made between Yorkshire English, Scottish English, Irish English, Welsh
English and so on, plus, of course, Standard British English. And since all large
societies tend to have rather well-defined social class distinctions, within American
or British or Australian English speech community, one would naturally find varieties
of English associated with the upper class, the middle and the lower classes as shown
in Labov's study. Thus, the fact that major languages (spoken by large populations)
tend to have regional and social varieties and that speakers of these varieties are
often identified, recognised and evaluated in terms of the variety they speak, makes
the notion of a common langllage or the same language rather problematic. One
can cite more examples (such as the example of the French or the Hindi speech
community) to further support this position. French spoken in Canada or in France is
quite different from each other. Similarly, Awadhi is different from Bhojpuri and
Khari Bholi. So, while to the outside world or the social scientist there is one English
speech community, to the insiders i.e. to the members of the community, there are
perceptible differences between different sub-groups, and the speakers often invoke
and highlight these differences in order to assert their distinct identity. A look at the
following diagram should make this more clear.

I English speech community I

I I
British American Australian
I
~hrkshire I!,on,don ~ c o t l k d
I 1
Middleclass Upper class Lower class

The second component of the definition of speech community viz. frequent

interaction and communication, also poses a problem. Again, given small and
localized speech communities where everyone knows everyone else and there is
almost daily interaction among the members, it may be reasonable to set up the
criterion of frequent interaction and mutual communication; in the case of large
speech communities spread over different parts of the globe, it may be rather
unrealistic to talk of frequent or regular interaction. If we take the example of the
Hindi speech community, we shall immediately see the point being made here. Now
Hindi is spoken by several million people who live in different parts of India
extending fiom Kashmir to Kanyakumari. Members of the Hindi speech community,
though concentrated in the so-called Hindi-belt, are to be found settled in non-Hindi
areas such as Manipur, Kerala, Tamilnadu, etc. Moreover, Hindi speakers have also
gone and settled in other parts of the world such as the West Indies, Mauritius, the
U.S.A., the U.K. etc. While one can reasonably assume a fair degree of interaction
among people living in the same or adjoining areas, it is hard to imagine any degree
of frequency of interaction among groups settled in non-Iiindi areas of India or in
countries other than India. Not only is there ail absence of frequency of interaction,
let us say, between Hindi speakers settled in Trivandrum and other Hindi speakers in
the Hindi-belt or between Hindi speakers settled in Trinidad and Tobago and those
Hindi speakers who have settled in Mauritius or Fiji, these groups who migrate and
settle in non-Hindi areas or in countries abroad also develop forms of Hindi which
T*tairgnta,gg.sits use-i may bc sul3staniially different from the fornis of Hindi used in the Hindi heartland
(Uttcr Fradesh, Madhya Bradcsh, Delhi, etc.) It may thus be said that whereas within
sl.lb-groups (c.g. Trinidadian Hindi speakers, Mauritian Hindi Speakers, Kerala-based
Hindi sgeikrs) i.e. at the level of small groups, there may be fiequent interaction,
comrnunictzt~onand shared linguistic features, at the level of the huge Hindi-speaking
population, clubbed together under the label 'Windi Speech Community" not only in
one lilccly to encounter a grcat deal of linguistic diversity and variation, but also an
absencc sf regular or f~equcntinteraction. That being so, how is it and why is it that
melnbcrs of such large groups (vastly dispersed and with no regular communication
links or interaction) identify with a particular language and assert their
'belongingness' to a speech community. We shall try to tackle these questions in
another section of this Unit. But before we do that, there is a third component of the
definition of a speech comnlwity and the problems related thereto.

me third component of the definition of speech community refers to 'distinctiveness'

or the perception that one is a member of a speech community and that hisher speech
community has a language'distinct from that of another speech community. Within
the English speech comrnr~nityitself, as we have seen earlier, there are major
divisions such as American English, British English and Australian English. Thus,
while to the world at large, the three together with Canadian and New Zealand
English speech communities, constitute a single speech community, the members of
these communities may perceive themselves as belonging to distinct separate speech
communities - the American speech community, the British speech community and
the Australian or Canadian speech community. So much so that their scholars and
linguists write separate grammars of their Englishes, and the speakers pride
themselves on being different from the others. Do they then constitute three or four
different speech communities or a single, large speech community - the English
speech community.

Again, there may be cases where one community considers itself as being distinct
from another in respect of language e.g. the Konkani speakers consider themselves as
a separate speech community while the Marathi speech community, by and large,
considers Koilka~lionly to be a dialect of Marathi and hence, denies Konkani
speakers the status of a separate, distinct speech community. More all less similar
was the case with Bangla and Assamese till a few decades ago - the Bangla speech
community considered Assamese a dialect of Bangla, while the Assamese speakers
thought of themselves as possessing a distinct language and hence constituting a
separate speech cominutiity. Such examples can be multiplied; the point is that on
close examination even the criterion of distirlctiveness turns out to be rather
problematic.

