Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-grxwn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-06T06:17:47.706Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

22 - Sociophonetics

from Section V - Applications of Phonetics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 November 2021

By
Katie Drager  and
Thomas Kettig
Edited by
Rachael-Anne Knight  and
Jane Setter
Rachael-Anne Knight
Affiliation:
City, University of London
Jane Setter
Affiliation:
University of Reading
Get access

Summary

This chapter provides an overview of research questions and methods found in sociophonetic work. We begin by providing a historical overview of the field, and then describe commonly used methods alongside the research questions they are used to explore. For those interested in teaching a course on sociophonetics, we describe how we approach teaching the course. Finally, we identify which underused methods we anticipate seeing used more widely in the coming years.

Keywords

sociophoneticssociolinguisticsphoneticsvariationsocial categoriesproductionperceptionmethodsexperiments
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Phonetics , pp. 551 - 577
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

22.7 References

Adank, P. M., Smits, R. & van Hout, R. (2004). A comparison of vowel normalization procedures for language variation research. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 116(5), 3099–107. doi.org/10.1121/1.1795335.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ash, S. (1992). Controlling for dialect in contextless vowel identification: Revisiting the Peterson-Barney experiment. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 91(4), 2386. doi.org/10.1121/1.403331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Babel, M. (2010). Dialect divergence and convergence in New Zealand English. Language in Society, 39(4), 437–56. doi.org/10.1017/S0047404510000400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Babel, M. (2012). Evidence for phonetic and social selectivity in spontaneous phonetic imitation. Journal of Phonetics, 40(1), 177–89. doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2011.09.001.Google Scholar
Baker, A., Archangeli, D. & Mielke, J. (2011). Variability in American English s-retraction suggests a solution to the actuation problem. Language Variation and Change, 23(3), 347–74. doi.org/10.1017/S0954394511000135.Google Scholar
Baranowski, M. (2013). Sociophonetics. In Bayley, R., Cameron, R. & Lucas, C., eds., Oxford Handbook of Sociolinguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 403–24.Google Scholar
Beckner, C., Rácz, P., Hay, J., Brandstetter, J. & Bartneck, C. (2016). Participants conform to humans but not to humanoid robots in an English past tense formation task. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 35(2), 158–79. doi.org/10.1177/0261927X15584682.Google Scholar
Blackwood Ximenes, A., Shaw, J. A. & Carignan, C. (2017). A comparison of acoustic and articulatory methods for analyzing vowel differences across dialects: Data from American and Australian English. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 142(1), 363–77. doi.org/10.1121/1.4991346.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boersma, P. & Weenink, D. (2017). Praat: Doing Phonetics by Computer [computer program]. Version 6.0.33, www.praat.org/.Google Scholar
Bowie, D. (2000). Perception and production in processes of merger. Proceedings of the Deseret Language and Linguistic Society Symposium, 26(1), 137–43. scholarsarchive.byu.edu/dlls/vol26/iss1/18.Google Scholar
Campbell-Kibler, K. (2007). Accent, (ING), and the social logic of listener perceptions. American Speech, 82(1), 32–64. doi.org/10.1215/00031283–2007-002.Google Scholar
Campbell-Kibler, K. (2011). Intersecting variables and perceived sexual orientation in men. American Speech, 86(1), 52–68. doi.org/10.1215/00031283–1277510.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Clark, L. (2009). Variation, Change and the Usage-Based Approach. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.Google Scholar
Clark, L. (2014). Phonological repetition effects in natural conversation: Evidence from TH-fronting in Fife. In Lawson, R., ed., Sociolinguistics in Scotland. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 153–76.Google Scholar
