Chapter 4: Language and ethnicity

Essential reading

Holmes, J. An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. (Harlow: Pearson Education Limited, 2008) third edition [ISBN 9781405821315] Chapter 8: ‘Ethnicity and social networks’ and ‘Chapter 2: ‘Language choice in multilingual communities’.

Soden, S. and A. Mooney ‘Language and Ethnicity’ in Mooney et al. Language, Society and Power. (Abingdon: Routledge, 2011) third edition [ISBN 9780415576598] pp.113–34.

Further reading

Fought, Carmen Language and Ethnicity. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006) [ISBN 9780521612913].

Hewitt, Roger White Talk, Black Talk. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986) [ISBN 9780521338240].

Sebba, M. London Jamaican: Language Systems in Interaction. (London: Longman, 1993) [ISBN 9780582080959].

Singh, Isthla Pidgins and Creoles: An introduction. (London: Arnold, 2000) [ISBN 9780340700952].

Other works cited

Cheshire, J., P. Kersill, S. Fox and E. Torgersen ‘Contact, the feature pool and the speech community: The emergence of Multicultural London English’, Journal of Sociolinguistics, 15(2), 2001, pp.151?96.

Crystal, D. The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English Language. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003) second edition [ISBN 0521530334].

Edwards, J. Multilingualism. (London: Penguin Books, 1994)
[ISBN 9780415120111].

Jenkins, J. World Englishes: A Resource Book for Students. (London: Routledge, 2009) second edition [ISBN 9780415466127].

Joseph, John Language and Identity: National, Ethnic, Religious. (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004) [ISBN 9780333997536].

Mesthrie, R., J. Swann, A. Deumert and W. Leap Introducing Sociolinguistics. (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2009) second edition
[ISBN 9780748638444].

Rampton, B. Crossing: Language and Ethnicity among Adolescents. (Manchester: St Jerome Publishing, 2004) second edition
[ISBN 9781900650779].

Romaine, S. Language in Society: An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000) second edition [ISBN 0198731922].

Talbot, M., K. Atkinson and D. Atkinson Language and Power in the
Modern World. (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2003)
[ISBN 0748615385].

Van Dijk, T. ‘Racist discourse’ in Cashmore, E. (ed.) Routledge Encyclopedia
of Race and Ethnic Studies. (London: Routledge, 2004)
[ISBN 9780415286749] pp.351–55.

Van Dijk, T. ‘Discourse and the denial of racism’, Discourse and Society, 3(1) 1992, pp.87–118.

Introduction

In this chapter we will consider some of the ways in which language interacts with ethnicity. We will approach this topic from two angles: language used by different ethnic groups; and language that is used to represent different ethnic groups. First, we take a look at what we mean by ‘ethnicity’ before moving on to think about how many speakers and ethnic groups use more than one language, frequently switching between them. We then turn our attention to pidgins and creoles, which are languages which develop when different ethnic groups come into contact. Two (non-standard) varieties of English are next considered: African American Vernacular English (AAVE), followed by London Jamaican (LJ). These two varieties are associated with minority ethnic groups in the USA and in the UK. After this, we briefly mention the emergence of Multicultural London English, before considering language representation, that is, how we talk about, write about and describe ethnic groups. First of all, however, what exactly do we mean by ‘ethnicity’?

Defining ‘ethnicity’

To get you thinking about what is meant by the term ‘ethnicity’ and other terms it is linked to, we offer a selection of definitions:

Common usage tends to associate ‘race’ with biologically based differences between human groups, differences typically observable in skin color, hair texture, eye shape, and other physical attributes. ‘Ethnicity’ tends to be associated with culture, pertaining to such factors as language, religion, and nationality.

(Bobo, 2001, p.267, cited in Fought, 2006, p.10)

Joseph gives the following three definitions to differentiate between ethnicity, nationality and race:

ethnic identity is focused more on common descent and on a cultural heritage shared because of common descent, than on political aspirations for autonomy

national identity is focused on political borders and autonomy, often justified by arguments centred on shared cultural heritage, but where the ethnic element is inevitably multiple

racial identity – now a concept virtually taboo in American discourse […] is focused, like ethnic identity, on common descent and cultural heritage, but conceived on a grander scale, for example, ‘black’ identity as opposed to Wolof identity.

