Prompt: By taking a range of examples from the different subsystems of language, discuss how at least one particular group or individual has constructed their identity. Explain the range of attitudes that arise in response to this constructed identity.
Our linguistic repertoire, being a product of our central dogmata,
interesting word choices inherently acts as a marker in defining who we are and the social groups to which we do or do not belong. In this way, linguistic shibboleths are constructed based on our ideologies, synthesising
what exactly synthesises? the shibboleths, or our ideologies? a myriad of language palettes for specific speech communities so that those who are able to conform to these highly individualistic language conventions,
(whether it be through conscious or subconscious means
), can perform
to me, "performing" an identity sounds a bit strange but it may not to you, maybe project an identity?the associated identities.
the bracketed phrase in redmakes the sentence a little too long and hard to read As such, the specific language features that we employ enables “members of a social group [to] draw personal strength and pride from using the same language” (Clare Kramsch), thereby bolstering in-group membership and solidarity. However, opposition to these idiosyncratic language usages arise because of their ability in marking group boundaries which inherently excludes the out-group.
the exclusive value of language varieties is indeed one attitude towards varieties, but this is not the only negative attitude, also maybe talk about some positive attitudes as well?In this sense, language acts as a stage in showcasing our ascribed and avowed multiple identities to reflect the cultures and sub-cultures
you do a lot of "x and x" in your writing, and here, you don't need "sub-cultures"; maybe keep track of how many times you use the constructionwe wish to participate in, as seen with the formation of ethnolects, age-based sociolects, and political-based idiolects.
Our linguistic idiosyncrasies generally conform to our sense of ethnic identity, whereby interlocutors subconsciously or consciously employ language strategies to reflect their cultural backgrounds.
niceSubsequent to the migration boom and the conclusion of the ‘cultural cringe’ movement, Australia developed a sense of independence and hence the majority of the populace began to embrace and celebrate the linguistic diversity proposed by ethnolects.
There are a lot of unsubstianted claims in this such as "conclusion of the cultural cringe movement", I would not say something like this. Instead, hedge such a definite claim if you need to. Because of this cultural osmosis, there is now a myriad of ethnicities, as shown by the 2016 data which indicated that half of the Australian population has at least one parent who was born overseas, and that over 300 different languages are used within Australia.
This little intro of information did not contribute to the prompt enough to justify its length, always think to yourself when writing/reading "is this really helpful and relevant"?For the census example, I believe the 2016 results came out in 2017, so quote this somewhere when introducing your example(there is an sbs article about this posted mid-17 you can find)As such, each distinct speech community uses borrowings in order to perform their ethnic and multicultural identities. For instance, members in the Islamic speech community are able to utilise the borrowing “halal snack pack”,
I am not sure this is a centerpiece of the Islamic/Arabic (ethnolect?); it's a term used by a very wide range of Australians, and lacks that sense of exclusivity and cultural significance. which was also named a runner-up for Word of the Year in the Macquarie Dictionary,
again, this was announced early 17 so you can mention it for the examiners and their obsession with modern examples :^)in order to exemplify and construct their religious and ethnic identities,as PhD research candidate Josh Clothier explains that those who use ethnolects “express links with their heritage communities”.
So, I'd say instead of giving all your analysis of one example in one sentence, split it up a little so that you can really analyse it deeply for a higher score. Although the majority of the Australian populace exhibit a descriptivist attitude towards these language usages,
perhaps substantiate this a little OR elaborate on the extent and 'content' of their descriptivism just a little. Do they not care, do they appreciate them as valid expressions of cultural identity?there exists a minority opting for a more prescriptivist viewpoint to the employment of non-Standard features of ethnolects to construct one’s identity. For instance, the newly proposed language proficiency test requires immigrants to attain “university-level” (Tony Burke) Standard Australian English – this diminishes the diversity of ethnolects, thereby lessening the frequency of non-Standard language in society. In so doing
doing so?, members who share a mutual L2
Hopefully EL isn't like Biology where using 'non-defined' abbreviations are penalised are restricted in their ability to exemplify and perform their multicultural identities through code-mixing. Although ethnolects enable those who share an ethnic identity to form in-group solidarity, dichotomous attitudes towards this non-Standard language usage exist within Australia.
In addition, the conscious indexation of one’s identity can be readily achieved through their choices of language, thereby marking the social groups to which we belong. In regards to age-based sociolects, teenagers can manipulate their linguistic choices to construct a distinctive variety of language that asserts their youthful, amiable, and rebellious identity. For instance, the notable ‘Spongemock’ meme, in which an imperative sentence given by an authority is followed by a mockery of the aforementioned statement by a noncompliant listener through the use of non-Standard orthography, enables teenagers to gain covert prestige by utilising a lexicon distinct from the Standard, thus allowing them to “keep in with their peers” (Philippa Law).