Clopper, C. G., Pierrehumbert, J. B. & Tamati, T. N. (2010). Lexical neighborhoods and phonological confusability in cross-dialect word recognition in noise. Laboratory Phonology, 1(1), 65–92. doi.org/10.1515/labphon.2010.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corneau, C. (2000). An EPG study of palatalization in French: cross-dialect and inter-subject variation. Language Variation and Change, 12(1), 25–49.Google Scholar
Costa, P. & Mattingly, I. G. (1981). Production and perception of phonetic contrast during phonetic change. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 69, 191–6. doi.org/10.1121/1.386167.Google Scholar
Coupland, N. (1980). Style-shifting in a Cardiff work-setting. Language in Society, 9(1), 1–12. doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500007752.Google Scholar
Coupland, N. (2014). Social context, style, and identity in sociolinguistics. In Holmes, J. & Hazen, K., eds., Research Methods in Sociolinguistics: A Practical Guide. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 290–303.Google Scholar
De Decker, P. (2010). Sounds shifty: Gender and age differences in perceptual categorization during a phonetic change in progress. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics, 15(2), 50–60.Google Scholar
De Decker, P. & Mackenzie, S. (2017). Tracking the phonological status of /l/ in Newfoundland English: Experiments in articulation and acoustics. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 142(350), 350–62. doi.org/10.1121/1.4991349.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
De Decker, P. & Nycz, J. (2012). Are tense [æ]s really tense? The mapping between articulation and acoustics. Lingua, 122(7), 810–21. doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2012.01.003.Google Scholar
De Decker, P. & Nycz, J. (2013). The technology of conducting sociolinguistic interviews. In Mallinson, C., Childs, B. & Van Herk, G., eds., Data Collection in Sociolinguistics. New York: Routledge, pp. 118–26.Google Scholar
DiPaolo, M. & Yaeger-Dror, M. (2011). Sociophonetics: A Student’s Guide. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
D’Onofrio, A. (2015). Persona-based information shapes linguistic perception: Valley girls and California vowels. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 19(2), 241–56. doi.org/10.1111/josl.12115.Google Scholar
D’Onofrio, A. (2016). Social Meaning in Linguistic Perception. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.Google Scholar
Docherty, G., Langstrof, C. & Foulkes, P. (2013). Listener evaluation of sociophonetic variability: Probing constraints and capabilities. Linguistics, 51(2), 355–80. doi.org/10.1515/ling-2013–0014.Google Scholar
Docherty, G., Foulkes, P., Gonzalez, S. & Mitchell, N. (2018). Missed connections at the junction of sociolinguistics and speech processing. Topics in Cognitive Science, 10(4), 759–74. doi.org/10.1111/tops.12375.Google Scholar
Drager, K. (2010). Sensitivity to grammatical and sociophonetic variability in perception. Laboratory Phonology, 1(1), 93–120. doi.org/10.1515/labphon.2010.006.Google Scholar
Drager, K. (2011). Speaker age and vowel perception. Language and Speech, 54(1), 99–121. doi.org/10.1177/0023830910388017.Google Scholar
Drager, K. (2018). Experimental Research Methods in Sociolinguistics. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Drager, K., Hay, J. & Walker, A. (2010). Pronounced rivalries: Attitudes and speech perception. Te Reo, 53, 27–53.Google Scholar
Eckert, P. (2000). Linguistic Variation as Social Practice. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Eckert, P. (2008). Variation and the indexical field. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 12(4), 453–76. doi.org/10.1111/j.1467–9841.2008.00374.x.Google Scholar
Eckert, P. (2012). Three waves of variation study: The emergence of meaning in the study of sociolinguistic variation. Annual Review of Anthropology, 41, 87–100. doi.org/10.1146/annurev-anthro-092611–145828.Google Scholar
Eckert, P. & Labov, W. (2017). Phonetics, phonology and social meaning. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 21(4), 467–96. doi.org/10.1111/josl.12244.Google Scholar
Floccia, C., Goslin, J., Girard, F. & Konopcznski, G. (2006). Does a regional accent perturb speech processing? Journal of Experimental Psychology, 32(5), 1276–93. doi.org/10.1037/0096–1523.32.5.1276.Google Scholar
Foulkes, P. & Docherty, G. (2006). The social life of phonetics and phonology. Journal of Phonetics, 34(4), 409–38. doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2005.08.002.Google Scholar
Foulkes, P., Docherty, G. & Watt, D. (1999). Tracking the emergence of sociophonetic variation. In Proceedings of the International Congress of the Phonetic Sciences 99, San Francisco, pp. 1625–8.Google Scholar