(2004, pp.162–63)

Finally, an observation from Edwards:

Ethnic identity is allegiance to a group – large or small, socially dominant or subordinate – with which one has ancestral links. There is no necessity for a continuation, over generations, of the same socialization or cultural patterns, but some sense of a group boundary must persist. This can be sustained by shared objective characteristics (language, religion, etc.), or by more subjective contributions to a sense of ‘groupness’ or by some combination of both. Symbolic or subjective attachments must relate, at however distant a remove, to an observably real past.

(1994, p.128)

It is worth thinking about the way in which ‘ethnicity’ seems to be tied into culture, shared bonds and a sense of ‘groupness’. This, according to Edwards must also be linked into something real and tangible, even if that bond or link is from a long time ago or from many generations previously. ‘Nationality’, on the other hand, has a sense of the political attached to it. ‘Race’ may refer to biology. Race may also be, as Joseph details in the quote above, a pejorative term which is no longer ‘politically correct’ to use. The other thing to consider is how we only label minority groups ‘ethnic’. That’s not the way minority groups talk about themselves. As Talbot et al. (2003) remark, in the UK, we don’t refer to the Women’s Institute as an ‘ethnic group’, fish and chips as ‘ethnic food’ or to a bowler hat as ‘traditional ethnic headgear’.

Activity

What is your ethnic background? Is it straightforward for you to answer this question? What factors do you need to consider?

Activity

Research the three terms we have referred to: ‘ethnicity’; ‘race’; ‘nationality’. Use online sources, dictionaries and scholarly works to help you. Make a list of the similarities and differences between the terms: the things that unite them and the things that differentiate them. Is your interpretation of ‘ethnicity’ and your interpretation of your own ‘ethnicity’ any different now from what it was before you started to think about the terms?

How is language linked to ethnicity?

Most people would agree that language is a very important marker of ethnicity. In fact, it may be the key defining feature in determining someone’s ethnicity, although this is not true in every case. For example, in Northern Ireland, Protestants and Catholics are not defined by language. So for those groups, religion is the marker of ethnicity. Or take the case of Wales and Welsh. Only 21 per cent (2004) of those who live in Wales speak Welsh, but it would be difficult to argue that the person who speaks no Welsh, whose family has lived there for generations, is any less ‘Welsh’ than someone who speaks Welsh all the time. On the other hand, we can consider the case of many immigrant groups. In London, for example, there are sizeable immigrant groups, such as those from Poland or other Eastern European countries. Sometimes their children attend schools at the weekend to ensure they do not forget their native language skills, despite the fact that they are spending most of their time using and speaking English in their everyday life.

Monolingualism, bilingualism and multilingualism

There are many ethnic groups that speak more than one language or language variety. This may appear odd at first to people living in countries such as the UK or the USA which we can think of as predominantly monolingual countries. This will mean that a large percentage of the population speaks only one language and to speak more than one is quite unusual. However, we have made the point that many immigrants in, say, the UK, want their children to speak not only the host language but to be able to communicate in their native language as well. In other countries and continents (Africa, for example), speaking more than one language is something that most people have to do to be able to communicate with those they come into contact with. Being bilingual describes the ability to speak two or more languages, although as Mesthrie et al. (2009, p.37) point out, many writers use the term multilingual to mean the same thing. It can usually be ascertained from the context, however, how the terms are being used.

Code-switching and language contact

Language can be linked to ethnicity in other ways too. For example, people who speak more than one language may switch between languages during a conversation, or even within one utterance (code-switching). Code-switching may occur for a variety of reasons: perhaps someone joins the conversation who does not speak the language of the other participants. It may be that the topic under discussion motivates or even necessitates a switch. Relationships between participants in a conversation may be another factor. It is also the case that, sometimes, when different ethnic groups come into contact with one another, there isn’t a language they all share that can be used. When these situations arise, a hybrid language sometimes develops.

Activity

Read Chapter 2 ‘Language choice in ‘multilingual communities’ in Holmes (2008), focusing particularly on the section on code-switching. Then sum up some of the different types of code-switching and reasons for and/or functions of code-switching. Consider the examples provided by Holmes as well as your own observations of multilingual language use.

