Search

Sociolects, as social varieties of language, should be classified and described on the basis of both linguistic and sociological criteria. In practice, however, most often only either the first one (e.g. according to Antoni Furdal and Danuta Buttler) or the second one is used (e.g. according to Aleksander Wilkoń and Tomasz Piekot). Both these criteria are less frequently combined (Stanisław Grabias). The article proposes those aspects of the sociological and linguistic functioning of language varieties that should be used by sociolinguistics especially in the characterisation of sociolects, but also in their typology. The sociological criteria include: the type of contacts in the group (including contacts made via the Internet), the degree of group formalisation, the durability of the group and the type of bond that binds the group together. Among the linguistic criteria the following were distinguished: nomination and expressiveness, the method of acquiring a sociolect and the degree of its codification and the rank of the linguistic norm. The article also clarifies the concept of the distinguishing features of the sociolectic vocabulary [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article attempts to organize the terminology and concepts related to the social varieties of the Polish language. It has a special focus on establishing the relations between hobbyist varieties and professional and other social varieties. Discussed are the best-known classifications of sociolects (focusing on the typologies of Aleksander Wilkoń and Stanisław Grabias) and the relationship between professional varieties and other social varieties. The division of sociolects into environmental varieties and professiolects (with two sub- varieties: professional, which also includes scientific varieties, and hobbyist varieties) was established. The examples of several specific sociolects show the difficulty and sometimes the inability to determine strict boundaries between different types of sociolects. The transitory, mixed nature of varieties mainly concerns hobbyist sociolects, whereas the status of adolescent varieties in relation to the student variety appears, on the basis of the findings so far, as unclear and requiring new research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article, we introduce a sociolinguistic perspective on language modeling. We claim that language models in general are inherently modeling varieties of language , and we consider how this insight can inform the development and deployment of language models. We begin by presenting a technical definition of the concept of a variety of language as developed in sociolinguistics. We then discuss how this perspective could help us better understand five basic challenges in language modeling: social bias, domain adaptation, alignment, language change , and scale . We argue that to maximize the performance and societal value of language models it is important to carefully compile training corpora that accurately represent the specific varieties of language being modeled, drawing on theories, methods, and descriptions from the field of sociolinguistics., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. The author(s) declared that they were an editorial board member of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision., (Copyright © 2025 Grieve, Bartl, Fuoli, Grafmiller, Huang, Jawerbaum, Murakami, Perlman, Roemling and Winter.)

Copyright of Revista Signos is the property of Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Valparaiso and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Social change, communicative multiplicity and technological innovation have all created a greater need for increased dynamism and variation in language but also with language. Synchronous communication is based on spoken language, which alters the concept of language standardization and is usually based on the written form. The static, standardized version is losing importance, while social and communicative dynamics create various new language variants; these new versions have major internal subdivisions based on pronounced interference from standard language (geographical dialects), and from the forces of globalization and the complex transactions of language users (social dialects). The colloquial variant of language is visibly expanding into the public sphere. The result is a marked increase in the number of professional designations, which are the most dynamic part of our vocabulary, but also in their presence in other language varieties and communicative styles. Individuals use language to showcase both individuality and creativity, as well as their inclusion in social and cultural groups in the contemporary communications arena. The importance of language in the education process can be shown in the fact that it is evidently a means of receiving and shaping knowledge. Our contemporary society is currently undergoing a transition stage, one that includes language, communication habits and patterns, as well as relationships.

Copyright of Journal of Elementary Education / Revija za Elementarno Izobraževanje is the property of University of Maribor, Faculty of Education and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article discusses the use of language varieties by the main character in the animated film Chicken Little in English and Slovene. Both versions of the film are dubbed by professional actors and are aimed at a young target audience, children. The main intention of the article is to analyze the characteristics of Chicken Little’s speech in both languages, to compare the differences in the use of language varieties, and to evaluate the consequences of shifts in language use on the character and the story in the target language. The analysis is based on a transcript of the speech and enables comparison on four different levels: phonetics, morphology, syntax and vocabulary. The main focus is on the analysis of speech in the target language: Maribor regional colloquial language, with influence from the dialectal speech of Ruše. The main conditions influencing the use of certain language varieties are taken into consideration: the characteristics of the dubbing process, specifics of the target audience, and prevailing norms related to the use of language on television.

This paper is based on an investigation of the standard - colloquial debate among the four official languages, English, Mandarin, Tamil and Malay in Singapore. The aim of the study is to examine (1) major steps/movements in the history of Singaporean language policies that have been influential in forwarding the debate in the country and (2) how this debate has been reflected in the country's educational policymaking. Expanding on Gupta's (1989, 1994, 2001) "diglossia model", the study examines the diglossic "H" - "L" relationships among the languages to understand the standard - colloquial issue in the country. The outcomes of this study reveal that (1) the standard - colloquial debate can be extended beyond the "Singlish" - Singapore Standard English (SSE) question to the other three official languages, and (2) the Singapore government's drive for standard language usage marks significant shift in language use and attitudes of the speakers towards the vernacular languages in the country. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]