‘Authentic’ Israeli Hebrew

Class for

Sociolinguistics of the Mediterranean

Concepts from Giles (1973)Speech Accommodation Theory/

Communication Accommodation Theory

Your linguistic choices are based on*your affiliation with your interlocutor*your disaffiliation from your interlocutor

.

Audience Design

HAY, J., JANNEDY, S., & MENDOZA-DENTON, N. (1999). Oprah and /ay/: Lexical frequency, referee design and style. In Proceedings of the 14th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, pp.1389–1392.

How do speakers accommodate?• Speakers converge toward or diverge

from an interlocutor.• Did you know babies ‘coo’ with a lower Fo when

they’re seeing a man than when they’re seeing a woman? That’s converging.

• Did you know, if someone talks English to a French Canadian, the Canadian will often talk in a heavier French accent than s/he ‘has’ to, or even answer in French, although s/he knows English? That’s divergence. [cf, Giles & Coupland 1991]

Audience Design

It is all about who you’re talking to….

Audience Design

Concepts from Bell (1984, 2001)Your linguistic choices are based on

*Audience Design ~ affiliation/disaffiliation w/ your immediate audience

*Referee Design ~ who you want to be seen as

or ~ characteristics you wish to represent.

Referee Design

Trudgill, Peter. 1983. On Dialect: Social and Geographical Perspectives. Oxford, U.K.: Blackwell.

Referee Design

Referee Design

How does Referee Design work?• Speakers converge toward a ‘stereotype’• Did you know, many national politicians talk more Southern when

being interviewed to show that they’re ‘old boys’ (Hall-Lew). • Republican California Latinos use less accented English. (Bourhis)• Singers use more southern features in singing because it is the phonology

of Elvis, or Nashville [or whoever]. That’s converging. (

• Speakers diverge from a ‘stereotype’• Many Southern dialect speakers diverge from their native accent, not to

talk more like Northerners, but just not to be heard as ‘dumb’ or ‘racist’.

• Speakers accommodate to a stereotype of they want to sound like.

How does Referee Design work?

• Speakers converge twd a‘stereotype’• Did you know, many national Republican politicians

talk more Southern when being interviewed to show their right wing bonafides(Hall-Lew et al 2012).

• Singers use more southern features in singing because it is the phonology of Elvis, or Nashville [or whoever]. That’s referee designed convergence.

• Speakers accommodate to –who they want to sound like.–What image they want to project.

Example: George ‘W’ Bush• *Aks [only AAVE speakers, and rural southerners use]

• *Bidness• Chirren• Nucular• Wuhdn’t<wasn’t

• Is this accommodation to area (TX) or image (Good Old Boy=who me? A Yalee? Harvard Business School? Nope. I’m a simple Texan.)

Referee or Audience Design

Referee Designed divergence?• Speakers diverge from a group

‘stereotype’• Many Southern dialect speakers diverge,

– not to talk more like Northerners,

– but just not to be heard as ‘dumb’ or ‘racist’.

• Many Latinos diverge from their accent– Not to talk more like Anglos.

– But to project a specific persona.

Referee or Audience Design

Referee or Audience Design

Israeli Hebrew

Israeli Hebrew • What is the relationship among different groups

within Hebrew-speaking society?

• Who are you talking to [i.e., your audience]?

• What is prestigious [i.e., your possible referee]?

• What are the linguistic ramifications of the choices made?

Communal variation.Ashkenazi MizrahiImmigrants from Europe Local & other Arabic-sp areas

Linguistic Sprachsbund

Religious variation.Ashkenazi Mizrahi (‘Eastern’)Religious Western immigrants Religious Local

Secular Western Israelis Secular Eastern Israelis

Most of the country is not religious.Most of the distinctions between the two groups are relegated to liturgical reading.

Communal variation.Ashkenazi Mizrahi (‘Eastern’)/ ArabImmigrants from Europe Local & from Arabic-speaking

regions

SES, $, Education Linguistic Sprachsbund

Is this equivalent to the Maghrebi-Mashreqi distinction?Albeit inverted? – ‘prestigious’ dialects from further W (& N)

Is this equivalent to the N-S distinction in the US?

