Attitudes to Language

Attitudes to language — the beliefs, feelings, and evaluations people hold about different language varieties and their speakers — are a central concern of sociolinguistics. This lesson examines the prescriptivist and descriptivist traditions, investigates how attitudes are formed and measured, and explores the consequences of linguistic prejudice. Understanding language attitudes is essential for the AQA specification, as it connects to every other area of language diversity.

Key Definition: Language attitudes are the evaluative reactions — positive or negative — that people have towards different language varieties, accents, dialects, and styles. These attitudes are socially learned rather than linguistically justified.

---

Prescriptivism vs Descriptivism

The debate between prescriptivism and descriptivism is the fundamental philosophical divide in the study of language.

Prescriptivism

Key Definition: Prescriptivism is the approach that seeks to lay down rules for "correct" language use, based on the assumption that some forms of language are inherently superior to others. Prescriptivists advocate for adherence to standard forms and view non-standard usage as erroneous.

The prescriptivist tradition in English has deep roots:

• Robert Lowth (1762) wrote A Short Introduction to English Grammar, which prescribed rules such as never splitting infinitives and never ending sentences with prepositions. Many of these rules were based on Latin grammar and were not natural features of English.
• Lindley Murray (1795) wrote English Grammar, which became the most widely used grammar textbook for over a century. Murray reinforced and popularised Lowth's rules.
• Samuel Johnson (1755) compiled his Dictionary of the English Language, which standardised spelling and definitions. Johnson initially aimed to "fix" the language permanently, though he later acknowledged that this was impossible.

Modern prescriptivism persists in style guides (e.g., Strunk and White, 1959, The Elements of Style), in newspaper columns on language ("correct" usage columns), and in public discourse about declining standards.

Descriptivism

Key Definition: Descriptivism is the approach that seeks to describe language as it is actually used, without making judgements about correctness. Descriptivists study all varieties of language as legitimate objects of enquiry.

The descriptivist tradition dominates modern academic linguistics. Key principles include:

1. All language varieties are rule-governed. Non-standard dialects have their own systematic grammars — they are not random collections of errors.
2. Language change is natural and inevitable. Attempts to "fix" language at a particular point are futile and misguided.
3. Standard English has social prestige, not linguistic superiority. It became standard through historical accident (power, geography, printing), not because it is inherently clearer or more logical.
4. Linguistic judgements are social judgements in disguise. When people say "that accent sounds uneducated," they are expressing prejudice against the social group associated with that accent, not making a valid linguistic observation.

Feature	Prescriptivism	Descriptivism
View of non-standard forms	Errors to be corrected	Valid linguistic systems
Attitude to change	Change = decline	Change = natural evolution
Role of the linguist	To prescribe correct usage	To describe actual usage
Standard English	The correct form	One variety with social prestige
Key proponents	Lowth, Murray, Strunk & White	Trudgill, Crystal, Labov, Cameron

---

Standard Language Ideology

Key Definition: Standard language ideology is the belief that a standard variety of a language is inherently superior to non-standard varieties and that all speakers should aspire to use it. This ideology underpins prescriptivist attitudes.

Milroy and Milroy (1999) in Authority in Language provided the most comprehensive analysis of standard language ideology. They argued that:

1. Standardisation is a social process, not a linguistic one. A standard variety is established and maintained through institutions (education, government, media) rather than through any inherent linguistic quality.
2. The "complaint tradition" — the long history of public complaints about declining language standards — reflects this ideology. Letters to newspapers complaining about split infinitives, misused apostrophes, or "incorrect" pronunciation are expressions of standard language ideology.
3. The ideology creates a hierarchy of varieties, with the standard at the top and non-standard varieties ranked below. This hierarchy has real consequences: speakers of non-standard varieties may be discriminated against in education, employment, and public life.

The Complaint Tradition

Milroy and Milroy documented a complaint tradition in English stretching back centuries. Every generation believes that language standards are declining and that the younger generation speaks worse than previous ones. This belief is factually unfounded — there is no objective evidence that English has deteriorated over time — but it is remarkably persistent.

Examples of complaints across the centuries:

Period	Complaint	Target
18th century	"English is being corrupted by foreign words"	French and Latin borrowings
19th century	"The lower classes speak abominably"	Working-class speech
Early 20th century	"The wireless is destroying proper English"	Radio broadcasting
Late 20th century	"Television is ruining children's language"	TV, pop culture
21st century	"Texting is destroying literacy"	Digital communication

The content of the complaint changes, but the structure remains identical: a golden age of "correct" language is contrasted with a present state of decline, and a particular social group or technology is blamed.

---

Linguistic Prejudice

Key Definition: Linguistic prejudice is the negative evaluation of speakers based on their language variety, accent, or dialect. It is a form of social discrimination that uses language as a proxy for judgements about class, ethnicity, intelligence, and character.

Linguistic prejudice manifests in many ways:

• Accent discrimination in employment: Studies have shown that speakers with non-standard accents may be disadvantaged in job interviews and customer-facing roles.
• Educational prejudice: Teachers may unconsciously rate children more negatively if they speak with non-standard accents or use non-standard grammar.
• Media representation: Non-standard accents are often used in media to signal stupidity, criminality, or untrustworthiness (e.g., the use of Birmingham accents for villains).

---

Matched Guise Experiments

Key Definition: The matched guise technique is a research method developed by Lambert et al. (1960) in which participants hear the same speaker using different language varieties (guises) and rate each guise on personality traits (e.g., intelligence, friendliness, trustworthiness). The technique reveals unconscious language attitudes.

Lambert et al. (1960)