LING 580a,b: Accommodation Theory and Social Network Theory

LING 580a,b

Spring 2008

A seminar in sociolinguistics

Problems in Linguistics. ACCOMMODATION THEORY: ENFORCEMENT OF LINGUISTIC NORMS IN INTERPERSONAL AND NETWORK CONTEXTS

Instructor:	Alicia Beckford Wassink	Meeting Room:	MGH 278
Office:	A217 Padelford	Meeting Day and Time:	Mondays 330-550
Office Hours:	M 2-3pm
Office Phone:	616-9589
Dept. Phone:	543-2046 (Linguistics Dept. main office)

Course website (this page): http://faculty.washington.edu/~wassink/LING580syllspr08.htm

Course Description

Early sociolinguistic writings on social networks were heavily influenced by social psychological and ethnographic research into the ways individuals accommodate each other linguistically when in relationships where linguistic norms are levied and rights are conferred to those who conform. Speech Accommodation Theory (or variously Communication Accommodation Theory) developed as a theoretical account for adaptive behavior in particular conversational contexts (specifically accent accommodation). A great deal of research attention has been invested in the development of this theory. However, researchers have recently been turning their attention to how CAT might relevant to theories of linguistic change. Obviously, short-term conversational interactions are transitory, and the adaptations we make are not lasting. Can we bridge the gap from short-term adaptations to long-term accommodation, to language change?

Student learning goals

At the end of this quarter, you will be able to:

· Articulate the basic tenets of CAT/SAT and SNT succinctly in writing and discussion

· Understand how responses to norm enforcement operate at an interpersonal level

· Evaluate attempts to link CAT/SAT to theories around dialect contact and language change

Course Readings

All readings for this course are available online, at UW Electronic Reserves:

https://eres.lib.washington.edu/eres/default.aspx

Required work and grading

Students will have weekly writing assignments (e.g. reading responses, an abstract), lead the class discussion of a reading and write a final paper.

Grades are assigned as follows:

35% writing assignments

25% leading class discussion

40% final paper

Writing assignments (35%)

1. Reading responses: Write (2-3 pages) about what you believe are the major strengths and weaknesses of the article/research and what questions you have about the chapter or article and its findings. There may be specific questions assigned for responding to some chapters/articles.

2. Abstract: Write an abstract of the paper you have proposed for this course (to be turned in).

We have a Catalyst Peer Review site, which we will use regularly:

http://catalyst.washington.edu/webtools/pr/slogin.cgi?owner=wassink&id=4415

...and a GoPost web discussion site at:

https://catalysttools.washington.edu/gopost/board/wassink/5270/

Peer work counts toward the graded writing assignments, below (marked in calendar below with e.g., “Œ”). Use the peer review site to post your response papers. The intent is for the postings and exchange here to promote and reflect our most careful, considered writing. Both the instructor and class peers will comment on the postings here. Use the GoPost web discussion area to post short questions and responses, comments, or suggested readings for the class to read.

Leading class discussion (25%)

1. Students will lead the class discussion 1 meeting day during the quarter. Depending on class size, this leading might take place in pairs. The aims of this assignment are to lead the class in an engaging, enriching, interactive discussion while (1) obtaining a clear understanding of the issues, the research questions, the methodology, and the major findings of the article; (2) relating the content of the article to other course readings, discussions, and assignments; (3) understanding the assets and shortcomings of the study/article. In preparation for your discussion, you may wish to consider the following questions:

· What is the main point of the article? What hypotheses or research questions are being investigated?

· How does this article fit into the study of language attitudes and how does it relate to other course readings? What background literature is relevant to this study?

· What is the methodology of this study? How was the data collected? What is the research design?

· What are the major results/findings of the study?

· Are the author’s hypotheses supported or not? What explanations does the author provide for the results?

· What conclusions does the author reach?

· What do you believe are the major strengths and weaknesses of this article? What questions do you have about the study and the findings?

2. Students will make a 10 minute oral presentation of their final paper.

Final paper (40%)

· 15- 20 pages in length

Final paper topics (You must submit a paper proposal by week 5)

1. Accommodation theory was developed to account for stylistic variation (within a speaker). Can it be profitably linked to models that address language change (within a group)? What specific, larger-scale phenomena are elucidated by SAT (either on their own or from within the vantage point of another, related theoretical perspective)?

