These is notes from my SocioLinguistics class
Fischer covered 80% of SocioLing in 1958. Before it was mostly Historical Linguistics. Then Structuralism (Saussure). Finally in 1957 Chomsky started Generative Linguistics which in 2001 forced Indrajit Samarajiva to draw Syntax Trees so fuck you Chomsky! Seriously, he’s a douchebag. That shit was pointless and frustrating. Plus he talks shit about America. If I ever see you on the street I’ll give you a wedgie, Chomsky!
Anyways Structcultursrsuturalists and Chomsky thought that you could explain language as an algorithm, that all the information required to understand language was contained within the Phonetics, Morphology, Syntax and Semantics of that language. However, that is bullshit. Language is social, for example, I would not say “How the fuck are you?” to my professor, but I would say that to Ron. Nothing within the Language can explain this variability, it’s explained by social factors. Hence, SocioLinguistics.
In 1958 this guy Fischer did a study in England bout how some kids say talkin’ and some kids say talking. Nothing in Syntax or Phonetics can explain this Variation. Chomsky et al would call this free variation, but that’s bullshit. Fischer said free variation is a label, not an explanation. ie, it ignores the main duty of Science, which is to explain shit.
The only way to explain this Linguistic variation is Social Factors: the good kids said talking and the bad kids said talkin’
I have already studied this, the rest of my notes are worthless, except the picture Tracy drew for me.
Formal or Informal Speech predicts whether or not indi will say ‘fuck’
Did study of kids English (talking vs talkin). Free Variation
but… Free Variation is a label, not an explanation
24 children, each used both -ing & -in. Fischer however divided them into 2 groups (Criticism).
Different ancestors (Dialect Mixture) Social Factors
Formal or Informal Influenced by Observer’s Paradox (Accomodation)
SocioLinguistics is not Dialectology (physical & racial separation of dialects)