Language Attitudes
Language Attitudes
Language Attitudes
For what activities is the first language thought to be inadequate? Give reasons.
For what activities is the second or third language not thought to be adequate?
Give reasons.
Could someone who speaks only X language get a good job? Why?
Would you ever use (L2, trade language, national) forfuneral, singing, etc.
Can you think of a situation in which it is best not to use your mother tongue?
Why?
What is the most useful language to know around here? Give reasons.
Attitudes are personal beliefs, but there are patterns of attitudes throughout a
community. Similar people will have similar attitudes and a profile of the community can
be developed.
Language attitudes are opinions, ideas and prejudices that speakers have with respect to a language. For example, it is
often said that in order to learn a language, it often helps to have a positive attitude towards that language. Galician was
traditionally considered to be an unsuitable language for certain things, or that it should not be taught to children. Over
the years, attitudes have changed, and it is now harder to find openly hostile expressions towards Galician.
In general, Galicians have a positive attitude towards their language, especially the youth.
The vast majority (72%) thinks that children should be taught both languages and 21.4% think
that they should only be spoken to in Galician.
Some studies reveal that Galician, and language in general, plays a discrete role in the identity of
young people.
social status or power of the groups of speakers, and the forces held responsible for
vitality of a language can be contributed to the solidarity value of it. Another
dimension, called ingroup solidarity or language loyalty, reflects the social pressures
to maintain languages/language varieties, even one without social prestige (Edwards
1982:20 .)
Fishman and Agheyisi (1970) have suggested that there is a mentalist and behaviourist
viewpoint to language attitudes. According to the mentalist view, attitudes are a
"mental and neutral state of readiness which cannot be observed directly, but must be
inferred from the subject's introspection". Difficulties arising from this viewpoint
include the question that from what data can attitudes be derived, and in what way are
they quantifiable. According to behaviourism, attitudes are a dependent variable that
can be statistically determined by observing actual behaviour in social situations. This
also causes problems; it can be questioned whether attitudes can be defined entirely in
terms of the observable data (Dittmar 1976: 181).
Fasold suggests that attitudes toward a language are often the reflection of attitudes
towards members of various ethnic groups (Fasold 1984: 148): people's reactions to
language varieties reveal much of their perception of the speakers of these varieties
(Edwards 1982: 20).
Many studies have demonstrated that judgements of the quality and prestige of
language varieties depend on a knowledge of the social connotations which they
possess. Thus, for instance, the use of dialects and accents would be expressions of
social preference, which reflect an awareness of the status and prestige accorded to the
speakers of these varieties. A prestige standard form of a language has no inherent
aesthetic or linguistic advantage over nonstandard varieties. The prestige is usually the
product of culture-bound stereotypes passed on from one generation to the other
(ibid., 21).
Le Page and Tabouret-Keller (1985) stress the importance of the nature of intergroup
relations in the discussion of language attitudes and uses: they vary as the nature of
intergroup relations changes. When relations change, status relationships, and
therefore perceptions, attitudes and uses, change. Speakers select their code from a
variety of socially marked models. Change takes place when the social values of the
models change and the behaviour of the speech community also changes (ibid, 172).
When studying language attitudes, the concept of motives is important. Two basic
motives are called instrumental and integrative motives. If L2 acquisition is
considered as instrumental, the knowledge in a language is considered as a "passport
to prestige and success". The speaker/learner considers the speaking/learning of
English as functional (Ellis 1991: 117). On the other hand, if a learner wishes to
identify with the target community; to learn the language and the culture of the
speakers of that language in order to perhaps be able to become a member of the
group, the motivation is called integrative. In generally, research has proved the
integrative motivation to have been more beneficial for the learning of another
language (Loveday 1982: 17-18). On the other hand, Gardner & Lambert, for
instance, have found out that where the L2 functions as a second language (i.e. it is
used widely in the society), instrumental motivation seems to be more effective.
Moreover, motivation derived from a sense of academic or communicative success is
more likely to motivate one to speak a foreign/second language (Ellis 1991: 118).