Pidgins and creoles

We will now take a look at the type of languages which emerge as a result of contact between different ethnic groups who do not share what is known as a lingua franca. A lingua franca is a common language used between groups of people for communication. The contact between these different ethnic groups may have arisen for a variety of reasons: wars, trading, colonialism and slavery are some examples. In these situations, the different groups of people need to communicate but may be unable to if they cannot speak one another’s language. Sometimes a pidgin develops. There are some common features of pidgin languages. To begin with, they have no native speakers and they develop to enable contact between people who do not have a common language. They are often short-lived (for example, a pidgin developed between the American soldiers and the Vietnamese during the Vietnam war but it has died out as it is no longer necessary).

Pidgins are made up by taking features of two or more languages (some theories say at least three languages: two plus one dominant language). They are usually simplified or reduced in terms of phonology, morphology, syntax and vocabulary. There is a low prestige value associated with pidgins and many negative attitudes expressed towards them as we can see in this constructed example:

Young visitor to Papua New Guinea:

When I first heard Pidgin English I just thought it was baby-talk. I thought anyone can do that. It had words like liklik for ‘little’ and cranky for ‘wrong’ and nogut for ‘bad’. It just made me laugh. Then I began to realise it wasn’t as easy as I thought. People kept correcting me when I tried, and they got annoyed if I didn’t take it seriously. I soon learned better.

(Holmes, 2008, p.86)

Activity

Research and consider other attitudes (both positive and negative) linked to ethnic groups and their language varieties. You can use Holmes (2008) to help you.

Creoles emerge when the pidgin becomes the first language of the children of pidgin speakers so, unlike pidgins, they have native speakers. They become much more elaborate so that they can be used in many domains and for many functions. Attitudes towards creoles may still be very negative, even though they are more complex than their pidgin source and, indeed, they function just as any other language does. Tok Pisin is an example of a pidgin which (some say) has developed into a creole. It has many first language speakers and has developed to meet the needs of its speakers. Tok Pisin is viewed very positively by its speakers. It has status and prestige in Papua New Guinea and is often used for debate in its parliament.

We have noted that pidgin vocabulary is often quite small. This is because pidgin languages only extend themselves as far as they need to to cope with the demands of those that use them. The following observations and examples illustrate some features of pidgins and are taken from Mesthrie et al. (2009, pp.281–83), who cite both Todd and Tok Pisin (1994, p.3, 178) and Holm (1988, p.73):

1. 1. Many pidgin words are polysemous. This means they can mean several things, each of which can be worked out in the context (Cameroon Pidgin English):

Shado	- shadow, soul, reflection
Bif	- meat, animal
Water	- water, lake, river, spring, tear
Belly	- stomach, seat of emotions

1. 2. Multifunctionality: this describes how one word might have several grammatical uses. In Tok Pisin a word like sik is a noun and an adjective, for example, Mi sik (I’m sick) (adj.) and em i gat bigpela sik (he has got a terrible disease).
2. 3. Circumlocution): this describes the ‘roundabout’ way in which some concepts are expressed in pidgins. In these examples the word bilong functions as a preposition meaning ‘of’ (Tok Pisin):

Gras bilong fes	- beard
Gras bilong hed	- hair
Gras bilong ai	- eyebrow
Wara bilong skin	- sweat
Pinga bilong lek	- toe
Pela bilong op	- bottle, bottle opener

1. 4. Compounding is often used in the formation of abstract concepts
   (Tok Pisin):

Big maus	- conceited (literally big mouth
Drai bun	- tough toughness (literally dry bones)
Tu bel	- in two minds, doubting (literally belly)

Here are some examples of compounding to indicate gender of nouns:

Hos man	- stallion
Hos meri	- mare
Paul man	- rooster
Paul meri	- hen

Activity

Research pidgins and creoles and contact languages. You can find sections in Mesthrie et al. (2009) or Romaine (2000), in addition to Holmes (2008, pp. 83–93). After studying these topics, offer some possible explanations for the development of pidgins in the areas of the world where they have developed (there are some maps showing where some pidgins and creoles are to be found in Romaine (2000, pp.170–73).

African American Vernacular English (AAVE)

We will now move on to consider a language variety which is associated with African American speakers in the United States. This language variety is especially prevalent in Northern cities of the United States. It is a very contentious language variety which has been relabelled many times as the following list demonstrates:

Negro dialect; substandard Negro dialect; non-standard Negro English; Black English; Afro-American English; Ebonics, Vernacular Black English, African American Vernacular English. (See Wolfram and Schilling-Este, 1998, p.14 cited in Holmes, 2008, pp.414–16.)