2.4 BII[MULXlLINGUALISM AND THE NOTION OF

SPEECH COMMUNITY

From the definitions of speech community that we have given so far it is clear that
there is a general belief that each language defines and delimits a speech community.
30 the general equation that seems to be operative is "one language - one
community". We have already seen some of the problems inherent in the notion of
one language or a common language. Now we turn to another question: how do we
determine and name a speech community that operates with and uses two or more
languages? Canada is on excellent example. There most of the people learn, use and
function with French and English. Do we then call a community of such people the
French speech community or the English speech community (that is if we share the
belief that each language defines and delimits a speech community)? Within the
Indian context, widespread societal bilingualism (a state of things in which
bilingualism is a feature of whole groups or societies rather than a matter of
-22
 individual accomplishment) is the norm rather than an exception. Large sections of Speech Community
populations in India operate with two or more languagesldialects. 'I'hus, it is not and Multilingualism
uncommon to meet people in Delhi who know Hindi, Urdu, Punjabi and Eng:ish, or
people in Tamilnadu who h o w Tamil, Kannada, Hindi and English and so on.
While, obviously, such people cannot be said to constitute the English speech
community, what nameflabel would be most appropriate for such groups or
communities. Onc way of taking care of such a situation could be to variously name
the Delhi population as Hindi speech community (which also knows and uses -
Punjabi, Urdu and English), Punjabi speech community (which also knows and uses
Hindi, Urdu and English), and Urdu speech community (which also knows and uses
Hindi, Punjabi and English). But this indeed would be a very tedious way of dealing
with the notion of speech community. One would, in defence of such a labelling,
ifi-;rite the notion of 'mother tongue' of 'native language' and say that it is the mother
tongue or native language which defires a speech.community. But even the notion of
mother tongue is problematic since we know of many.peoplewithin our Indian
context who do not know how to speak, read or write their so-called mother tongue,
while they are quite proficient in several other Indian languages including English
(and, indeed, even proficient in some foreign languages). It is not rare to meet a
Malayalee who does not know Malayalam, a Gujarati virl~odoesn't know Gujarati and
a Punjabi who doesn't know Punjabi. How can they then qualify to be members of
the Malayalee, Gujarati or Punjabi speech communities. It might be more sensible
then, to think in terms of bilingual or multilingual speech communities where two or
more languages serve the communicative and interactional needs sf large groups of
people. For doing this, one would of course, have to suspend one's belief in the 'one-
language: one community' equation. In the light of the foregoing it may be
reasonable to suggest that speech communities may or may not be co-terminus with
one or the other language. Each group of people, each social aggregate has to be
viewed as operating not just with one language but with a verbal repertoire, and it is
this notion of verbal repertoire that we shall discuss in the next section.

2.4.1 Verbal Repertoire

Even while considering so-called monolingual societies or communities, it has been

widely acknowledged, that language manifests itself in diffirent forms (varieties).
These different forms may be detennined and generated b) such factors as age,
education, sex, socio-economic class, regional location, etc. And it is the sum total of
all these that, somehow, constitutes a given language. Thus, even while talking about
monolingual communities, it is a good idea to think of different varieties, dialects,
styles and registers (use based) varieties. A monolingual speech community, then,
would have a verbal repertoire comprising different dialects, styles, registers, etc.
with each of its members sharing in a varying degree the total verbal repertoire. It
may be clarified here that it is only a rare individual (if at all) who would control the
entire verbal repertoire of hisher community. By the same logic, bilmultilingual
communities may be seen to have different languages with their styles, registers, etc.
in their verbal repertoire, with each member having differential control over small or
large parts of that repertoire. Recalling the earlier example we gave of a community
of speakers using Hindi, Urdu, Punjabi and English, the verbal repertoire of such a
community may be represented as follows

Verbal Repertoire

Hindi Urdu Punjabi I English ]

(with their styles, registers, etc.)

Now each member of such a community would have differential control over parts of
this verbal repertoire. Some would know all the four languages (and their different
styles etc.), while some others may know three or two or even one part of the *
community's verbal repertoire. However, since most members would know two or
more parts, such a community can be best characterised as a multilingual or bilingual
Language in use-l community. Such communities, possessing multilingual verbal repertoires, also
evolve tacit rules governing use o f different languages in different spheres of life
(known as domains) such as home, market place, office, school, place of worship, etc.
just as monolingual communities evolve tacit rules governing use of different
styles/registers/varietiesin different domains.

