Got class? Community-shared conceptualizations of social class in evaluative reactions to sociolinguistic variables

Author(s):  
Laura Staum Casasanto ◽  
Stefan Grondelaers ◽  
Roeland van Hout
2021 ◽  
pp. 136078042098512 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louise Folkes

Discussions around social mobility have increasingly gained traction in both political and academic circles in the last two decades. The current, established conceptualisation of social mobility reduces ‘success’ down to individual level of educational achievement, occupational position and income, focusing on the successful few who rise up and move out. For many in working-class communities, this discourse is undesirable or antithetical to everyday life. Drawing upon 13 interviews with 9 families collected as part of an ethnographic study, this article asks, ‘how were social (im)mobility narratives and notions of value constructed by residents of one working-class community?’ Its findings highlight how alternative narratives of social (im)mobility were constructed; emphasising the value of fixity, anchorage, and relationality. Three key techniques were used by participants when constructing social (im)mobility narratives: the born and bred narrative; distancing from education as a route to mobility; and the construction of a distinct working-class discourse of fulfilment. Participants highlighted the value of anchorage to place and kinship, where fulfilment results from finding ontological security. The findings demonstrate that residents of a working-class community constructed alternative social mobility narratives using a relational selfhood model that held local value. This article makes important contributions to the theorisation of social mobility in which it might be understood as a collective rather than individual endeavour, improving entire communities that seek ontological security instead of social class movement and dislocation.


2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 93-106
Author(s):  
Yugank Goyal

Why do we buy houses as opposed to renting one? This question, in its simplistic formulation captures, inter alia, some of the most fundamental emotions of temporal values that we impose on ourselves. Yet, the question has attracted little scholarly scrutiny. The article, using this question as a case, attempts to excavate the silences of our imagination of time in the cacophony of modernity. Time has had varying versions of existence in the modern world. When time is singular, it has the same meaning attributed to by everyone in the same community. A pluralistic conception of time is the exact opposite. I use discount rates as a unique entry point to understand how people view their future (time), and thereby a conceptual aperture to see if time is losing its singularity or not. More importantly, how so. I collected data on house prices in India in five major metropolitan cities in India and compared those prices with rental values. The crude estimation is a useful proxy to observe discount rates, and consequently, varying conceptions of time. I show that time has become a homogenized entity for people falling in similar economic class while it has lost its singularity for those within the same social class (community). This gets folded into questions of ethical implications of modernity’s impact on one’s aspirations.


ICAME Journal ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 111-134
Author(s):  
Ivor Timmis

Abstract This article investigates the relationship between certain pronoun uses and identity in a 1930s working class community. It is based on a corpus of informal conversations drawn from the Mass-Observation archive, a sociological and anthropological study of the Bolton (UK) working class at this time. The article argues that certain pronoun uses in the corpus can only be explained as homophoric reference, a kind of reference which depends on implicit agreement about the intended referent of the pronoun. The article then discusses the basis on which this implicit agreement could operate: shared culture and knowledge and a tight network of social relations. In the conclusion, two particular questions are raised: 1) How far can the homophoric reference described be related to social class? 2) When does (dialect) grammar become pragmatics?


2016 ◽  
Vol 63 (4) ◽  
pp. 487-496 ◽  
Author(s):  
Blake A. Allan ◽  
Patton O. Garriott ◽  
Chesleigh N. Keene

2004 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Ruiz ◽  
M. W. Roosa ◽  
N. A. Gonzales
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document