Representing inequality in language
Words as social categorizers of experience
Using large, computerized corpora, this study aims to provide lexico-grammatical evidence for patterns or constructions in language pertaining to domains such as “power”, “dominance”, “inequality” or “status”. The study will specifically focus on the verbal uses of brook and countenance, lemmas that are pivotal to the domains in question and whose semantic and pragmatic meanings will be associated with discourses of inequality and supremacy, subordination and authorization. The verbal lemmas will turn out less as markers of energy transfer (as might be expected from the prototypical constructional meaning of transitive clauses in which they ordinarily occur) than as markers of perceived social implications, with a clear focus on the constructing and representational nature of their uses. In addition to offering a contribution to language-dependent “dominance”, “inequality”, “power”, “status” research, this paper will also demonstrate the indispensable use of corpus-linguistic methods within a predominantly functional framework (drawing its main inspirations from current research in neo-Firthian linguistics, Frame Semantics and Cognitive Linguistics in particular).
References (41)
References
Atkins, Sue, Charles J. Fillmore, and Christopher R. Johnson. 2003. “Lexicographic Relevance: Selecting Information from Corpus Evidence.” International Journal of Lexicography16(3): 251–280. 

Bartlett, Tom. 2012. Analysing Power in Language. A Practical Guide. London and New York: Routledge.
Becker, Howard S. (ed). 1964. The Other Side: Perspectives on Deviance. New York: The Free Press.
Cameron, Deborah. 2001. Working with Spoken Discourse. London: Sage.
Cole, David R., and Linda J. Graham (eds). 2012. The Power in/of Language. Oxford:
Wiley-Blackwell. 

Clear, Jeremy. 1993. “From Firth Principles: Computational Tools for the Study of Collocation.” In Text and Technology. In Honour of John Sinclair, ed. by Mona Baker, Gill Francis, and Elena Tognini-Bonelli, 271–292. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Conley, John M., and William M. O’Barr. 1998. Just Words. Law, Language, and Power. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Coupland, Nikolas. 2001. “Age in Social and Sociolinguistic Theory.” In Sociolinguistics and Social Theory, ed. by Nikolas Coupland, Srikant Sarangi and Chistopher N. Candlin, 185–211. Harlow, UK: Longman.
Facchinetti, Roberta (ed). 2012. English Dictionaries as Cultural Mines. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Fairclough, Norman, and Ruth Wodak. 1997. “Critical Discourse Analysis.” In Discourse as Social Interaction. Discourse Studies, vol. 2, ed. by Teun van Dijk, 258–284. Thousand Oaks, CA, London and New Delhi: Sage.
Fiedler, Klaus, and Peter Freytag. 2009. “Attribution Theories Wired into Linguistic Categories.” In Language and Social Cognition. Expression of the Social Mind, ed. by Hanna Pishwa, 349–369. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Fillmore, Charles J. 1982. “Frame Semantics.” In Linguistics in the Morning Calm, ed. by The Linguistic Society of Korea, 111–137. Seoul: Hanshin Publishing.
Firth, John Rupert. 1957. “The Technique of Semantics.” In Papers in Linguistics 1934–1951, John Rupert Firth, 7–33. London: Oxford University Press.
Foucault, Michel. 1966. Les mots et les choses. Une archéologie des sciences humaines. Paris:
Gallimard.
Foucault, Michel. 1969. L’archéologie du savoir. Paris: Gallimard.
Foucault, Michel. 1971. L’ordre du discours. Paris: Gallimard.
Goffman, Erving. 1961. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Anchor Books.
Goldberg, Adele E. 2011. “Meaning Arises from Words, Context, and Phrasal Constructions.” Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik59(4): 317–329. 

Gumperz, John J. 1986. “Interactional Sociolinguistics in the Study of Schooling.” In The Social Construction of Literacy, ed. by Jenny Cook-Gumperz, 45–68. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Halliday, Michael Alexander Kirkwood. 2004. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. 2nd ed.London: Arnold.
Jaworski, Adam, and Nikolas Coupland. 2006. “Introduction. Perspectives on Discourse Analysis.” In The Discourse Reader, ed. by Adam Jaworski, and Nikolas Coupland, 1–37. London: Routledge.
Labov, William. 1966. The Social Stratification of English in New York City. Washington: Center for Applied Linguistics.
Lindquist, Hans. 2009. Corpus Linguistics and the Description of English. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Louw, Bill. 1993. “Irony in the Text or Insincerity in the Writer? – The Diagnostic Potential of Semantic Prosodies.” In Text and Technology. In Honour of John Sinclair, ed. by Mona Baker, Gill Francis, and Elena Tognini-Bonelli, 157–176. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Mead, George Herbert. 1934. Mind, Self and Society: From the Standpoint of a Social Behaviorist. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Poynton, Cate. 1989. Language and Gender: Making the Difference. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Reddy, Michael J. 1979. “The Conduit Metaphor – A Case of Frame Conflict in Our Language about Language.” In Metaphor and Thought, ed. by A. Ortony, 284–324. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Simpson, Paul, and Andrea Mayr. 2010. Language and Power: A Resourcebook for Students. London and New York: Routledge.
Sinclair, John. 1996a. “The Empty Lexicon.” International Journal of Corpus Linguistics1(1): 99–119. 

Sinclair, John. 1996b. “The Search for Units of Meaning.” TextusIX: 75–106.
Stewart, Dominic. 2010. Semantic Prosody: A Critical Evaluation. London and New York: Routledge.
Stubbs, Michael. 2001. Words and Phrases. Corpus Studies of Lexical Semantics. Oxford and Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Talmy, Leonard. 1988. “Force Dynamics in Language and Cognition.” Cognitive Science12: 49–100. 

Williams, Raymond. 1976. Keywords. A Vocabulary of Culture and Society. London: Fontana.
Wilson, Steven R. 2002. Seeking and Resisting Compliance: Why People Say What They Do When Trying to Influence Others. Thousand Oaks, CA, London and New Delhi: Sage.
Wodak, Ruth. 2005. “Sprache und Politik – Sprache in der Politik – Sprache/Sprechen über (Sprache in/über) Politik: Möglichkeiten und Grenzen diskursanalytischer Vorgehensweisen.” Aptum2: 135–153.
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
Schulze, Rainer
2015.
The Significance of ‘the Social’ in Contemporary Linguistics. In
The Exercise of Power in Communication,
► pp. 17 ff.

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 15 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.