2016•Journal of Asian Pacific CommunicationRequires access

Speech community theory and the language / dialect debate

Daming Xu

Open publisher page 10 citations

Abstract

Much research has been done addressing the issue of language and dialect and has attracted much interest in the Sinophone world. In this paper, the issue is approached from the perspective of Speech Community Theory (SCT) with discussion of the identification of Chinese varieties. There are mainly two approaches in previous research: linguistic and sociolinguistic. In the linguistic approach, the classification of languages and dialects is through comparison of linguistic descriptions and intelligibility. In the sociolinguistic approach, actual language use and attitudes of the speakers are investigated and ethnic and political factors are considered. The two approaches tend to result in different classifications. The purely linguistic classification tends to be narrower than the classification invoking attitudinal, cultural and political factors, resulting in a larger number of languages than the sociolinguistic approach. The different approaches are traced to divergent understandings of what a language is. A language is often understood purely as a tool of communication or, alternatively, it is regarded primarily as an identity device. Applying SCT, we analyze the connection between communication and identity formation, taking the example of Cantonese speakers. That case shows a correlation of linguistic contact with linguistic identity among native speakers. Consequently, the relevance of cultural and socio-political factors is explained through their impact on communication rather than directly on a linguistic identity.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Much research has been done addressing the issue of language and dialect and has attracted much interest in the Sinophone world. In this paper, the issue is approached from the perspective of Speech Community Theory (SCT) with discussion of the identification of Chinese varieties. There are mainly two approaches in previous research: linguistic and sociolinguistic. In the linguistic approach, the classification of languages and dialects is through comparison of linguistic descriptions and intelligibility. In the sociolinguistic approach, actual language use and attitudes of the speakers are investigated and ethnic and political factors are considered. The two approaches tend to result in different classifications. The purely linguistic classification tends to be narrower than the classification invoking attitudinal, cultural and political factors, resulting in a larger number of languages than the sociolinguistic approach. The different approaches are traced to divergent understandings of what a language is. A language is often understood purely as a tool of communication or, alternatively, it is regarded primarily as an identity device. Applying SCT, we analyze the connection between communication and identity formation, taking the example of Cantonese speakers. That case shows a correlation of linguistic contact with linguistic identity among native speakers. Consequently, the relevance of cultural and socio-political factors is explained through their impact on communication rather than directly on a linguistic identity.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 10 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Much research has been done addressing the issue of language and dialect and has attracted much interest in the Sinophone world. In this paper, the issue is approached from the perspective of Speech Community Theory (SCT) with discussion of the identification of Chinese varieties. There are mainly two approaches in previous research: linguistic and sociolinguistic. In the linguistic approach, the classification of languages and dialects is through comparison of linguistic descriptions and intelligibility. In the sociolinguistic approach, actual language use and attitudes of the speakers are investigated and ethnic and political factors are considered. The two approaches tend to result in different classifications. The purely linguistic classification tends to be narrower than the classification invoking attitudinal, cultural and political factors, resulting in a larger number of languages than the sociolinguistic approach. The different approaches are traced to divergent understandings of what a language is. A language is often understood purely as a tool of communication or, alternatively, it is regarded primarily as an identity device. Applying SCT, we analyze the connection between communication and identity formation, taking the example of Cantonese speakers. That case shows a correlation of linguistic contact with linguistic identity among native speakers. Consequently, the relevance of cultural and socio-political factors is explained through their impact on communication rather than directly on a linguistic identity.

Key concepts: Linguistics, Speech community, Identity (music), Intelligibility (philosophy), Sociology, Perspective (graphical), Sociolinguistics, Politics

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Speech community theory and the language / dialect debate — Research Paper | ScholarLens