Stereotyped Prestige.Ashkenazi Mizrahi (‘Eastern’)/ ArabImmigrants from Europe Local & from Arabic-speaking

regions

Socioeconomic Power (Bourdieu 1991)

Language Academy Prestige**

Each dialect has its own prestige:•The ‘Newer’ dialect speakers have socioeconomic clout.• The Local dialect has Social-Psych ‘authenticity’ & Gravitas•**How important is Academy bonafides? (ex)

Linguistic Variation

Relevant Cells for SingersDegree of Religiosity

Ashkenazi Sfardi

Secular 5 5

Religious 2 5

‘Mizrahi’ vs. ‘Ashkenazi’ Vs/ Vowel/ Region

IXirik +/-

tseire/segol

akamats/patax

oxolem +/-

ushuruk/kubuts

^schwa

European iy/I ey/ o/a ow uw schwa

ay/I ey/ ow/ ow uw schwa

iy/I ay/ a iy/I uw schwa

iy/I ey/ uw Iy/i schwa

iy/I ay/ oy/o Iy/i schwa

Mizrahi I a o u

‘Mizrahi’ ‘Ashkenazi’ & Koiné/ Vowel/ Region

IXirik +/-

tseire/segol

akamats/patax

oxolem +/-

ushuruk/kubuts

^schwa

European iy/I ey/ o/a ow uw schwaMizrahi I a o u Academy=Koiné

i a o u

That is, the distinction between long & short vowels is lost, And the simplest Vowels are retained, both in Academy and Koiné use.

Mizrahi, Ashkenazi, AcademyC/ Region (resh) (het) (xaf) (ayin) (sof)

Ashkenazi R x x - s

Mizrahi r h x pharyn t

Academy r h x pharyn t

The Language Academy insisted on ‘linguistic purity’, although it wasn’t the lowest common denominator.Rules for, e.g., announcers, politicians, professors.Academy as beneficiary of linguistic insecurity.

‘Mizrahi’ vs. ‘Ashkenazi’ CsC/ Region (resh) (het) (xaf) (ayin) (sof)

Ashkenazi R x x - s

Mizrahi r h x pharyn t

Koiné R x x - t

But:Unlike with the outcome of the vowel repertoire, the lowest common denominator won…on the street.

Today’s Public SpeakersC/ Region (resh) (het) (xaf) (ayin)

Theater rr h x pharyn

Scripted News r h x pharyn

TV talk R x x -

So: The more formal the speaking style, …. the more the Academy choices dominate.Conversely: Dominance of unscripted ‘reality’TV limits the importance of Academy decisions.

Academy, Mizrahi or Koiné?

Audience or Referee Design?

Referee Design (Trudgill 1983)

Presence of ‘postvocalic ‘r’ in songs.

Cutler (2010f) & white rappers

35

Figure 1. T,d Deletion as a Measure of Identity Performance

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

-0.20-0.15-0.10-0.050.000.050.100.150.200.250.30

Informal <---Style Shifting---> Formal

Rate of t,d Deletion ------->

Kevin

EyedeaPJ

Chuck D

Bobo

Trix Ivy

Dr. Dre

Ghetto Thug

Nas

Mike

Eminem Benny

G Robot

Evidence of t/d deletion in 2 styles among US rappers

Use of [r] in different situations

song IV

Mizrahi singer (resh, het, ayin)• If they’re singing only ‘Eastern Style’

– they’ll maintain [r]

– They’ll maintain pharyngeals

• If they’re presenting their music as ‘koiné’– they’ll attempt to use both [r] and [R]

– They’ll variably neutralize pharyngeals

• While maintaining their koiné vowel system

• Interviews for the general public reveal greater convergence toward the koiné

Mizrahi Interviewee (resh, het, ayin)• Interviews for the general public

• Reveal greater convergence toward the koiné

• Except when the interview focuses on Mizrahi ID

• NB: 3 Mizrahi song writers interviewed

• IV [r]-fulness can even exceed sung percentages.

/r/ For Singers in the 90’s

• The stronger the Koiné ‘bonafides’ the clearer the contrast between IV and song [aqua line]

• (M)KI singers, who sing no ‘Mizrahi’ music– Used [r] categorically in song

– Used [R] categorically in IV

• M~KI singers, who sing both styles of music– Used [r] and [rR] variably in song

– Used [R] and [rR] variably in IV

/r/ For Singers & Politicians in the 90’s

• Interviews (etc)-mixed audience, referee designed– The more salient audience, the more convergent

– The more salient referee relationship, more MI maintenance.

ASIDE: 3 ideal foci for research into social psych motivations—

-Pop music (e.g., Trudgill…Gibson for Eng. Lg Singers)

-Politics (e.g., Hall-Lew, Hernandez-Campoy /Cutillas-Espinosa)

-Humor (e.g., Gibson 2011)

(rR) % for singers ca 1990

41

song IV

AudienceHyperaccommodation

vs.Referee Design