IDEOLOGIES AND ATTITUDES ABOUT LANGUAGE

Ideologies and Attitudes about Language

Name of Writer

Name of Institution

Ideologies and Attitudes about Language

This research will focus on examining language ideologies. Language ideologies, which are produced and reproduced in sociocultural contexts, will refer to a society's beliefs about language (Kroskrity, 2000), in which the norms of language attitudes and discourse are imbedded. Put differently, language ideologies are ¡ªsets of beliefs about language articulated by users as a rationalization or justification of perceived language structure and use (Silverstein, 1979, p. 183). These beliefs are often mistaken as commonsense truths about language and as a result, people generally do not question their legitimacy.

There are four features of language ideologies according to Kroskrity (2000). The first is that, speaker's language attitudes about language are formed in sociocultural and political contexts. The second feature is that language ideologies, or the norm beliefs about language, are formed in these same contexts. The third feature is that some members of a group will be more aware than others about local language ideologies, and the fourth feature is that member's language ideologies mediate between social structures and forms of talk. (p.21) that is there is a reciprocal relationship between established views about language and the way people choose to speak. If a language is established as prestigious or acceptable, the cultural group that uses the language tends to be viewed with similar respect (Baugh, 2000). It is this last feature that is most significant to the present research because critical discourse analysis will be used to examine how language ideologies mediate between classroom discourse and the values of school.

Part of the current ideologies in the U.S. about language insists that there is only one right way to speak and all other varieties are inferior, and those who speak other varieties are as a consequence less intelligent, less competent. However, debates about language are not really about intelligence or being educated; they are usually about power. Those with power want to hold on to it; those without want to gain it. The dominant ideology among educators is that students should speak Standard English, and that the school system is responsible for teaching it without affirming, utilizing, or encouraging use of the nonstandard forms students bring from home. In a critical race theory agenda, the process needed to change current ideologies against AAE is first to expose them. Once we expose the ideologies as socially constructed myths and not as facts, then we will be able to change them.

According to Lippi-Green (1997a), standard language ideology (SLI) refers to a society's belief that there can be only one ?correct? way to speak and that other varieties are substandard, and the use of a substandard variety justifies restricting its speakers to a lower social status. She further explains that language is a flexible social tool used to mark social allegiances. We are ironically accepting of most other aspects of a person's identity except for the language aspect, which is ?the most effective way [people] have of situating themselves socially ...