AAVE has a number of features which differentiate it from mainstream American English, some of which we list below:

Absence of the verb be in certain contexts:

In SE, most speakers use reduced forms of the verb be: When people say: ‘she’s very nice’ rather than ‘she is very nice’, the is becomes s. AAVE speakers omit the verb be:

AAVE	American standard English
She very nice	She's very nice
He a teacher	He's a teacher
That my book	That's my book
The beer warm	The beer's warm

Using ‘be’ for repeated actions:

AAVE	American standard English
She be at school on weekdays	She's always at school on weekdays
The children to be messin'	The children do mess around a lot
I run when I bees on my way	I always run when I'm on my way to school
The beer be warm at that place	The beer's always warm at that place

Negative concord or multiple negation:

In Standard English only one negative is allowed. Most non-standard varieties can have two or more and this is called 'negative concord' or 'multiple negation'. As Holmes (2008, p.150) tells us, multiple negation occurs in all English-speaking communities but is linked to the lower social classes rather than the middle classes. Examples of multiple negation are:

‘We didn’t have nothing to talk about.’

‘Nobody don’t want no ice cream.’

The data and features on AAVE have been drawn from Holmes (2008, pp.186–88). Make sure you read this section where further examples and explanations can be found.

Children who speak AAVE often perform very badly in school. In two communities in the USA proposals were put forward in an attempt to address this which attracted a great deal of publicity. The first was a court case in 1979 in which parents took the school their children attended and the Board of Education to court and the second concerns the proposals put forward by the Oakland school board in 1996. We outline the details of both, drawing on Mesthrie et al. (2009, pp.364–68) and Crystal (2003, p.97).

• • The Ann Arbor trial: Parents of children who were pupils at the Martin Luther King Elementary School took the Ann Arbor School District Board to court. The parents represented the 13 per cent of black children at the school. They claimed that their children were underperforming at school because they spoke in a language variety which was different from that used at the school. Linguists such as William Labov testified on the parents’ behalf. The judge found that the children were hindered because teachers did not take their language variety into account when teaching Standard English. The school board was ordered to help teachers identify those speaking ‘Black English’ and help them apply their language skills when learning Standard English.
• • Ebonics: African Americans were still being classed as ‘learning disabled’ in American schools 15 years later. The Oakland School Board (California) therefore proposed ‘bilingual education’ in its schools. AAVE speakers would start their education in the language they already knew and move to Standard English after they had learnt it as an L2 (second language). The School Board argued that AAVE could be traced to West African languages and that the students’ language was Ebonics (this word is blended from two words: Ebony + Phonics). There was a great deal of controversy surrounding these proposals, forcing the School Board to revise its plans. A selection of the public reaction can be found in Mesthrie et al. (2009, p.367).

Activity

‘If you use AAVE, you won’t get a good job’ seems to indicate that if you use Standard English you will get a good job. But consider whether it is a person’s ethnicity or the language variety that they use that prevents them from getting certain jobs. Is the problem prejudice/racist attitudes or linguistic deficit? (adapted from Holmes, 2008, p.416).

We turn now to consider a language variety associated with certain ethnic groups which has been used in some areas of London (most notably the East and South East). It was studied extensively by Mark Sebba (1993).

London Jamaican (LJ)

Based on Jamaican Creole, this variety has mainly been used by Black British adolescents in the London area, many of whom have Caribbean, but not necessarily Jamaican, ancestry. Most of them were born in Britain, indeed, some users of LJ features are Anglo (white) or Asian British adolescents. The following are some of the distinctive features of this variety and are taken from Jenkins (2009, pp.112–14) and Sebba (1993, pp.146–59). The features are divided into four groups: the first, second and third list some grammatical, phonological and lexical features of Jamaican Creole which are also found in LJ, while the fourth lists some features of LJ which are also part of London English (or Cockney). Therefore Sebba’s observations suggest that this variety of English draws both on local (London) features of English, as well as on (stereotypical features of) Jamaican Creole.