I'd say the quote is more pertinent to the more lexical(slang) dimensions of teenspeak, not sure though One such meme ridicules the recent ‘no’ campaign advertisement against marriage equality by writing “iT’s oK To VoTE nO”. With this non-Standard use of capitalisation, youths promote in-group solidarity between teenagers via the indexation of a progressive political identity, whilst excluding those of a conservative mindset.
This explanation has to do with the specific meme, but it might also imply progressive/conservative politics is inherent to the construction, which it is not. This allows for inclusivity amongst teenagers to lower social distance and enhances the positive face needs of other teenagers with similar ideologies, whilst acting as a “barbed wire for older generations” (John Sutherland) who are potentially unable to decipher the semantic implications of these non-Standard usages or attain opposing views. As such, those who form the out-group garner resentment towards these distinctive sociolects.
I'm sure you could add in a little example for this by finding a comment by an older person conveying their dislikeThrough the use of style, teenagers are able to reflect their rebellious identity and elicit a sense of inclusiveness among other teens by promoting social intimacy and in-group solidarity.
If you wanted, I feel another dimension of the teen sociolect could also be discussed well here,(if you have time) so as to not have all your analysis focused on the political memeThrough the use of inclusive and exclusive language choices within the realm of politics, political parties are able to signal their associations to specific societal communities or views, thereby manipulating and redesigning their multiple identities to advance their political agendas. Within the marriage equality debate, the dichotomy between inclusivity and exclusivity is displayed, particularly in regards to the strategic lexical choices which aim to divide potential voters based on their ideologies. For instance, the use of the noun phrase “marriage equality” by the Australian Labor Party attains euphemistic properties
good pickup, and subsequent analysis within the cultural context. Maybe also include the key term 'social purpose'? In tandem with this, discuss the Australian value of egalitarianism and its relation to how identity was constructed with this noun phrase? and ''? as it aims to highlight the equal nature between homosexual and heterosexual couples, thereby reinforcing the ALP’s mantra of equality. In this way, the left-wing political party can construct an identity reflecting their progressive ideologies, hence appealing to minority voters, specifically from the LGBTIQ+ community. In comparison, the noun phrase
nice metalanguage“gay marriage”, which is used by the Australian Conservatives, implies that this love is different; that it is connoted with abnormality. Here, prominent orators including Senator Cory Bernardi, synthesise an ‘us-and-them’ rhetoric to form a sense of othering, thereby positioning members of the LGBTIQ+ community in the out-group, whilst appealing to conservative voters through this establishment of a traditionalist political identity.
Give a quote from him here.As a result of this division, negative attitudes arise towards the language usages from each side of the debate. For instance, ‘yes’ voters were swift to lambaste the Australian Christian Lobby when they likened the children of same-sex couples to ‘the stolen generation’, with Senator Penny Wong responding, “I object, as do every person who cares about children”.
This is a good example but a little more analysis is needed; this would perhaps pertain to the deeply rooted meaning that "stolen generation" has to Australians, and how, as a result, a disrespectful identity was projected? In this sense, our political views we wish to express through our lexicon aid us in creating our multiple identities, in turn garnering opposition from those who disagree.
The language we use acts as a stage in designing and performing our avowed and ascribed multiple identities in order to showcase the cultures and sub-cultures we wish to participate in. However, the construction and exhibition of our group identities inadvertently forms a barrier for the out-group, hence harvesting resentment and disagreement within wider society.
This is a good place to finish up with a quote instead of leaving it on a final note concerning out-groups, which are not the most pertinent conclusion to the prompt-There are other negative attitudes that you could have discussed re. prescriptivism, such as their belief some varieties of language are 'incorrect', 'wrong', and 'improper'. There are such attitudes towards teenspeak(sometimes), and the changes to migrant language standards are another good topic to discuss this on. /color]
-"different subsystems of language"(prompt) Perhaps expand by discussing phonology for example?
I'd say a (high) 12/15, as some key ideas were expressed really well, but quotes chosen could have been more "worth using/remembering". For example," ethnolects “express links with their heritage communities” " contributes to the essay as much as it would without the name/quotation marks. Imo, quotes that express an idea in a heightened/sophisticated way are greater 'bang for your buck'.
Analysis as well could be delved into more, as that's one of the key requirements of a really good essay; however, overall, there's definitely effort that has been put into the essay which shows through !