Language in Late Modernity

Abstract

The study of teenagers in the classroom, and how they interact with one another and their teachers, can tell us a great deal about late-modern society. In this revealing account, Ben Rampton presents the extensive sociolinguistic research he carried out in an inner-city high school. Through his vivid analysis of classroom talk, he offers answers to some important questions: does social class still count for young people, or is it in demise? Are traditional authority relationships in schools being undermined? How is this affected by popular media culture? His study, which provides numerous transcripts and three extensive case studies, introduces a way of perceiving established ideas in sociolinguistics, such as identity, insecurity, the orderliness of classroom talk, and the experience of learning at school. In doing so, Rampton shows how work in sociolinguistics can contribute to some major debates in sociology, anthropology, cultural studies and education.

Endangering Multilingualism

“…The same assumption was crippled by Dell Hymes in his famous paper on the 'tribe' (Hymes, 1968), and more recent work has developed entirely different lines into the analysis of language and ethnic or cultural belonging (e.g. Rampton, 2006;Harris, 2006). The long lineage of such critiques can be explained by the fact that the ethnolinguistic assumption was the cornerstone of the classic Herderian language ideologies of the nation-state (Bauman & Briggs, 2003;essays in Blommaert, 1999;Kroskrity, 2000 andespecially Silverstein, 2000) and has lived a long life in a variety of versions in the context of state-managed language and culture policies throughout the 20th century, one of its most prominent versions being 'classic' multiculturalism (Vertovec, 2010; for illustrations see Blommaert & Verschueren, 1998;essays in Pavlenko & Blackledge, 2002).…”

“…These subcultural patterns of conduct were, in effect, patterns of conduct typical of a late-modern society affected by globalization flows of people, images and symbolic resources such as language (Rampton, 2006;also Blommaert, 2010). Globalization has given a profound make-over of contemporary societies and this make-over included a sociolinguistic change, both in terms of quantity (more languages being present in migration centres such as the metropolis of the west) and of quality (languages being used differently in such centres).…”

Handbook of Narrative Analysis

“…Swales (1990: 54) articulates a moderately emic position with respect to genres by maintaining that "[a] discourse community's nomenclature for genres is an important source of insight." However, the questions posed by the proponents of the historical approach to genres extend even beyond the discourse community, thus foregrounding the social practices in which the genres under analysis are embedded (e.g., Hanks 1987;Rampton 2006;Devitt 2004;. Prince (1990) aptly notes that historical genres have typically been characterized by using highly miscellaneous criteria.…”

“…Genre and genre theories have lately inspired a wide range of research from literary theory (Frow 2006;Herman 2002;Pyrhönen 2007), linguistics (Swales 1990;Ventola 2006), sociolinguistics (Rampton 2006;, anthropology (Hanks 1987), New Rhetorics (Miller 1984;Devitt 2004), sociology (Squire 1999(Squire , 2012, linguistic anthropology , media studies (Lacey 2000), political communication (Cap and Okulska 2013), and oral history (Tonkin 1992;Chamberlain and Thompson 1998). Within this gamut of disciplines and approaches, no standard theory or consensus about genre prevails.…”

The Handbook of Narrative Analysis

“…The purpose of the chapter is to present genre analysis as a relevant perspective in the study of the social aspects of narration. 1 Genre and genre theories have lately inspired a wide range of research from literary theory (Frow 2006;Herman 2002;Pyrhönen 2007), linguistics (Swales 1990;Ventola 2006), sociolinguistics (Rampton 2006;, anthropology (Hanks 1987), New Rhetorics (Miller 1984;Devitt 2004), sociology (Squire 1999(Squire , 2012, linguistic anthropology , media studies (Lacey 2000), political communication (Cap and Okulska 2013), and oral history (Tonkin 1992;Chamberlain and Thompson 1998). Within this gamut of disciplines and approaches, no standard theory or consensus about genre prevails.…”