Jamaican Creole grammatical features in LJ:

• • lack of case marking and other distinctions on pronouns: ‘mi’ and ‘I’ are used interchangeably for Standard English ‘I’, ‘me’, ‘my’; ‘yu’ for Standard English singular ‘you’, ‘your’
• • use of present tense for both present and past, e.g. ‘an I se’ meaning ‘and I said’;
• • elimination of tense suffixes ‘–s’, ‘–ed’, ‘–t’ and participle endings ‘–ing’, ‘–ed’, ‘–en’, for example: ‘yu bret stink’ for ‘your breath stinks’;
• • negation with ‘no’, often with phonological changes, e.g. ‘no bret stink’ for SE ‘my breath doesn’t stink’;
• • lack of inversion in question forms, as in ‘im did phone you?’;
• • absence of the copula for Standard English ‘noun – to be – adjective’ constructions: as in ‘dis party well rude’
• • use of suffix ‘–dem’ added to a noun to indicate plurality: ‘man-dem’ meaning ‘men’, or a large quantity as in ‘kaan-dem’ (‘a lot of corn’).

Jamaican Creole phonological features in LJ:

• • substitution of /ð/ and /?/ with /t/ and /d/, e.g. ‘bret’ for ‘breath’ and ‘dis’ for ‘this’;
• • labialisation when the sound /b/ is followed by certain vowels, e.g. ‘boys’ is pronounced ‘bwoys’;
• • dropping of word-final consonants, e.g. ‘bulleh’ for ‘bullet’
• • realisation of the vowel sounds /?/ and /?:/ as /a:/ so that ‘cloth’ becomes ‘klaat’
• • lack of weak vowels especially schwa, so that the word ‘rapper’ is pronounced /rapa/ rather than /rap? / and ‘the’ is regularly pronounced /da/ and /di/.

Jamaican Creole lexical features of LJ:

• • ‘mash-up’ (destroy)
• • ‘picky-picky’ (frizzy, of hair)
• • ‘duppy’ (ghost)
• • ‘bombklaat’ (toilet paper).

Features of London Jamaican which are also markers of London English but not Jamaican Creole:

• • the glottal stop /?/, for example, ‘ghetto’ is pronounced /ghe?o/
• • vocalisation of dark ‘l’ (the RP sound when it does not occur before a vowel), e.g. ‘tell’ as ‘tew’, whereas in Jamaican Creole it is pronounced as clear ‘l’ (the RP sound when it occurs before a vowel)
• • substitution of /ð/ and /?/ with /f/ and /v/ (London) alongside /t/ and /d/ (Jamaican)

Activity

Analyse the extract below which comes from Sebba (1993, p.20). It is a transcript of two girls having a conversation. See if you can identify which features belong to London English and which features belong to LJ. A further point you might want to think about in relation to this extract is that the two girls were asked to have a conversation in LJ. What effect might this have had on the conversation that they produced?

Language crossing

Language ‘crossing’ is the term which describes how language varieties are used by speakers who don’t belong to the groups that traditionally use a particular language variety. It was coined by Ben Rampton (2004) who carried out ethnographic research with teenagers in a south Midlands town in England, looking into the contexts and situations where people used varieties which did not belong to them. He analysed crossing into Punjabi, creole or stylised Asian English (a parody of a stereotypical Asian English speech style).The contexts where crossing occurred seemed to be when the teenagers were talking to adults, when they were with their peers or at times when they were listening to a type of Punjabi music called bhangra. Crossing seemed to have a variety of functions including resistance to adult norms, identity construction and was also about challenging expectations.

As Fought (2006, p.205) points out people who cross need access to the codes that do not belong to them. A person might have a network of social contacts from different ethnic backgrounds, providing access to different codes or varieties or, on the other hand, they might only know one person. They may also have access to codes or varieties via the media in its various forms (newspapers, internet, radio or television). Indeed, the media can be considered as very influential in determining how different ethnic groups are represented in ways which influence how people think about those groups.

Multicultural London English (MLE)

Researchers (see Cheshire et al., 2011) have recently identified a number of language features that occur, particularly among young people, in multi-ethnic parts of inner city London. They differentiate this variety from London Jamaican discussed by Sebba (1993) which we have just described. Cheshire et al. (2011) detail the emergence of MLE and the features associated with it. After the Second World War, large numbers of people from developing countries emigrated to the UK, settling in some urban areas such as Hackney or Tower Hamlets in East London. By contrast, many of the indigenous population moved out to the suburbs or to the surrounding counties. Language shift to English occurs quickly among immigrants, but native speakers of English may be in the minority in some areas or there may not be much mixing between the immigrants and those already living there. Consequently, English is frequently learned informally from other second language speakers. This language contact situation has resulted in a number of interesting language features, two of which we list below:

• • A new quotative: this is them ‘what area are you from?’, this is me ‘I’m from Hackney’
• • A new use of definite and indefinite article: in Standard English it is usual to say: a pear, an apple or thuh pear, thee apple, but the researchers found variability in the use of articles among younger speakers in places like Hackney with some speakers saying ‘a apple, thuh apple’.

