Men’s Identities and Sociolinguistic Variation: The Case of Fraternity Men

The variation patterns of the variable (ING) in an American college fraternity are explained by analyzing individual men’s contextualized discourse. While most of the fraternity men predictably use a lower rate of the ‘vernacular’ variant in weekly meetings, several men use a higher rate. I argue that all of the men index alignment roles associated with power, but that these alignment roles are powerful in different, specifiable ways. Qualitative discourse analysis shows that the men with high rates of the vernacular variant use (ING) to index working-class cultural models and confrontational stances, as part of identity displays based on physical, rather than structural, power. Thus, the variable has several potential abstract social meanings, but specific interactional meanings can only be constructed in contextualized practice.

[1]  J. L. Fischer.  Social Influences on the Choice of a Linguistic Variant , 1958 .

[2]  D. Holland,et al.  Cultural models in language and thought: An appraisal , 1987 .

[3]  C. Goodwin,et al.  Rethinking Context: Language as an Interactive Phenomenon , 1992 .

[4]  E. Goffman.  Behavior in Public Places , 1963 .

[5]  The Individual Psychology of Alfred Adler: A Systematic Presentation in Selections from His Writings. , 1956 .

[6]  P. Eckert.  The whole woman: Sex and gender differences in variation , 1989, Language Variation and Change.

[7]  P. Eckert,et al.  Think Practically and Look Locally: Language and Gender as Community-Based Practice , 1992 .

[8]  R. Freedle.  New directions in discourse processing , 1980 .

[9]  S. Bem,et al.  The Lenses of Gender: Transforming the Debate on Sexual Inequality , 1993 .

[10]  J. Hearn.  Men in the Public Eye , 1919 .

[11]  S. Levinson.  Activity types and language , 1979, Linguistics.

[12]  S. Kraemer.  Steps to an Ecology of Mind: Gregory Bateson , 1993, British Journal of Psychiatry.

[13]  Graciela Hierro,et al.  Gender and Power , 1994, Hypatia.

[14]  Jennifer Arnold.  Sociolinguistic variation : data, theory, and analysis : selected papers from NWAV 23 at Stanford , 1996 .

[15]  W. Labov.  The social stratification of English in New York City , 1969 .

[16]  Etienne Wenger,et al.  Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation , 1991 .

[17]  Nikolas Coupland,et al.  What is Sociolinguistic Theory , 1998 .

[18]  Men’s Identities and Patterns of Variation , 1996 .

[19]  Locating Dialect in Discourse: The Language of Honest Men and Bonnie Lasses in Ayr , 1991 .

[20]  E. Goffman.  The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life , 1959 .

[21]  Cynthia A. McLemore,et al.  The pragmatic interpretation of English intonation : sorority speech , 1991 .

[22]  M. Silverstein.  Shifters, linguistic categories, and cultural description , 1976 .

[23]  S. Murray.  You just don't understand: Women and men in conversation , 1992 .

[24]  A. Houston.  Continuity and Change in English Morphology: The Variable (ING) , 1985 .

[25]  W. Labov.  The intersection of sex and social class in the course of linguistic change , 1990, Language Variation and Change.

[26]  A. Adler,et al.  The Individual Psychology of Alfred Adler: A Systematic Presentation in Selections from His Writings , 1956 .

[27]  E. Goffman,et al.  Forms of talk , 1982 .

[28]  Raewyn Connell,et al.  Gender and Power , 2016 .

[29]  P. Trudgill.  Sex, covert prestige and linguistic change in the urban British English of Norwich , 1972, Language in Society.