Attitudes Toward Tbilisi- and Mingrelian-Accented Georgian Among Georgian Youth

Abstract

Two matched-guise studies examined language attitudes among Georgian youth toward two varieties of spoken Georgian: Tbilisi-accented Georgian (standard variety) and Mingrelian-accented Georgian (nonstandard variety). Study 1, conducted in Tbilisi, found that listeners (N = 106) attributed more status and solidarity to the standard variety, regardless of self-reported regional identity (Tbilisieli, Mingrelian, other). Study 2, conducted in Samegrelo, found that self-identified Mingrelians (N = 96) attributed more status and solidarity to the standard variety, regardless of language use at home. Together, these findings suggest that Mingrelians may be undergoing a generational shift in their language attitudes in favor of linguistic homogenization.

Figuring Out Who’s Who: The Role of Social Categorization in the Language Attitudes Process

“…Because the order of presentation of the two guises was not counterbalanced, we did not control for possible order effects. However, we want to emphasize that in a previous study (Dragojevic et al, 2015), which used these same guises in conjunction with Tbilisi- and Mingrelian-accented guises produced by two other speakers (see Note 4), the same evaluative pattern emerged even though listeners heard some of the Tbilisi-accented guises before and some after the corresponding Mingrelian-accented guises. Indeed, across the three speakers, the Tbilisi-accented guises were always rated more favorably than the Mingrelian-accented guises.…”

“…Second, and related, results of the present study are based on listeners’ ratings of voice stimuli produced by only a single speaker. In a previous study, Dragojevic at al. (2015) used these same voice stimuli in conjunction with corresponding Tbilisi- and Mingrelian-accented voice stimuli produced by two other speakers.…”

“…First, the vast majority of Georgian respondents (79.9%) in the present study correctly categorized the guise as "Mingrelian" (see Results section), which suggests that they perceived it as authentic. Second, in a previous study that used these same recordings, Dragojevic et al (2015) found that Tbiliseli and Mingrelian informants both evaluated Misha's Mingrelian-accented guise in a similar (negative) manner as Mingrelian-accented guises produced by two other speakers, one of whom naturally speaks Georgian with a Mingrelian accent. That Misha's contrived Mingrelian accent was evaluated in a similar manner as the Mingrelian accent of a speaker who habitually uses that variety lends further credence to the authenticity of Misha's Mingrelian accent guise.…”

“…During a brief pause after each recording, participants were asked to rate each speaker on six personality traits adapted from past research (Dragojevic et al, 2015)three relating to status (intelligent, educated, and cultured) and three relating to solidarity (pleasant, attractive, amusing)-using a 6-point scale (1 = very little, 6 = very much), as well as indicate where they thought each speaker was from via an openended question (i.e., Which region or town in Georgia do you think that this person comes from?). Having rated all the voices, participants indicated their ethnicity via an open-ended question.…”

“…Past research suggests that the Mingrelian accent is a stigmatized variety, associated with predominantly negative stereotypes, whereas the Tbilisi accent is a prestige variety, associated with predominantly positive stereotypes. For example, in a recent study, Dragojevic, Berglund, and Blauvelt (2015) found that Tbiliseli and Mingrelian informants both rated Tbilisi-accented speakers more favorably on status and solidarity traits than Mingrelian-accented speakers. Expecting to replicate these results in the present study, we predicted that:…”