To what extent do I agree the status of Standard English (SE) has changed since the turn on the century?

One aspect that has the potential to change the status of Standard English that has been introduced in the last century is texting. This is implementing the status of Standard English as the effects of texting mean that people develop a tendency to be lazy and indolent with their dialect; meaning they don’t use standard form, leading to a decrease in the status of it. Although a lot of mobile devices feature an auto-correct which if a word is miss-spelt, it corrects it for you, this also encourages failure to exert in standard-English as the user will fail to pay attention to this correction and furtherly will not care to pay attention to standard forms as using texts will just do it for them.  Also another problem that lads to the decline of SE that is encouraged by texting, is that it allows users to develop a sense of failure to attend to standard English as abbreviations progress in a form of laziness and sense of urgency; an example of this is “c u l8r” instead of ‘see you later’; this means people are replacing standard English with non-standard forms, which carries the risk of replacing standard English.

In addition to this point, an aspect of the century that contributes to the changing status of SE is the advance of technology. This is due to the fact that one part of technology leads to the spread of social media; meaning that if a person has a large base of ‘followers’ from different areas, there will be more variants within the form of dialect; therefore because of this it leads to a large influence of using non-standard English as standard-forms has been alternated to non-standard variants. Another reason why technology has the potential to encourage the deterioration of Standard English, is because the use of technology has lead for people to develop a dependence using technology in order to communicate; leading to a decline in Standard English as people will tend to shorten, change and twist meanings of standard forms, therefore leading to a decline of standard English.

However a factor that provokes the question to what extent I believe Standard English has declined, is the fluctuation in the use of Standard English, depending on the area of England. For example; in certain areas such as North London, for example, it is least likely to be common to speak in a lot of standard forms, due to the fact that; there is a variety in ethnicities, therefore there is a greater influence on standard form leading to a decline in the use of it. There is a greater tendency in areas such as North London, certain areas of Essex, when it is popular (specifically for adolescents) to use slang words, or standard English words but with a different intended meaning than the original meaning of it, again leading to the decline in Standard English. Conversely, areas in which there are less influencing and new variables of dialect and, for example the more northern region of England, will have less susceptibility to develop and adapting to new slang words or ways of pronouncing words or phrases, meaning that in areas such as these the status of Standard English is maintained.

This leads me to propose the question that is there a possibility that one’s social class will depict their ability to maintain standard forms. An example of this is within education; an upper/upper middle class will receive an education that is directed towards being surrounded by people of the same class, therefore same attitudes and shared knowledge; meaning upper class education is of a niche standard that sub-consciously specialises in standard forms. It is argued that influences such as the Afro-Caribbean dialect is influencing standard English too harshly and that it has effects on students and young people particularly, due to its new meanings of vocabulary, slag words and pronunciation of words, this is bad on young people and students as internal of the school, in a lot of areas it is encouraged to speak in a non-standard variable, particularly of a working-class area as attitudes towards education, authority such as teachers and society are poor therefore people represent this mind-set through their dialect. In William Labov’s theory of language and social class, it is suggested an individual’s dialect is dependent on their class, and that upper class will have more of a received pronunciation and a dialect containing standard forms; thereby meaning lower middle and lower class are more likely to carry non-standard English due to their culture, attitudes, surroundings and class.

The argument in which is presented as to whether the status of standard English is changing, regarding this, is whether society is constructed dominantly of upper/ upper middle social classes, or middle lower/lower social classes.

Which brings me to my next conclusion, another argument as to why the status of Standard English is changing, potentially for the worst, is due to the fact that there is an increased amount of slang words and alterior meanings for what was originally a standard form. Portrayals by the media of role models, in my opinion, are held marginally responsible for the decline in standard-English, due to the fact that the media is able to represent such a great amount of role models to such a wide audience; of all ages, meaning that shows such as Towie, for sake of example, encourage the use of utilising non-standard forms, and taking advantage of new words and meanings. Also in the media, rappers that produce music with lyrical content of slang and homonyms, both leading to the development in use of non-standard English. A piece of evidence of the influence the media has on scoping standard English, is that new words are frequently being added to the dictionary; for example ‘selfie’, this encourages new variables to be more used than non-standard forms; leading to the decline of standard English.

To conclude, to which extent id agree that the status of standard English is changing is of a significant amount, this is due to the fact that there are many implementing and influencing factors towards the change of standard English, such as social class, education, social background, influencing ethnicities and peers.

Secondary data analysis

Based on my questionnaire research of gender differentiations of opinion on the effect Afro-Caribbean language on Standard English, I accumulated a number of linguistic and social theorists that represent my argument on attitudes of changes in standard-language and differentiation between male and female.

The first overall argument that was portrayed in my results was that the male’s generic opinion presented a sense of oblivion to the fact that Standard English was potentially  declining, and the reasons why and that it was more common for the male to adapt to Afro-Caribbean style influences than female. The theory argued by Jenny Cheshire has the potential to correlate with this as she suggests in her 1982 reading study, there is a relationship between the use of non-standard variables and adherence to peer group norms. This may be the reason as to why in my results, the male portion is evidently more likely to speak with afro-Caribbean influence; my results showed that within the proportion of males asked, there was a variation of their ethnicity therefore the male’s peers are more likely to have an influence of their alteration in dialect as, according to Cheshire’s study, the relationship between use of an individual’s non-standard dialect and their peer’s norms is responsible for an individual changing their style of dialect/accent. Cheshire suggests that variation in dialect is a conscious choice, therefore meaning that there is a significant influence of afro-Caribbean, based on my questionnaire, as the male’s results showed that their dialect is more so influenced by other language as a pose to female’s as they didn’t show a high level of concern or even awareness for change or decline in standard English and growth in the use of other dialect (in this specific case, afro-Caribbean). In Jenny Cheshire’s study, she found that those who used non-standard forms were the participants who tended to approve of criminal activities, these responses linked to being boys’ results as a pose to girls.