2. How far can accommodation go? When would the changes in a speaker’s system (in Second Language Acquisition terms) run up against the limits of I-language? What authors have taken up this issue? What questions remain unaddressed?

3. Social Network models rely upon three notions of social influence: competition, contagion and exposure to model the diffusion of innovations through a community. In your opinion, What usefulness might these notions hold for representing linguistic innovations? Is language different, and unable to be modeled in these ways? If so, how?

The following UW grading scale will be used: (www.washington.edu/students/gencat/front/Grading_Sys.html):

Percent = Grade

≥ 95% = 4.0 88 = 3.3 81 = 2.6 74 = 1.9 67 = 1.2

94 = 3.9 87 = 3.2 80 = 2.5 73 = 1.8 66 = 1.1

93 = 3.8 86 = 3.1 79 = 2.4 72 = 1.7 65 = 1.0

92 = 3.7 85 = 3.0 78 = 2.3 71 = 1.6 64 = .9

91 = 3.6 84 = 2.9 77 = 2.2 70 = 1.5 63 = .8

90 = 3.5 83 = 2.8 76 = 2.1 69 = 1.4 62 = .7

89 = 3.4 82 = 2.7 75 = 2.0 68 = 1.3 (< .7 is a failing grade)

Policies

· Special needs

To request academic accommodations due to a disability, please contact Disabled Student Services, 448 Schmitz, 543-8924 (V), 543-8925 (TTY), uwdss@u.washington.edu. If you have a letter from DSS indicating that you have a disability that requires special academic accommodations, please present the letter to your instructor as soon as possible so the proper accommodations can be discussed and met.

Calendar

Week	Date	Topic	Prepare for Today (Due today)	Assignments (Do today)
1	March 31	Introduction/context: Where have we heard about CAT/SAT before? In the context of what research issues?	Come prepared to discuss what you already know about CAT/SAT. We’ll read together Trudgill (2008), and possibly begin working on Response paper Œ.	Today: 1) Write own response paper 2-3 pps. 2) Upload your response to the course Catalyst site, as Assgt. Œ 3) After writing your own ideas, read the brief, published responses Trudgill’s paper: (*Coupland, Holmes & Kerswill,* and Bauer). DO NOT read the review articles till you have written your own response paper Later this week: Read 4) *Giles & Powesland, 5) Shepard, Giles & LePoire*
2	April 7	Short-term accommodation What are the basic tenets of CAT/SAT? What’s the big deal: aren’t we just saying speakers talk to enhance their social attractiveness?	Come prepared to discuss: 1) Giles & Powesland, 2) Shepard, Giles & LePoire	Post response paper : Note whether any of your concerns in Assgt Œ were shared or addressed by commentators (Coupland, Holmes & Kerswill, Bauer).
3	April 14	ABW away -- meeting led by students	Read and discuss in class: Wassink & Dyer (consider how this study relates to Kerswill & Holmes commentary)	1) Post response paper Ž (Response to Wassink & Dyer) 2) Read Giles & Smith 3) Read Cheshire, Thakerar & Giles
4	April 21	Short-term accommodation Psychological dimensions of CAT/SAT	Come prepared to discuss: *Giles & Smith,* 2) Cheshire et al.	1) Read Siegel, 2) Auer, Barden & Grosskopf
5	April 28	Long-term accommodation Long-term effects of accommodation: when and for whom will effects become permanent?	Come prepared to discuss: 1) Siegel, 2) Auer, Barden & Grosskopf	Finish reading 1) read Everett & Borgatti, 2) Complete background SNT reading Scott (1, 3-5)
6	May 5	Innovation and social networks SNT: Centrality	Come prepared to discuss: 1) Scott, chs 1, 3-5 2) Everett & Borgatti	1) Read Vallente 2) Post term paper idea to (1pg max) Assgt
7	May 12	SNT: Social influence processes “Network models and methods for studying the diffusion of innovations” - in-class work: Vallente problem sets	Come prepared to discuss: Vallente	Read 1) Villena-Ponsoda, 2) Auer & Hinskens
8	May 19	SNT: Finish Social influence processes (hour 1) Discuss the role of interpersonal accommodation in social-network based explanations of innovation (hour 2)	Come prepared to discuss: 1) Villena-Ponsoda, 2) Auer & Hinskens	formulate term paper outline (may post to Catalyst with peer review )
9	May 26	Memorial Day--no class		work on papers--finalize outline, begin writing, discuss work with peer
10	June 2	Present final paper abstracts	abstracts due
	Thurs, Jun. 12, 2008		final paper due, 6:30 p.m., ABW’s office, A217 PDL	Papers may be turned into me early. Papers arriving after 6:40pm WILL LOSE ½ letter grade!

