Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-g4j75 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-30T05:24:06.810Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Soziolinguistik or sociolinguistics: Can the Great Divide Be Bridged?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 December 2008

Jennifer Dailey-O'Cain  and
Rosina Lippi-Green
Jennifer Dailey-O'Cain
Affiliation:
University of AlbertaDepartment of Modern Languages and Cultural Studies 200 Arts Building Edmonton, AB T6G 2E6Canada [jenniedo@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca]
Rosina Lippi-Green
Affiliation:
English DepartmentWestern Washington UniversityBellingham, WA 98225–9055 [rlg@cc.wwu.edu]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Review Article
Information
Journal of Germanic Linguistics , Volume 10 , Issue 1 , Spring 1998 , pp. 107 - 127
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Germanic Linguistics 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Ammon, Ulrich. 1991. Die Internationale Stellung der deutschen Sprache. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barbour, Stephen, and Stevenson, Patrick. 1990. Variation in German: A critical approach to German sociolinguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bell, Allan. 1984. Language style as audience design. Language in Society, 13.145–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bell, Allan. 1991. The language of news media. Oxford and Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Bereiter, Carl, and Engelmann, Siegfried. 1966. An academically oriented pre-school for culturally deprived children. Pre-school education today, ed. by Hechinger, Fred M., 105–37. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.Google Scholar
Bernstein, Basil. 1974. Class, codes, and control: Theoretical studies towards a sociology of language. 2nd edn.London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Chambers, J. K. 1995. Sociolinguistic theory: Linguistic variation and its social significance. Oxford and Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Dailey-O'Cain, Jennifer. 1997. Geographic and socio-political influences on language ideology and attitudes toward language variation in post-unification Germany. Doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan.Google Scholar
Dailey-O'Cain, Jennifer. Forthcoming. The perception of post-unification German regional speech. Handbook of perceptual dialectology, ed. by Preston, Dennis. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dittmar, Norbert. 1973. Soziolinguistik: Exemplarische und kritische Darstellung ihrer Theorie, Empirie und Anwendung. Frankfurt a. M.: Athenäum-Fischer.Google Scholar
Eckert, Penelope. 1989. The whole woman: Sex and gender differences in variation. Language Variation and Change 1.245–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eckert, Penelope. 1990. Cooperative competition in adolescent “girl talk.” Discourse Processes 13.91–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fennell, Barbara A. 1992. Markers of ethnic identity in immigrant worker German. The Language Quarterly 30.1–19.Google Scholar
Gass, Susan M., and Varonis, Evangeline M.. 1994. Input, interaction, and second language production. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 16.283–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horowitz, Frances Degen, and Sullivan, Joseph W.. 1981. Mother-child interaction issues: Summary chapter. Early language: Acquisition and intervention, ed. by Schiefelbusch, Richard L. and Bricker, Diane D., 251–56. Baltimore: University Park Press.Google Scholar
Humboldt, Wilhelm von. 1904. Gesammelte Schriften. Vol. 4. Ed. by Leitzmann, Albert. Berlin: B. Behr.Google Scholar
Hundt, Markus. 1992. Einstellungen gegenüber dialektal gefärbter Standard-sprache: Eine empirische Untersuchung zum Bairischen, Hamburgischen, Pfälzischen und Schwäbischen. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag Wiesbaden.Google Scholar
Kelman, Herbert C. 1971. Language as an aid and barrier to involvement in the national system. Can language be planned?: Sociolinguistic theory and practice for developing nations, ed. by Rubin, Joan and Jernudd, Björn H., 21–51. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar
Labov, William. 1972. The logic of nonstandard English. Language in the inner city. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Labov, William. 1990. The intersection of sex and social class in the course of linguistic change. Language Variation and Change 2.205–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lippi–Green, Rosina. 1997. English with an accent: Language and discrimination in the United States. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Mickartz, Heinrich. 1983. Einstellungsäußerungen zur Verwendung von Hochsprache und Mundart in der Kindererziehung. Sprachverhalten in ländlichen Gemeinden: Dialekt und Standardsprache im Sprecherurteil, ed. by Hufschmidt, Jochen et al. , 60–116. (Forschungsbericht, Erp-Projekt, 2.) Berlin: Schmidt.Google Scholar
Milroy, James. 1992. Linguistic variation and change: On the historical sociolinguistics of English. Oxford and Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Milroy, James, and Milroy, Lesley. 1991. Authority in language: Investigating language prescription and standardisation. 2nd edn.London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Milroy, James, and Milroy, Lesley. 1993. Mechanisms of change in urban dialects: The role of class, social network and gender. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 3.57–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silverstein, Michael. 1992. The uses and utility of ideology: Some reflections. Journal of Pragmatics 2.311–24.Google Scholar
Woolard, Kathryn A., and Schieffelin, Bambi B.. 1994. Language ideology. Annual Review of Anthropology 23.55–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar