Заявка на публикацию

Срочная публикация научной статьи

+7 995 770 98 40
+7 995 202 54 42


Поделитесь статьей с друзьями:
Автор(ы): Сулейманова Вазира Талатовна
Рубрика: Филологические науки
Журнал: «Евразийский Научный Журнал №3 2020»  (март, 2020)
Количество просмотров статьи: 1128

Сулейманова Вазира Талатовна,
преподаватель английского языка,
Самаркандский государственный институт иностранных языков,

Abstract: The article investigates the Language as social bonding because humans have rules for language and these rules lead us to communicate more efficiently and effectively. It has often been said prescriptively, if you want to learn the heart of the people, you must learn the language. We say this because of sociolinguistics helps us understand how to “think” in a particular society.

Key words: culture, social, sociolinguistics, American English, English-speaking people, students

The development of sociolinguistics in linguistic analysis make it possible to gain deeper insights into the very nature of language and to reveal more fully the conditions of its functioning and the dynamics of its development, thus forming new light on the ontological picture of language as a social phenomenon.

As obvious from some countries where sociolinguistics actually started from scratch, the revival of interest in sociolinguistic problems in former USSR was, in fact, the renewal and continuation of a tradition going back to the earliest period in the history of soviet linguistics when E.D.Polivanov, V.M.Zirmunskij, and other prominent linguists laid the foundation of a sociolinguistics.

At the 80-90s of the past century, the linguists in the country were following with keen interest the development of sociolinguistics in Europe and USA. In evaluating the studies of sociolinguistics abroad, they criticized whatever was basically unacceptable to them, and, at the same time, they searched to utilize the achievements of foreign science which promote the further progress of sociolinguistics, the elaboration of its theory and methods, and the study of its problems.

Variation is the engine of linguistic change, for communities do not switch from one feature to another overnight but go through a period in which new and old variants compete until one win out. But synchronic variation — variation viewed at one point in time — is not always symptomatic of ongoing change, although it may encapsulate the effects of previous change or resistance to change. Most of the examples in this dissertation attest to the vibrancy of synchronic variation and variety in current American English without any indications of or implications for ongoing change. Many of our examples come from “vernacular” dialects of American English—everyday informal regional and social varieties with features like ax (for ask), himself (for himself), and zero copula (as in He working) that are frequently stigmatized as non-mainstream, nonstandard, or worse (considered as evidence of ignorance, lack of education, or laziness). But usages of this type also survive; even thrive, by symbolizing opposition to mainstream culture. That is, they may vividly express the identities of their users as members of a particular region, social class, ethnicity, or age group. Some of these usages are widely emulated as acts of admiration or solidarity by people outside the groups in which they originated. For instance, white suburban teenagers, who consider these expressions “cool”, often adopt expressions originating among urban African-American youth.

The extensive use of slang by teenagers is a significant part of this dissertation. Some slang words illustrate very general principles of linguistic variation and change. For instance, igg, from ignore, illustrates the tendency to reduce or shorten words in informal speech. Although the incidence is higher as one goes down the social ladder, virtually all Americans reduce past and hand to pas’ and han’ in casual or excited speech, at least some of the time, and they can similarly drop the initial unstressed syllable in (a)bout. Unlike more broadly accepted slang reductions (such as mike for microphone), which typically retain their most strongly stressed syllable, igg involves the retention of an initial unstressed syllable and the loss of a stressed syllable.

Among the things requiring our great attention was the question “How to teach sociolinguistic variation in American English effectively?” largely identifies our profession. Our students try to use British English to reveal or conceal their personal identities, characters, and background, often wholly unconscious that they are doing so. Almost all of English learners contact with Americans involves speaking strongly governed by rules, rules that dictate not only what they say but also how they say it. The speech activities of our students and foreigners shows how social situations determine what kinds of speech can be used and how speech develops to meet social needs.

To gain a sociolinguistic knowledge of variations in American English will allow Uzbek students and others to communicate with American people and society, and also to establish a close contact within this society. It will allow English-speaking people of Uzbekistan to distinguish themselves from Americans who live a distance away and in a different social group and grade but to communicate with them nevertheless. It will serve as a linguistic fence between two peoples from differing modes of life and cultures.


  1. Halliday M. A. K., Hasan. R. Language, context, and text: Aspects of language in a social-semiotic perspective. —London: Oxford University Press, 1989.
  2. Hymes, D.H. Two types of linguistic relativity. In W. Bright Sociolinguistics. — The Hague: Mouton, 1996. — P. 114–158
  3. Kress G. Genre in a social theory of language: a reply to John Dixon. // Reid I. The Place of Genre in Learning Current Debates. — Victoria: Deakin University Press, 1987. — P. 35-45.