Journal review 1

[Journal Review 1]

1. Title     : Register and Style as Distinct and ‘Functional’ Varieties of Language.

2. Author :  Obins Nuhu Isaac, College of Agricultural Technology, Samaru Kataf, Kaduna State.

3. Journal: Research on Humanities and Social Sciences.

4. Publication: Vol.4, No.14, 2014.

5. Abstract:
    This paper assesses the relationship between register and style, the prominent differences between them and how both are responsible for sociolinguistic context. It further argues that register and style in relation to context are ‘functional’ manifestations or varieties of a given language since they usually mark the changes that occur in language as a result of immediate sociolinguistic ‘necessities’ over and above the traditional dialectal and social varieties. Language users are usually more conscious of their ‘immediate’ linguistic environments (contexts) in terms of communication goals than they usually are of their ‘remote’ regional or social background and this informs a selection of ‘appropriate’ linguistic items to adjust as it were to those language situations or demands.

6. Goals:
    This paper assesses the relationship between register and style, the prominent differences between them and how both are responsible for sociolinguistic context.

7. Problem:
    There are different manifestations of language as a phenomenon or as a “specific”, to use Ballard’s term.Since register and style (situated in context) operate within the same socio-cultural domain, it becomes imperative to distinguish between the two.

8. Theories:

    a. Varieties of Language

        The term ‘variety’ according to Hudson can be applied to the different manifestations of language as a phenomenon or as a “specific”, to use Ballard’s term. Hudson defines a variety of language as “a set of linguistic items with similar social distribution” (24). This definition, as he notes, merges the ‘specific forms’ like English and French with their ‘manifestations’ thus giving them equal status. This obvious ‘merger’ is no doubt responsible for his claim that varieties do not exist after all since there are no clear ways to delimit them. According to him, “all that exists [sic] are people and items, and people may be more or less similar to one another in the items they have in their language” (40).

      b. Register

          Register is the collective term for various situational and functional aspects of a text. In other words, register is the sum of a text’s subject matter, its purpose, its mode (essentially, spoken or written), its genre (the type of text it is) and the relationship that exists between its participants (namely, the writer or speaker and the audience). These factors all work together to influence the choices language users make when constructing discourse (181).

     c. Style
       
         Style as a linguistic concept is very flexible and dynamic undoubtedly due to its “potential for diverse application” (Azuike, 77). Thus, it has been a subject of different ascriptions and characterizations. Azuike provides six broad theoretical sub-headings under which the concept has been characterized namely: “(1) a deviation from a norm; (2) a manifestation of the individual; (3) content and/or form; (4) choice between alternative ways of expressing the same idea; (5) product of context; (6) and simply as good or beautiful writing” (111). Style as product of context is the sub-categorization that is closely knitted to register and therefore receives the emphasis in this paper. Since register and style (situated in context) operate within the same socio-cultural domain, it becomesimperative to distinguish between the two. Hudson passively suggests that “‘style’ is sometimes used instead of[Halliday’s] ‘tenor’ – an aspect of register which “depends on the relations between participants” (49). He however advises against such use since, according to him, “‘style’ is used in a lay sense to mean roughly the same as ‘register’” (49). Hudson in one sense makes style a ‘subset’ of register by characterizing it as ‘tenor’ and another sense makes the two of equal status. Register and style are however distinct in practical applications in sociolinguistic contexts.

     d. The Formality Scale

         Since register influences manner of expression, a speaker or writer usually switches between formal and informal speech forms in order to ‘adapt’ to different linguistic contexts basically for the purpose of linguistic appropriateness. Yule provides a further insight into this linguistic flexibility:
Formal style is when we pay more careful attention to how we’re speaking and informal style is when we pay less attention. They are sometimes described as ‘careful style’ and ‘casual style’. A change from one to the other by an individual is called style-shifting (208). Yule however limits his assessment of formality to ‘speaking’ even though it is also applicable in writing and this is no doubt informed by his characterization of style as “speech style”. He further provides two broad categories to include ‘careful’ and ‘casual’ which Joos elaborated into five styles or manners of expression in spoken English – frozen, formal, consultative, casual and intimate.
1. Frozen – an extremely formal, printed, unchanging language such as biblical quotations. It often contains archaisms.
2. Formal – a one-way participation which usually involves no interruptions. It also involves the use of technical vocabulary or jargon. “Fuzzy semantics” or exact definitions are important. Strangers usually introduce themselves in this context.
3. Consultative – a two-way participation in which background information is provided. A prior knowledge is not usually assumed. “Back-channel behaviour” such as “uh huh”, “I see” etc. is common and interruptions are allowed.
4. Casual – a colloquial style used among friends and acquaintances. Provision of background information is not necessary and ellipsis (contractions) and slang are common. Interruptions are also a common feature of the casual style.
5. Intimate – an extremely informal and non-public communication style in which intonation says more than words or grammar. It also has a private vocabulary. Source: Wikipedia/register (sociolinguistics). Some of the distinguishing features of formal and informal styles in English are summarized below:
Formal:
- More of complex, longer sentences
- Avoidance of contractions and abbreviations
- Use of passive voice
- More ‘educated’ and Latinate words with a low frequency vocabulary
- Avoidance of the imperative form
- Use of single-word verbs.

Informal:
- Short words and sentences
- Contractions and abbreviations
- Colloquial language, Anglo Saxon or Germanic words - Phrasal verbs ( multi-word or multi-part verbs)
- May use the imperative form.

9. Methods:
    The author looks at variety from a perspective of ‘form’ in her categorization of English “as a specific language” (8). English in her view is “specific” when compared to the French language or the German language. But, as she observes, studying English only as a specific form of language is not holistic since it (English) “can take different forms” or varieties (8). She adds that …the English spoken in America varies in several ways from the English spoken in Britain. And within Britain, there are many regional variations in the pronunciation, vocabulary and grammar of English, just as there are many variations in America (8). The author not only identifies the two dominant manifestations of English, which are, the British and the American, but also recognizes other ‘many regional variations’ in both places. The author notes, merges the ‘specific forms’ like English and French with their ‘manifestations’ thus giving them equal status. This obvious ‘merger’ is no doubt responsible for his claim that varieties do not exist after all since there are no clear ways to delimit them . Then the last is the author characterizes dialect as “a subordinate variety of a language”.

10. Finding:
      From this array of ‘stylistic’ characterizations, it is clear that register and style do not have the same application. Register often determines the appropriate speech style that is applicable in any given speech event. Style is a manner of expressing both the familiar and the unfamiliar linguistic items by a language user in discourse. As Azuike puts it, “style is deemed to be conditioned by the sociocultural factors which influence the making of an utterance, whether written or spoken” (119). The “sociocultural factors” are what constitute register or sociolinguistic context.
There is another but subtle distinction between these two categories. While register is generally and sometimes strictly evaluated in terms of vocabulary, style can be assessed at the levels of vocabulary, syntax and pronunciation.

11. Conclusion :
       Context greatly contributes to language variation in sociolinguistics in much the same way as it contributes to meaning in pragmatics. Register and style are the major constituents of sociolinguistic context and determine how language users employ the linguistic items at their disposal, whether in consideration of the subject matter, the constitution of the audience, the means of presentation or the manner of expression. These sociolinguistic varieties of language do not however overlap in terms of definition. Different styles or registers are therefore considered ‘functional’ varieties of language since they are informed by sociolinguistic ‘necessities’.