2.5 THE INDIVIDUAL AhTD THE SPEECH COMMUNITY

In 2.3.2 we had raised a question: 'Given diversity and variation in a Ianguage and
also given the fact that there may be absence of frequent interaction, how is it that all
members of a social group claim to belong to a single speech community?' In this
section we shall try to answer this and related issues which pertain to the individuals
who constitute a speech community and the ways in which they see themselves in
relation to the language or languages of their community. Going back to our example
of the English speech community, let us take the case of a taxi-driver in London
hailing from Yorkshire. Now this person would start out as a speaker of the
Yorkshire dialect of British English and would learn and start using Cockney English
(the variety used by working and lower classes in London). If he is ambitious and
has the opportunity, he may learn standard British English too. Now, this gentleman
will have membership of three communities - Yorkshire speech community, Cockney
speech community and Standard British English speech community, and depending
on where he is, with whom he is interacting and what kind of identity he wishes to
project, he may invoke anyone of these memberships and also emphasize his
distinctiveness from the American or the Australian speech communities. While
operating with these multiple identities and maintaining his distinctiveness, he would
also claim membership of the overall speech community known to the world as "the
English speech community".
In a bilmultilingual setting, one can understand this kind of individual strategy by
looking at the example of a tribal child. Let us say a Santhali speaker learn Santhali
as hisher first language; then s h e learns a variety of Hindi (some regional dialect of
Hindi) and through formal education s h e goes on to learn standard Hindi and
English. Now for this tribal individual there are identity options. Slhe can claim
membership of the Santhali speech community or (when s h e has negative
perceptions of hislher tribal language) s h e project himselfierself as a member of the
Hindi speech community or of the speech community represented by the dialect of
Hindi used in hislher region or the neighbouring region. Now imagine a day when
this person goes to America and settles down there, using only English most Or all of
the time. This would add another dimension to hislher language identity. After
twenty years or so in America s h e completely gives up hisfher Santhali identity,
partly uses hidher Hindi identity and operates most of the time with hisher English
identity. It is a different matter that to the members of the English speech community
s h e will always be an outsider - an Indian, a Hindi speaker or a tribal Santhali
speaker. What is important to remember is that individuals are constantly redefining
their linguistic identities and relocating themselves in relation to this or that speech
community, as well as, in relation to different sub-groups within a large, diversified
and widely dispersed speech community. Individuals within speech communities,
thus, tend to have local, regional (supralocal) and national identities and locate
themselves accordingly in relation to smaller or larger speech groups or speech
communities.

2.6 LET US SUM UP

In this unit, we introduced you to the notion of a speech community and the problems
involved in defining it. We also tried to give you an insight into the ways in which
 individual locate and identify themselves in relation to their speech community. Speech Community
These notions were explained in terms of the multilingual reality of India. and Multilingualism

speech community 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.

dialect a variety of a language, spoken in one part of

a country (regional dialect), or by people
belonging to a particular social class (social
dialect), which is different in some words,
grammar andlor pronunciation from other
forms of the same langauge.

bilingualism The use of at least two languages either by

an individual or by a group of speakers, such
as the inhabitants of a particular region or a
nation.

multilingualism the use of three or more languages by an

individual or by a group of speakers such as
the inhabitants of a particular region or a
- , nation.

verbal repertoire the speech varieties which an individual

knows

monolingual a person who knows and uses only one

' language

register a speech variety used by a particular group

of people, usually sharing the same
occupation (eg. doctors, lawyers) or the
same interests (stamp collectors, cricket
fans)

2.8 QUESTIONS

1. From the definitions of 'speech community' and the discussions thereon, try
to construct your own definition of speech community.

2. Think about your own past and present life and try to describe your own
speech community.

3. Having read the entire unit, discuss how 'real' and 'useful' is the notion of
'speech community'.
Language in uskl 4. If you can't count upto 20 in a language, or don't know any nursery rhymes or
small narratives in that language, or cannot hold simple day-to-day
conversation on ordinary topics in that language, can you still claim
membership of that language as your mother tongue and a membership of
that speech community? Discuss.

5. Do you agree with the 'one language: one community' theory? What other
factors, apart fiom language, may determine one's identification with a
speech community?

2.9 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Fasold R: 1990.The Sociolinguistics of Language. Oxford :Basil Blackwell

Fishman, J.A. 1971 Sociolinguistics: A Brief Introduction . Mass: Newbury House

Rowley.

Gupta, R.S. and K.S.Agarwal: Studies in Indian Sociolinguistics.New Delhi,

Creative Books

Hudson, R.A.1990. Ssciolinguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Wardaugh, R.1986. An Introduction to Sociolinguistics.Oxford: Blackwell.