Cover not available
Part of
Dimensions of Iconicity
Edited by Angelika Zirker, Matthias Bauer, Olga Fischer and Christina Ljungberg
[Iconicity in Language and Literature 15] 2017
► pp. 263–286

Iconization of sociolinguistic variables

The case of archetypal female characters in classic Hollywood cinema

 | Stanford University
This study examines the interaction between linguistic variables and other semiotic resources in the visual media. It argues that many of the suprasegmental variables in classic Hollywood cinema iconically and sound-symbolically represent the major archetypes of the era, namely, the femme fatale, the dumb blonde, and the screwball heroine. It also argues that other visual, cinematic devices worked to actively develop and fortify this iconic relation. Due to this iconization process, the underlying ideologies behind the linguistic variables were more easily naturalized, enabling their wider dissemination. The evidence for this argument comes from acoustic and statistical analyses of pitch and voice quality variables produced by actresses portraying the three archetypes. The quantitative approach combined with additional qualitative analyses of relevant pitch contours and film scenes show the systematic difference between the archetypes in the usage of these variables, and demonstrate the iconic link between linguistic variables, archetypes, and film imagery.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Iconicity and iconization
  • 3.Methods
    • 3.1Selection of films and actresses
    • 3.2Selection and analysis of the data
  • 4.Results
    • 4.1Inter-speaker variation: Pitch
    • 4.2Intra-speaker variation: Pitch
    • 4.3Variation in voice quality
    • 4.4The distinctive packaging of suprasegmental variables
  • 5.Iconization and archetypes
    • 5.1Iconization and femmes fatales
    • 5.2Iconicity and dumb blondes
    • 5.3Iconicity and screwball heroines
  • 6.Discussion and conclusion
  • Acknowledgments
  • References
  • Appendix
Published online: 8 September 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ill.15.15jeo
References (48)
References
Agha, A. 2003. The social life of cultural value. Language and Communication 23: 231–273. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B. & Walker, S. 2015. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4 . Journal of Statistical Software 67 (1): 1–48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bell, A. 2011. Falling in love again and again: Marlene Dietrich and the iconization of non-native English. Journal of Sociolinguistics 15(5): 627–656. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boersma, P. & Weenink, D. 2013. Praat: Doing Phonetics by Computer. Version 5.3.51. 〈[URL]〉 (23 September 2016).Google Scholar
Cook, P. 1979. Feminism and cinema: Star signs. Screen 20(3): 80–88. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cukor, G. 1949. Adam’s Rib. Hollywood cA: Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer.Google Scholar
Donen, S. 1957. Kiss Them for Me. Hollywood CA: Twentieth Century-Fox.Google Scholar
Dyer, R. 1998. Resistance through charisma: Rita Hayworth and Gilda. In Kaplan (ed.), 91–99.Google Scholar
Eckert, P. 1991. Social polarization and the choice of linguistic variants. In New Ways of Analyzing Sound Change, P. Eckert (ed.), 213–231. San Diego CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
. 2008. Variation and the indexical field. Journal of Sociolinguistics 12: 453–476. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2010. Affect, sound symbolism, and variation. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 15(2): 70–80.Google Scholar
Gal, S. 2013. Tastes of talk: Qualia and the moral flavor of signs. Anthropological Theory 13(1–2): 31–48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Garnett, T. 1946. The Postman Always Rings Twice. Hollywood CA: Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer.Google Scholar
Gehring, W. D. 1986. Screwball Comedy: A Genre of Madcap Romance. New York NY: Greenwood.Google Scholar
Gordon, M. & Ladefoged, P. 2001. Phonation types: A cross-linguistic overview. Journal of Phonetics 29(4): 383–406. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grant, B. K. 1986. Film Genre Reader. Austin TX: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Haiman, J. 1980. The iconicity of grammar: Isomorphism and motivation. Language 56(3): 515–540. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hathaway, H. 1953. Niagara. Hollywood CA: Twentieth Century-Fox.Google Scholar