Foulkes, P., Scobbie, J. M. & Watt, D. J. L. (2010). Sociophonetics. In Hardcastle, W., Laver, J. & Gibbon, F., eds., Handbook of Phonetic Sciences, 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 703–54.Google Scholar
Fridland, V. & Kendall, T. (2012). Exploring the relationship between production and perception in the mid front vowels of US English. Lingua, 122(7), 779–93. doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2011.12.007.Google Scholar
German, J. S., Carlson, K & Pierrehumbert, J. B. (2013). Reassignment of consonant allophones in rapid dialect acquisition. Journal of Phonetics, 41(3/4), 228–48. doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2013.03.001.Google Scholar
Gooskens, C., Heeringa, W. & Beijering, K. (2008). Phonetic and lexical predictors of intelligibility. International Journal of Humanities and Arts Computing, 2(1–2), 63–81. doi.org/10.3366/E1753854809000317.Google Scholar
Gordon, E., Campbell, L., Hay, J., Maclagan, M., Sudbury, A. & Trudgill, P. (2004). New Zealand English: Its Origins and Evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gratton, C. (2017). Non-binary identity construction and intraspeaker variation. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, Austin, TX, 7 January.Google Scholar
Guy, G. R. (1991). Contextual conditioning in variable lexical phonology. Language Variation and Change, 3(2), 223–39. doi.org/10.1017/S0954394500000533.Google Scholar
Hall-Lew, L. (2013). ‘Flip-flop’ and mergers-in-progress. English Language and Linguistics, 17(2), 359–90. doi.org/10.1017/S1360674313000063.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall-Lew, L. & Fix, S. (2012). Perceptual coding reliability of (L)-vocalization in casual speech data. Lingua, 122(7), 794–809. doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2011.12.005.Google Scholar
Hall-Lew, L. & Plichta, B. (2013). Technological challenges in sociolinguistic data collection. In Mallinson, C., Childs, B. & Van Herk, G., eds., Data Collection in Sociolinguistics. New York: Routledge, pp. 127–30.Google Scholar
Hardeman Guthrie, K. (2016). Gender and second language style: American learner perceptions of Mandarin sajiao. Asia Pacific Language Variation, 2(2), 157–87. doi.org/10.1075/aplv.2.2.03har.Google Scholar
Harrington, J., Palethorpe, S. & Watson, C. (2000). Monophthongal vowel changes in Received Pronunciation: An acoustic analysis of the Queen’s Christmas broadcasts. Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 30(1/2), 63–78. doi.org/10.1017/S0025100300006666.Google Scholar
Hay, J. & Drager, K. (2007). Sociophonetics. Annual Review of Anthropology, 36, 89–103. doi.org/10.1146/annurev.anthro.34.081804.120633.Google Scholar
Hay, J. & Drager, K. (2010). Stuffed toys and speech perception. Linguistics, 48(4), 865–92. doi.org/10.1515/ling.2010.027.Google Scholar
Hay, J. & Foulkes, P. (2016). The evolution of medial /t/ over real and remembered time. Language, 92(2), 298–330. doi.org/10.1353/lan.2016.0036.Google Scholar
Hay, J., Warren, P. & Drager, K. (2006). Factors influencing speech perception in the context of a merger-in-progress. Journal of Phonetics, 34(4), 458–84. doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2005.10.001.Google Scholar
Hildebrandt, K. A., Jany, C. & Silva, W. (2017). Introduction: Documenting variation in endangered languages. Language Documentation & Conservation, 13, 1–5. hdl.handle.net/10125/24746.Google Scholar
Holliday, N. (2016). Identity performance among Black/biracial men through intonation: Examining pitch accent and peak delay. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics, 22(2), 71–80.Google Scholar
Holliday, N. (2017). ‘My presiden(t) and firs(t) lady were Black’: Style, context, and coronal stop deletion in the speech of Barack and Michelle Obama. American Speech, 92(4), 459–86. doi.org/10.1215/00031283–6903954.Google Scholar
Holmquist, J. C. (1985). Social correlates of a linguistic variable: A study in a Spanish village. Language in Society, 14(2), 192–203. doi.org/10.1017/S004740450001112X.Google Scholar
Huettig, F., Rommers, J. & Meyer, A. S. (2011). Using the visual world paradigm to study language processing: A review and critical evaluation. Acta Psychologica, 137(2), 151–71. doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.11.003.Google Scholar