Secondly, another observation that was made following the results of my questionnaire was female responses showed to be more careful in how they presented themselves and their general outlook regarding how they spoke; they held the opinion that speaking standard English promoted a professional and impressive outlook, as a pose to speaking in non-standard form which was seen, with reference to most female responses, as lazy and in-proper. However the male portion of the responses displayed that a large percentage didn’t detect a bad effect of using non-standard forms, implying that males tended to carry a sense of relaxation when it comes to their dialect, not observing if there was any negative connotations to their adapted dialect. A theory that will support these results is a study carried out by Peter Trudgill, in which he carried out a study to prove the hypothesis of how gender effects dialect in each social class. In order to do this, Trudgill examined situations in which both male and female would exercise their dialect; Trudgill differentiated between relaxed and careful speech in order to assess participants awareness of their own accents as well as how they wished to sound – which saw the non-standard pronunciation quickly decline. He found that class is more of a determiner of non-standard usage than gender, though women in all social classes are more likely to use Received Pronunciation form. Men were reported to apply their non-standard forms more greatly- implying that men wished to sound more non-standard, which is correlates with my results. Women in this study were reported to apply greatly their standard forms; implying their desire to have a more standard dialect; just like in my research it was conducted that female respondents had a greater desire for standard-English as a pose to Afro-Caribbean style dialect. Trudgill concluded his study with the statement that women are more susceptible to standard-form then men; in which men are more subject to non-standard forms. In the “lower middle class” and the “upper working class” the differences between men’s and women’s usage of the standard forms were greatest in formal speech, thereby identifying these classes as most susceptible to the prestige of the RP form, with women leading the way on this front.

Considering the results accumulated from my research, it is possible that Labov’s 1966 New York study and Martha’s Vineyard study, suggests a hypothesis as to why there is a differentiation between male and female’s sense of voluntary to with-hold either a standard or non-standard dialect. This is the theory that William Labov suggested that individual speech patterns are “part of a highly systematic structure of social and stylistic stratification”; suggesting that whether someone choses the dialect of standard or non-standard form is dependent on their attitude and background represented by their social class.

Labov studied how often the final (r) was pronounced in words such as guard, bare and beer. Use of this variable has considerable prestige in New York City. Labov investigated the speech of sales assistants in three Manhattan stores; drawn from the top (Saks), middle (Macy’s) and bottom (Klein’s) based on the price and fashion scale. Each unwitting participant was approached with an enquiry designed to draw the answer – “Fourth floor” – which may or may not contain the variable final (r). Frequency of use of the prestige variable final “r” varied with level of formality and social class – the sales assistants from Saks used it most, those from Klein’s used it least and those from Macy’s showed the greatest upward shift when they were asked to repeat.  Of the four classes tested – Lower Class, Working Class, Lower Middle Class & Upper Middle Class – it was the lower middle class that were most susceptible to the overt prestige of the “r” – as they differed the most between the incidence in casual speech style (4%) to most careful speech style (77%).  Labov found that the Upper Middle Class differed least between the casual and careful speech styles, therefore showing that they were least susceptible to the prestige form, changing the way they spoke less than any other social class when thinking carefully about how they spoke.

This study can be considered as relevant to my research due to the fact that the theory suggests that someone’s dialect is developed and adapted based on their surroundings and their attitude (represented by what social class they were considered to be in), this suggests why most male participants were favorable towards the Afro-Caribbean style dialect influence as their attitudes showed that they were unaware of any negatives non-standard terms potentially carried, and believed speaking in a non-standard form was of a positive light. Whereas the female respondent’s carried the concern of their ability to sustain a decent level of Standard English in order to portray, assumedly, a prestige and important impression.

occupational theorists

Eakins and Eakins - 1976
In seven university faculty meetings, the men spoke for longer. the men's turns ranged from 10.66 to 17.07 seconds, the women's from 3 to 10 seconds.


Edelsky - 1981
In a series of meetings of a university department faculty committee, men took more and longer turns and did more and longer turns and did more joking, arguing, directing and soliciting of responses during the more structured segments of meetings. During the 'free-for'all' parts of the meetings, women and men talked equally, and women joked, argued, directed, and solicited responses more than men.


Herbert & Straight - 1989
Compliments tend to flow from those of a higher rank to those of a lower rank.


Herring - 1992
In an email discussion which took place on a linguistiucs 'distribution list', five women and 30 men took part, even though women make up nearly half the members of the Linguistic Society of America and nearly 36% of subscribers to the list. Men's messages were twice as long, on average,as women's.
Women tended to use  a personal voice, e.g 'I am intrigued by your comment....'. The tone adopted by the men who dominated the discussion was assertive: 'it is obvious that..'.


Holmes - 1998
Women managers seem to be more likely to negotiate consensus than male managers, they are less likely to just 'plough through the agenda', taking time to make sure everyone genuinely agrees with what's been decided.


Holmes (2005), Holmes and Marra (2002)
Contrary to popular belief, women use just as much humour as men, and use it for the same functions, to control discourse and subordinates and to contest superiors, although they are more likely to encourage supportive and collaborative humour.


Hornyack- 1994 
The shift from work talk to personal talk is always initiated by the highest- ranking person in the room.

Tracy and Eisenberg-1990/91
When role-playing delivering criticism to a co-worker about errors in a business letter, men showed more concern for the feelings of the person they were criticizing when in the subordinate role, while women showed more concern when in the superior role.