Raciolinguistics examines how language is used to construct race and how ideas of race influence language and language use. Although sociolinguists and linguistic anthropologists have previously studied the intersections of language, race, and culture, raciolinguistics is a relatively new focus for scholars trying to theorize race throughout language studies. Geneva Smitherman credits H. Samy Alim for the coinage of the new term, discussed at length in the 2016 book by Alim, John R. Rickford and Arnetha F. Ball which compiled raciolinguistic research. In their work, raciolinguists incorporate intersectionality in theorizing how various identities (e.g. gender, ethnicity, nationality) within a group and/or an individual influence lived experiences of race. Nelson Flores and Jonathan Rosa also used the term in their discussion of "appropriateness" in American language and education.
Drawing from sociolinguistics and linguistic anthropology, raciolinguistics focuses on race and its relation to language. A central concern of raciolinguistics is to understand the complex meanings and implications of speech coming from a racialized subject. The field also explores how the relationship between race and language impacts domains like politics and education.
In their critique of American language education, Nelson Flores and Jonathan Rosa argued that the standardization of "appropriate" language in American schooling creates different experiences for racialized students. "Appropriate" language, defined by the language of the dominant culture, is a construction of raciolinguistic ideologies that uphold certain linguistic practices as normative and others as deficient. These ideologies are defined by the white listening or speaking subject in that "language-minoritized students [are expected] to mimic the white speaking subject while ignoring the raciolinguistic ideologies that the white listening subject uses to position them as racial Others".
This page is automatically generated and may contain information that is not correct, complete, up-to-date, or relevant to your search query. The same applies to every other page on this website. Please make sure to verify the information with EPFL's official sources.
Language ideology (also known as linguistic ideology or language attitude) is, within anthropology (especially linguistic anthropology), sociolinguistics, and cross-cultural studies, any set of beliefs about languages as they are used in their social worlds. Language ideologies are conceptualizations about languages, speakers, and discursive practices. Like other kinds of ideologies, language ideologies are influenced by political and moral interests, and they are shaped in a cultural setting.
Linguistic anthropology is the interdisciplinary study of how language influences social life. It is a branch of anthropology that originated from the endeavor to document endangered languages and has grown over the past century to encompass most aspects of language structure and use. Linguistic anthropology explores how language shapes communication, forms social identity and group membership, organizes large-scale cultural beliefs and ideologies, and develops a common cultural representation of natural and social worlds.
Sociolinguistics is the descriptive study of the effect of any or all aspects of society, including cultural norms, expectations, and context, on language and the ways it is used. It can overlap with the sociology of language, which focuses on the effect of language on society. Sociolinguistics overlaps considerably with pragmatics and is closely related to linguistic anthropology. Sociolinguistics' historical interrelation with anthropology can be observed in studies of how language varieties differ between groups separated by social variables (e.