Jacewicz, E. & Fox, R. A. (2012). The effects of cross-generational and cross-dialectal variation on vowel identification and classification. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 131(2), 1413–33. doi.org/10.1121/1.3676603.Google Scholar
Janson, T. (1983). Sound change in perception and production. Language, 59(1), 18–34. doi.org/10.2307/414059.Google Scholar
Janson, T. & Schulman, R. (1983). Non-distinctive features and their use. Journal of Linguistics, 19(2), 321–36. doi.org/10.1017/S0022226700007763.Google Scholar
Kendall, T. (2013). Speech Rate, Pause, and Sociolinguistic Variation: Studies in Corpus Sociophonetics. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kettig, T. & Winter, B. (2017). Producing and perceiving the Canadian Vowel Shift: Evidence from a Montreal community. Language Variation and Change, 29(1), 79–100. doi.org/10.1017/S0954394517000023.Google Scholar
Khattab, G. (2013). Phonetic convergence and divergence strategies in English–Arabic bilingual children. Linguistics, 51(2), 439–72. doi.org/10.1515/ling-2013–0017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kiesling, S. F. (2009). Style as stance: Stance as the explanation for patterns of sociolinguistic variation. In Jaffe, A., ed., Stance: Sociolinguistic Perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 171–94.Google Scholar
Kim, J. & Drager, K. (2017). Sociophonetic realizations guide subsequent lexical access. In Proceedings of INTERSPEECH 2017, pp. 621–25. doi.org/10.21437/INTERSPEECH.2017–1742.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, J. & Drager, K. (2018). Rapid influence of word-talker associations on lexical access. Topics in Cognitive Science, 10(4), 775–86. doi.org/10.1111/tops.12351.Google Scholar
Kirtley, M. J. (2015). Language, Identity, and Non-Binary Gender in Hawaiʻi. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa, Honolulu, HI.Google Scholar
Kleinschmidt, D. F., Weatherholtz, K. & Jaeger, T. F. (2018). Sociolinguistic perception as inference under uncertainty, Topics in Cognitive Science, 10(4), 818–34. doi.org/10.1111/tops.12331.Google Scholar
Koops, C., Gentry, E. & Pantos, A. (2008). The effect of perceived speaker age on the perception of PIN and PEN vowels in Houston, Texas. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics, 14, 93–101.Google Scholar
Labov, W. (1963). The social motivation of a sound change. Word, 19(3), 273–309. doi.org/10.1080/00437956.1963.11659799.Google Scholar
Labov, W. (1969). Contraction, deletion, and inherent variability of the English copula. Language, 45(4), 715–62. doi.org/10.2307/412333.Google Scholar
Labov, W. (1972). Sociolinguistic Patterns. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Labov, W. (2006) [1966]. The Social Stratification of English in New York City, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Labov, W., Yaeger, M. & Steiner, R. (1972). A Quantitative Study of Sound Change in Progress. Report on National Science Foundation Contract NSF-GS-3287.Google Scholar
Labov, W., Ash, S. & Boberg, C. (2006). Atlas of North American English: Phonology and Phonetics. Berlin: Mouton/de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Labov, W., Ash, S., Ravindranath, M., Weldon, T. & Nagy, N. (2011). Properties of the sociolinguistic monitor. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 15(4), 431–63. doi.org/10.1111/j.1467–9841.2011.00504.x.Google Scholar
Labov, W., Rosenfelder, I. & Fruehwald, J. (2013). One hundred years of sound change in Philadelphia: Linear incrementation, reversal, and reanalysis. Language, 89(1), 30–65. doi.org/10.1353/lan.2013.0015.Google Scholar
Ladefoged, P. & Broadbent, D. E. (1957). Information conveyed by vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 29(1), 98–104. doi.org/10.1121/1.1908694.Google Scholar
Lambert, W. E., Hodgson, R. C., Gardner, R. C. & Fillenbaum, S. (1960). Evaluational reactions to spoken languages. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 60(1), 44–51. doi.org/10.1037/h0044430.Google Scholar
Lawson, E., Scobbie, J. M. & Stuart-Smith, J. (2011). The social stratification of tongue shape for postvocalic /r/ in Scottish English. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 15(2), 256–68. doi.org/10.1111/j.1467–9841.2011.00464.x.Google Scholar
Leemann, A. (2017). Analyzing geospatial variation in articulation rate using crowdsourced speech data. Journal of Linguistic Geography, 4(2), 76–96. doi.org/10.1017/jlg.2016.11.Google Scholar
Leemann, A., Kolly, M. J. & Britain, D. (2016). English Dialects, iPhone app. Accessed 28 June 2017 from itunes.apple.com/us/app/english-dialects/id882340404?mt=8.Google Scholar
