Social Class and Language (AQA A-Level English Language): Revision Notes

Social Class and Language

Introduction to social class and language

Social class has historically been one of the most significant factors affecting how people speak and write in the UK. The relationship between language and social class is complex and operates through multiple channels including educational background, type of work, the people we regularly interact with, how mobile we are between classes, our sense of identity and status, and the expectations of our local community.

Several landmark sociolinguistic studies conducted by researchers such as Peter Trudgill, William Labov, Lesley Milroy, and John Petyt have provided crucial evidence for understanding how class shapes linguistic behaviour in Britain and beyond.

Key theories and research

Peter Trudgill: the Norwich study

Peter Trudgill conducted influential research in Norwich, examining how social class affects pronunciation patterns, particularly focusing on the dropping of the /ng/ sound at the end of words. In standard pronunciation, words like walking retain the /ng/ sound, but in many varieties, speakers pronounce it as walkin' with just an /n/ sound.

Key findings from Trudgill's research:

• Speakers from working-class backgrounds used more non-standard forms (such as the /n/ pronunciation) in their everyday speech
• Middle-class speakers tended to use more standard forms (such as the /ng/ pronunciation)
• Women were more likely to use overt prestige forms than men, meaning they chose openly high-status pronunciations more frequently
• Men were more likely to use non-standard forms to gain covert prestige, meaning hidden status within their peer group, signalling solidarity with working-class identity

Lesley Milroy: Belfast social networks

Lesley Milroy proposed that social networks – the people someone regularly interacts with – may actually influence language more powerfully than social class alone. This reframes our understanding of class-based variation by emphasizing social connections rather than just income or occupation.

Key findings from Milroy's research:

• Dense, multiplex networks (where people have close-knit, overlapping connections typical of tight working-class communities) tended to preserve non-standard forms
• Looser networks (where people have more diverse, spread-out connections) showed greater adoption of standard or mainstream forms

William Labov: New York department store study

William Labov explored the relationship between class and rhoticity – the pronunciation of /r/ sounds. In rhotic accents, the /r/ is pronounced in words like car and floor, while in non-rhotic accents, it is not. Labov observed staff in high-end, mid-range, and budget department stores in New York.

Key findings from Labov's research:

• Workers in higher-status stores showed more frequent use of post-vocalic /r/ (pronouncing the /r/ after vowels), which was the prestige form
• Middle-class workers engaged in hypercorrection during careful speech, meaning they over-applied the prestige form, sometimes even more than upper-class speakers

What this reveals:

• Clear class stratification exists in pronunciation patterns
• Speakers engage in style-shifting, changing their pronunciation depending on the social context
• People demonstrate awareness of prestige norms and adjust their speech accordingly

John Petyt: Bradford study

John Petyt discovered strong correlations between social class and h-dropping – the omission of the /h/ sound at the beginning of words. In many regional accents, words like house may be pronounced as 'ouse.

Key findings from Petyt's research:

• Working-class speakers dropped initial /h/ sounds most frequently
• Middle-class speakers dropped /h/ sounds far less often
• Upwardly mobile speakers (people moving from working-class to middle-class positions) reduced their use of non-standard features as they changed class groups

Basil Bernstein: elaborated and restricted codes

Bernstein proposed that different social groups use distinctly different linguistic codes or ways of using language:

• Restricted code: This is context-dependent, implicit, and shorthand-like. It assumes shared knowledge and uses abbreviated expressions. Bernstein associated this with working-class groups
• Elaborated code: This is explicit, context-independent, and analytic. It provides full explanations and uses more formal structures. Bernstein associated this with middle-class groups

Linguistic features associated with social class

Accent and pronunciation features

Several pronunciation features are associated with social class differences:

• Rhoticity: Whether /r/ sounds are pronounced in certain positions (as explored by Labov)
• H-dropping: Omitting /h/ sounds at the start of words (as explored by Petyt)
• Glottal stops: Using a glottal stop (a closure in the throat) instead of /t/ sounds in words like butter or water
• Vowel distinctions: Different pronunciations of vowel sounds, such as the BATH/STRUT split where some accents pronounce bath and strut with different vowel sounds
• Levelled accents: Upwardly mobile speakers may adopt more levelled or neutralised accent features that reduce regional and class markers