References

**note: We are reading just two chapters from Dialect Change (P. Auer, F. Hinskens, and P. Kerswill, eds). The entire volume is directly relevant to this course. I encourage you this summer to read the rest of the book!!!***

Auer, Peter, Birgit Barden, & Beate Grosskopf (1998) Subjective and Objective Parameters Determining 'Salience' in Long-term Dialect Accommodation, Journal of Sociolinguistics 2 (2) , 163–187.

-----& Hinskens, Frans (2005) The role of interpersonal accommodation in a theory of language change, ch 13. In, Dialect Change: convergence and divergence in European languages (P. Auer, F. Hinskens, and P. Kerswill, eds). 335-357.

Bauer, Laurie (2008) A question of identity: A response to Trudgill, Language in Society 37(2), 270ff.

Cheshire, J., Thakerar, J. & Giles, H. (1982) Psychological and linguistic parameters of speech accommodation theory. In Giles, H. and R. St. Clair (eds.) Advances in the social psychology of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 205-255 .

Coupland, Nikolas (2008) The delicate constitution of identity in face-to-face accommodation: a response to Trudgill, Language in Society 37(2), 267-270.

Everett, Martin G. & Borgatti, Stephen P. (2005) Extending centrality, ch. 4. In, Models and methods in social network analysis (P.J. Carrington, J. Scott and S. Wasserman, eds.). Cambridge: Cambridge UP. 57-76.

Giles, Howard & Powesland, Peter (1975) Accommodation Theory. [reprinted from ‘A Social Psychological Model of speech diversity’, in Giles, H. and Powesland, P. F. (1975) Speech Style and Social Evaluation [European Monographs in Social Psychology], New York: Harcourt Brace, pp. 154-170.] In Coupland, N. and Jaworski, A. (1997) Sociolinguistics: a reader and coursebook. New York: St Martins Press. 232-239.

----- & Smith, Philip (1979) Accommodation theory: optimal levels of convergence, ch. 3. In, Language and Social Psychology (Howard Giles, and Robert N.St. Clair, eds.). Oxford: Basil Blackwell. 45-65.

Holmes, Janet & Kerswill, Paul (2008) Contact is not enough: a response to Trudgill, Language in Society 37(2), 273-276.

Scott, John (2006) Social Network Analysis: a handbook. London: Sage.

Ch1 “Networks and Relations”: pgs1-6;

Ch 3 “Handling Relational Data”: pgs 38-62

Ch 4 “Points, Lines and Density”: pgs 63-81

Ch 5 “Centrality and Centralization”: pgs 82-99

Shepard, Carolyn A., Giles, H. & LePoire, Beth (2001) Communication Accommodation Theory, ch. 1.2. In, The New Handbook of Language and Social Psychology (W. P. Robinson and H. Giles, eds.). Chichester: Wiley. 34-51.

**Siegel, Jeff (2005) Social context, ch. 8. Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (Doughty, C. & Long, M., eds.), 176ff.

Trudgill, Peter. (2008) Colonial dialect contact in the history of European languages: on the irrelevance of identity to new-dialect formation. Language in society 37(2), 241-280.

Valente, Thomas W. (2005) Network models and methods for studying the diffusion of innovations, ch. 6. In, Models and methods in social network analysis (P.J. Carrington, J. Scott and S. Wasserman, eds.). Cambridge: Cambridge UP. 98-116.

Villena-Ponsoda, Juan Andrés (2005) How similar are people who speak alike? An interpretive way of using social networks in social dialectology research, ch 12. In, Dialect Change: convergence and divergence in European languages (P. Auer, F. Hinskens, and P. Kerswill, eds). 303-334.

Wassink, Alicia B. & Dyer, Judy (2004) Language Ideology and the Transmission of Phonological Change, Journal of English Linguistics 32(1), 3-30.