Lev-Ari, S. & Peperkamp, S. (2014). An experimental study of the role of social factors in language change: The case of loanword adaptations. Laboratory Phonology, 5(3), 379–401. doi.org/10.1515/lp-2014–0013.Google Scholar
Levon, E. (2007). Sexuality in context: Variation and the sociolinguistic perception of identity. Language in Society, 36, 533–54. doi.org/10.1017/S0047404507070431.Google Scholar
Levon, E. (2014). Categories, stereotypes, and the linguistic perception of sexuality. Language in Society, 43(5), 539–66. doi.org/10.1017/S0047404514000554.Google Scholar
Llamas, C. & Watt, D. (2014). Scottish, English, British? Innovations in attitude measurement. Language and Linguistics Compass, 8(11), 610–17. doi.org/10.1111/lnc3.12109.Google Scholar
Llamas, C., Watt, D. & Johnson, D. E. (2009). Linguistic accommodation and the salience of national identity markers in a border town. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 28(4), 381–407. doi.org/10.1177/0261927X09341962.Google Scholar
Llompart, M. & Simonet, M. (2018). Unstressed vowel reduction across Majorcan Catalan dialects: Production and spoken word recognition. Language and Speech, 61(3), 430–65. doi.org/10.1177/0023830917736019.Google Scholar
Maegaard, M. (2010). Linguistic practice and stereotypes among Copenhagen adolescents. In Quist, P. & Svendsen, B. A., eds., Multilingual Urban Scandinavia: New Linguistic Practices. Bristol: Multilingual Matters, pp. 189–206.Google Scholar
Mallinson, C., Childs, B. & Van Herk, G. (2013). Data Collection in Sociolinguistics: Methods and Applications. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
McCloy, D. (2016). phonR: Tools for phoneticians and phonologists, R-package version 1.0–7.Google Scholar
McGowan, K. (2011). The Role of Socioindexical Expectation in Speech Perception. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.Google Scholar
McGowan, K. (2015). Social expectation improves speech perception in noise. Language and Speech, 58(4), 1–20. doi.org/10.1177/0023830914565191.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mendoza-Denton, N. (2008). Homegirls: Language and Cultural Practice among Latina Youth Gangs. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Meyerhoff, M. (2017). Writing a linguistic symphony: Analyzing variation while doing language documentation. The Canadian Journal of Linguistics, 62(4), 525–49. doi.org/10.1017/cnj.2017.28.Google Scholar
Mielke, J. (2015). An ultrasound study of Canadian French rhotic vowels with polar smoothing spline comparisons. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 137(5), 2858–69. doi.org/10.1121/1.4919346.Google Scholar
Mielke, J., Carignan, C. & Thomas, E. R. (2017). The articulatory dynamics of pre-velar and pre-nasal /æ/-raising in English: An ultrasound study. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 142(1), 332–49. doi.org/10.1121/1.4991348.Google Scholar
Milroy, J. & Milroy, L. (1978). Belfast: Change and variation in an urban vernacular. In Trudgill, P., ed., Sociolinguistic Patterns in British English. London: Edward Arnold, pp. 19–36.Google Scholar
Mougeon, R. & Nadasdi, T. (1998). Sociolinguistic discontinuity in minority language communities. Language 74(1), 40–55. doi.org/10.1353/lan.1998.0077.Google Scholar
Munson, B. (2011). The influence of actual and imputed talker gender on fricative perception, revisited. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 130(5), 2631–4. doi.org/10.1121/1.3641410.Google Scholar
Nagy, N. (2017). Documenting variation in (endangered) heritage languages: How and why? Language Documentation and Conservation Special Publication, 13, 33–64. hdl.handle.net/10125/24748.Google Scholar
Niedzielski, N. (1999). The effect of social information on the perception of sociolinguistic variables. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 18(1), 62–85. doi.org/10.1177/0261927X99018001005.Google Scholar
Nycz, J. (2015). Second dialect acquisition: A sociophonetic perspective. Language and Linguistics Compass, 9(11), 469–82. doi.org/10.1111/lnc3.12163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pardo, J. S. (2012). Reflections on phonetic convergence: Speech perception does not mirror speech production. Language and Linguistics Compass, 6(12), 753–67. doi.org/10.1002/lnc3.367.Google Scholar
Pharao, N., Maegaard, M., Møller, J. S. & Kristiansen, T. (2014). Indexical meanings of [s+] among Copenhagen youth: Social perception of a phonetic variant in different prosodic contexts. Language in Society, 43(1), 1–31. doi.org/10.1017/S0047404513000857.Google Scholar