Hawks, H. 1940. His Girl Friday. Hollywood CA: Columbia Pictures.Google Scholar
. 1941. Ball of Fire. Hollywood CA: RKO Radio Pictures.Google Scholar
. 1946. The Big Sleep. Hollywood CA: Warner Bros.Google Scholar
Hitchcock, A. 1958. Vertigo. Hollywood CA: Universal Pictures.Google Scholar
Irvine, J. T. & Gal, S. 2000. Language ideology and linguistic differentiation. In Regimes of Language: Ideologies, Polities, and Identities, P. Kroskrity (ed.), 35–84. Santa Fe NM: SAR.Google Scholar
Kaplan, E. A. 1998. Introduction to 1978 edition. In Kaplan (ed.), Women in Film Noir 1998, 15–19. London: British Film Institute.Google Scholar
Klatt, D. H. & Klatt, L. C. 1990. Analysis, synthesis, and perception of voice quality variations among female and male talkers. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 87(2): 820–857. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuhn, A. & Radstone, S. 1990. The Women’s Companion to International Film. London: Virago Press.Google Scholar
Marshall, G. 1949. My Friend Irma. Hollywood CA: Paramount Pictures.Google Scholar
Maurer, D., Pathman, T. & Mondloch, C. J. 2006. The shape of boubas: Sound-shape sorrespondences in toddlers and adults. Developmental Science 9(3): 316–322. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Minnelli, V. 1957. Designing Woman. Hollywood CA: Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer.Google Scholar
Moore, E. 2004. Sociolinguistic style: A multidimensional resource for shared identity creation. The Canadian Journal of Linguistics/La Revue Canadienne de Linguistique 49(3): 375–396. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ohala, J. J. 1994. The frequency codes underlies the sound symbolic use of voice pitch. In Sound Symbolism, L. Hinton, J. Nichols & J. J. Ohala (eds), 325–347.Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Peirce, C. S. 1998. The Essential Peirce: Selected Philosophical Writings, Volume 2: 1893–1913, Peirce Edition Project (eds). Bloomington IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Pierrehumbert, J. 1979. The perception of fundamental frequency declination. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 66(2): 363–369. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Place, J. 1998. Women in film noir. In Kaplan (ed.), Women in Film Noir, 47–58. London: British Film Institute.Google Scholar
Podesva, R. J. 2011. Salience and the social meaning of declarative contours: Three case studies of gay professionals. Journal of English Linguistics 10(5): 1–32.Google Scholar
R Development Core Team. 2008. R: A Language and Enviroment for Statistical Computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. 〈[URL]〉 (23 September 2016).Google Scholar
Reis, I. 1947. The Bachelor and the Bobby-Soxer. Hollywood CA: RKO Radio Pictures.Google Scholar
Robson, M. 1954. Phffft!. Hollywood CA: Columbia Pictures.Google Scholar
Ruggles, W. 1943. Slightly Dangerous. Hollywood CA: Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer.Google Scholar
Sapir, E. 1929. A study in phonetic symbolism. Journal of Experimental Psychology 12(3): 225. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Saussure, F. 1989[1916]. Cours de linguistique générale. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Shrader, P. 1986. Notes on film noir. In Film Genre Reader, B. K. Grant (ed.), 229–242. Austin TX: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Silverstein, M. 2005. Axes of evals. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology 15(1): 6–22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stuart-Smith, J., Pryce G., Timmins, C. & Gunter, B. 2013. Television can also be a factor in language change: Evidence from an urban dialect. Language 89(3): 501–536. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vicenik, C. Phonation-measurement (Praat Script). (18 October 2016).
Wilder, B. 1944. Double Indemnity. Hollywood CA: Paramount Pictures.Google Scholar
. 1959. Some Like It Hot. Hollywood CA: United Artists.Google Scholar
Zhang, Q. 2008. Rhotacization and the ‘Beijing Smooth Operator’: The social meaning of a linguistic variable. Journal of Sociolinguistics 12(2): 2012. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Boberg, Charles
2020. Diva Diction. American Speech 95:4 ► pp. 441 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 14 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.