Grammar features

Working-class varieties commonly include certain grammatical features that differ from standard English:

• Multiple negation: Using more than one negative in a sentence, such as I didn't do nothing
• Non-standard past tense forms: Using forms like I were or she come instead of standard I was or she came
• Absence of third-person -s: Saying she walk to school instead of she walks to school

In contrast, middle-class speakers typically use more standard grammar, particularly in formal contexts such as workplace communication or written language.

Lexis features

Vocabulary choices also reflect social class differences:

• Working-class slang and local vocabulary: Use of informal, regional words and expressions that may not be widely understood outside the community
• Occupational lexis: Specialized vocabulary related to particular types of work
• Formulaic expressions: Phrases and sayings linked to community identity and tradition

Pragmatics features

The way people use language in social interaction varies by class:

• Directness versus indirectness: Different preferences for stating requests or opinions directly or indirectly
• Politeness strategies: Varying approaches to being polite, which may involve different levels of formality
• In-group markers: Language features that signal membership in a particular social group
• Conversational styles: Different norms for turn-taking, interruption, storytelling, and other aspects of conversation, shaped by community expectations

Why social class influences language

Identity and prestige

People use language to construct and display their social identity. This happens in several ways:

• Speakers may adopt prestige forms to signal higher social status or aspiration
• Speakers may use non-standard forms to demonstrate solidarity with working-class identity and community
• Speakers shift style depending on their audience, using more standard forms in formal situations and more casual forms with friends (this is called style-shifting or accommodation)

Education

Formal schooling plays a crucial role in reinforcing class-based language differences:

• Schools teach and promote standard grammar as the correct or proper form
• Prestige pronunciation is often modelled and expected in educational settings
• Literacy norms emphasize standard written forms

Community and social networks

The nature of someone's social connections significantly impacts their language use:

Dense working-class networks promote:

• Maintenance of dialect features that may differ from standard forms
• Resistance to prestige norms imposed from outside the community

Looser networks promote:

• Mobility between different social groups
• Standardisation of language forms
• Linguistic innovation and adoption of new forms

Social mobility

When people move between social classes, they often adjust their language to match the expectations of their new social group. Petyt's research on h-dropping provides clear evidence of this phenomenon, showing that upwardly mobile speakers reduce their use of working-class linguistic features as they integrate into middle-class environments.

Evaluation and critical perspectives (AO2)

Social class is not straightforward

When evaluating research on social class and language, it is important to recognize that class does not operate in isolation:

• Class interacts with region, ethnicity, age, and gender to shape language use in complex ways
• Many contemporary linguists argue that class categories are less fixed today than they were when classic studies were conducted, particularly given changes in the economy and social structure
• Individual variation exists within class groups, so class alone cannot fully predict someone's language use

Networks may matter more than class labels

Milroy's research challenges the traditional focus on class by demonstrating that network density may predict linguistic variation more accurately than class labels. This suggests we should pay attention to who people regularly interact with, not just their occupation or income level.

Prestige is contextual, not absolute

The concept of prestige is more complex than it initially appears. Some non-standard forms carry covert prestige within certain communities, meaning they have hidden value even though they lack official or mainstream status. This complicates the assumption that standard forms are inherently superior or more desirable in all contexts.

Code theory faces criticism

Bernstein's elaborated and restricted codes theory has been criticized as:

• Overgeneralised, painting all working-class and middle-class speakers with the same brush
• Reinforcing stereotypes about working-class linguistic deficiency rather than recognizing linguistic difference
• Lacking empirical precision, with unclear definitions and measurements

Nevertheless, the theory remains useful when analyzing relationships between language and education, particularly when considering how educational institutions privilege certain language forms over others.

Exam-ready AO2 evaluation points

Remember!