Pierrehumbert, J. (2006). The next toolkit. Journal of Phonetics, 34(6), 516–30. doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2006.06.003.Google Scholar
Pitt, M. A., Dilley, L., Johnson, K., Kiesling, S., Raymond, W., Hume, E. et al. (2007). Buckeye Corpus of Conversational Speech, 2nd release, Columbus, OH: Department of Psychology, The Ohio State University. www.buckeyecorpus.osu.edu/.Google Scholar
Podesva, R. J. (2007). Phonation type as a stylistic variable: The use of falsetto in constructing a persona. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 11(4), 478–504. doi.org/10.1111/j.1467–9841.2007.00334.x.Google Scholar
Podesva, R. J. (2011). Salience and the social meaning of declarative contours: Three case studies of gay professionals. Journal of English Linguistics, 39(3), 233–64. doi.org/10.1177/0075424211405161.Google Scholar
Purnell, T., Idsardi, W. & Baugh, J. (1999). Perceptual and phonetic experiments on American English dialect identification. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 18(1), 10–30. doi.org/10.1177/0261927X99018001002.Google Scholar
Rickford, J. R. & McNair-Knox, F. (1994). Addressee- and topic- influenced style shift: A quantitative sociolinguistic study. In Biber, D. & Finegan, E., eds., Sociolinguistic Perspectives on Register. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 235–76.Google Scholar
Rubin, D. L. (1992). Nonlanguage factors affecting undergraduates’ judgments of nonnative English-speaking teaching assistants. Research in Higher Education, 33(4), 511–31.Google Scholar
Sankoff, D. (1975). VARBRUL version 2, Unpublished program and documentation.Google Scholar
Scanlon, M. & Wassink, A. B. (2010). African American English in urban Seattle: Accommodation and intraspeaker variation in the Pacific Northwest. American Speech, 85(2), 205–24. doi.org/10.1215/00031283–2010-011.Google Scholar
Schilling-Estes, N. (2004). Constructing ethnicity in interaction. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 8(2), 163–95. doi.org/10.1111/j.1467–9841.2004.00257.x.Google Scholar
Schüppert, A., Hilton, N. H. & Gooskens, C. (2015). Swedish is beautiful, Danish is ugly? Investigating the link between language attitudes and spoken word recognition. Linguistics, 53(2), 375–403. doi.org/10.1515/ling-2015–0003.Google Scholar
Scobbie, J. M., Lawson, E. & Stuart-Smith, J. (2012). Back to front: A socially-stratified ultrasound tongue imaging study of Scottish English /u/. Rivista di Linguistica/Italian Journal of Linguistics, 24(1), 103–48.Google Scholar
Sonderegger, M., Bane, M. & Graff, P. (2017). The medium-term dynamics of accents, on reality television. Language, 93(3), 598–640. doi.org/10.1353/lan.2017.0038.Google Scholar
Sóskuthy, M. (2017). Generalised Additive Mixed Models for dynamic analysis in linguistics: A practical introduction. arxiv.org/abs/1703.05339.Google Scholar
Staum Casasanto, L., Jasmin, K. & Casasanto, D. (2010). Virtually accommodating: Speech rate accommodation to a virtual interlocutor. In Ohlsson, S. & Catrambone, R., eds., Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society, pp. 127–32.Google Scholar
Strand, E. & Johnson, K. (1996). Gradient and visual speaker normalization in the perception of fricatives. In Gibbon, D., ed. Natural Language Processing and Speech Technology. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 14–26.Google Scholar
Sumner, M. & Samuel, A. G. (2009). The effect of experience on the perception and representation of dialect variants. Journal of Memory and Language, 60, 487–501. doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2009.01.001.Google Scholar
Szakay, A. (2012). Voice quality as a marker of ethnicity in New Zealand: From acoustics to perception. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 16(3), 382–97. doi.org/10.1111/j.1467–9841.2012.00537.x.Google Scholar
Szakay, A., Babel, M. & King, J. (2016). Social categories are shared across bilinguals’ lexicons. Journal of Phonetics, 59, 92–109. doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2016.09.005.Google Scholar
Tamminga, M. (2014). Persistence in the Production of Linguistic Variation. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.Google Scholar
Tamminga, M. (2017). Matched guise effects can be robust to speech style. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America Express Letters, 142(1), EL18–EL23. doi.org/10.1121/1.4990399.Google Scholar