Activity

At the time of writing (April 2012), academic research into Multicultural London English has only, relatively recently, started to appear in the published literature. Carry out some investigation to see what you can find out about this variety, using the internet to help you. You may come across academic work or news articles, for example.

Representing ethnicity, ‘race’ and nationality: the construction of otherness

In this section, we consider the ways in which we represent, write or talk about different ethnic groups. The scholar van Dijk has carried out a great deal of research into the way different ethnic groups are discriminated against in the language that is used to describe them, constructing them as the Other: those who are ethnically different from the perspective of the writer or speaker. He identifies three topic classes: difference; deviance and threat (van Dijk, 2004, pp.352–53). In earlier work, he also demonstrated how people went to considerable lengths to avoid the charge of racism. They did this by presenting themselves positively in conversations or in newspaper reports. One tactic was to explicitly deny they were racist: ‘I’m not racist, but . . .’ and then a negative portrayal of an ethnic group would follow. Here is one of his examples from the Daily Mail (28 November 1985) concerning immigration:

Our traditions of fairness and tolerance are being exploited by every terrorist, crook, screwball and scrounger who wants a free ride at our expense … Then there are the criminals who sneak in as political refugees or as family members visiting a distant relative.

(as quoted in van Dijk, 1992, p.103)

In the above extract, notice how fairness and tolerance are associated with the group the writer belongs to (signalled by the use of our). By contrast, those who do not belong to our group are represented very differently. Moreover, ethnic minorities are associated with ethically questionable and often illegal activities.

Activity

Van Dijk’s example comes from the 1980s. Are ethnicity, nationality and race still prominent in our newspapers today? Study some newspapers over a period of about a week, perhaps two aimed at different readerships. For example you could keep an eye on how the Guardian and the Sun (UK newspapers) choose to represent various groups. Can you find any articles where ethnicity is a factor?

In Chapter 7 we will also consider how individuals and groups are labelled, focusing this time on women and sexist language. In Chapter 8 we will introduce one methodological approach, Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), which has produced a lot of research on racial discrimination in language (van Dijk’s work, which we introduced above, is based on CDA).

In this chapter we have considered the topic of ethnicity from a variety of angles. We have investigated what we mean by the term and how language is linked to it. We considered how and why languages develop when different ethnic groups come into contact with one another. In addition, we also introduced some non-standard English varieties which are linked to sizeable ethnic groups in the USA and in the UK. Lastly, we considered how ethnic groups are labelled and represented, looking at examples from newspaper reporting.

Learning outcomes

After working through this chapter, and having done a substantial amount of reading on the topic as well as the activities, you should:

• • be able to discuss the term ‘ethnicity’ and how it is linked into ‘race’ and ‘nationality’
• • be able to explain what language contact refers to and how pidgins and creoles sometimes develop as a result
• • have developed an awareness of the existence of non-standard varieties of English which are associated with ethnic groups that are often viewed pejoratively
• • have developed an awareness of the (negative) ways different ethnic groups are sometimes represented in the press and by other ethnic groups.

Sample examination questions

1. 1. How is language linked to a person’s ethnicity? You may choose to look at the language a person/group uses to express their ethnic identity, or you may choose to look at how language is used to represent people or groups. In either case, provide examples and refer to research in this area.
2. 2. Discuss why pidgins and creoles are often considered as substandard varieties of the languages they are related to, although sociolinguists (see Romaine, 2000, p.174) argue that they are language varieties in their own right. Support your discussion with examples and reference to linguistic work in this area.
3. 3. What are the similarities and differences between code-switching and crossing? In your answer consider the speakers, contexts, linguistic forms and functions. You must support your answer with references to research.
4. 4. Does a speaker’s ethnic identity predetermine the way they speak or does language help speakers to construct their identity as ethnic?