Thomas, E. R. (1997). A rural/metropolitan split in the speech of Texas Anglos. Language Variation and Change, 9(3), 309–32. doi.org/10.1017/S0954394500001940.Google Scholar
Thomas, E. R. (2000). Spectral differences in /ai/ offsets conditioned by voicing of the following consonant. Journal of Phonetics, 28(1), 1–25. doi.org/10.1006/jpho.2000.0103.Google Scholar
Thomas, E. R. (2002). Instrumental phonetics. In Chambers, J. K., Trudgill, P. & Schilling-Estes, N., eds., The Handbook of Language Variation and Change. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 168–200.Google Scholar
Thomas, E. R. (2011). Sociophonetics: An Introduction. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Thomas, E. R. & Kendall, T. (2007). NORM: The vowel normalization and plotting suite, ncslaap.lib.ncsu.edu/tools/norm/.Google Scholar
Trudgill, P. (1974). The Social Differentiation of English in Norwich. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Van Hofwegen, J. (2017). Everyday Styles: Investigating the Full Scope of Variation in the Life of an Individual Speaker. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.Google Scholar
Vaux, B. & Golder, S. (2003). The Harvard Dialect Survey. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Linguistics Department.Google Scholar
Walker, A. & Campbell-Kibler, K. (2015). Repeat after whom? Exploring variable selectivity in a cross-dialectal shadowing task. Frontiers in Psychology, 6(546), 1–18. doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00546.Google Scholar
Walker, A. & Hay, J. (2011). Congruence between ‘word age’ and ‘voice age’ facilitates lexical access. Laboratory Phonology, 2(1), 219–37. doi.org/10.1515/labphon.2011.007.Google Scholar
Walker, A., Hay, J., Drager, K. & Sanchez, K. (2017). Divergence in speech perception. Linguistics, 56(1), 257–78. doi.org/10.1515/ling-2017–0036.Google Scholar
Warren, P. (2014). Sociophonetic and prosodic influences on judgments of sentence types. In Hay, J. & Parnell, E., eds., Proceedings of the 15th Australasian International Conference on Speech Science and Technology. Christchurch: ASSTA, pp. 185–8.Google Scholar
Wassink, A. B. (2015). Sociolinguistic patterns in Seattle English. Language Variation and Change, 27(1), 31–58. doi.org/10.1017/S0954394514000234.Google Scholar
Watson, K. & Clark, L. (2015). Exploring listeners’ real-time reactions to regional accents. Language Awareness, 24(1), 38–59. doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2014.882346.Google Scholar
Weinreich, U. (1954). Is a structural dialectology possible? Word, 10(2–3), 388–400. doi.org/10.1080/00437956.1954.11659535.Google Scholar
Wells, J. C. (1982). Accents of English, vol. 1, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wieling, M., Tomaschek, F., Arnold, D., Tiede, M., Bröker, F., Thiele, S. et al. (2016). Investigating dialectal differences using articulography. Journal of Phonetics, 59, 122–43. doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2016.09.004.Google Scholar
Willis, C. (1972). Perception of vowel phonemes in Fort Erie, Ontario, Canada, and Buffalo, New York: An application of synthetic vowel categorization tests to dialectology. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 15(2), 246–55. dx.doi.org/10.1044/jshr.1502.246.Google Scholar
Wolfram, W. (1969). A Sociolinguistic Description of Detroit Negro English. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
Yaeger-Dror, M. & Thomas, E. R. (2009). African American English Speakers and Their Participation in Local Sound Changes: A Comparative Study. Publication of the American Dialect Society (PADS) 94(1). Durham, NC: Duke University Press. doi.org/10.1215/-94–1-1.Google Scholar
Yaeger-Dror, M., Takano, S., Granadillo, T. & Hall-Lew, L. (2011). The sociophonetics of prosodic contours on NEG in three language communities: Teasing apart sociolinguistic and phonetic influences on speech. In Preston, D. & Niedzielski, N., eds., Sociophonetic Reader. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 133–76.Google Scholar
Zhang, Q. (2005). A Chinese yuppie in Beijing: Phonological variation and the construction of a new professional identity. Language in Society, 34(3), 431–66. doi.org/10.1017/S0047404505050153.Google Scholar
Zimman, L. (2017). Gender as stylistic bricolage: Transmasculine voices and the relationship between fundamental frequency and /s/. Language in Society, 46(3), 339–70. doi.org/10.1017/S0047404517000070.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×