Usage of Dialectic and Linguistic Varieties of Iranian Ethnicity in Tehran based on Cognitive- Socio Linguistic Study

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Department of Linguistics, North Tehran Branch , Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

2 Associate Professor of Linguistics, Payame Noor University, Tehran, Iran

3 Professor of French Language and Literature, Tarbiat Modarres University, Tehran, Iran

4 Professor of Linguistics, Payame Noor University, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

This study investigates the social status of the varieties of Iranian languages and dialects towards the use of lectals from the perspective of the hidden cognitive realities of real language use within the framework of lectal variation theory. A researcher-constructed survey questionnaire and interview were used in this study. Linguistic data were collected from 314 participants selected semi-randomly from among the language community of immigrants living in Tehran with ten different varieties of Persian languages. Participants had the apportunity to choose one of the varieties of languages (standard or non-standard) in two areas of home invoirement (having conversation with parents, siblings, spouses and children) and out of home invoirement (having conversation with colleagues, professors, classmates and people in the society). The Likert scale was used to measure the questionnaire items. Cronbach’s alpha was used to measure the reliability. Besides, the Chi-square test was used to receive statistical results. According to the results, Due to the power component, the greater validation of the standard language, Escape from their audience’s negative judgments towards their language varieties and ultimately to gain social prestige, 84.71% of speakers of language varieties in Tehran prefer to use the standard variety of Persian language in their daily conversation. In terms of language identity, speakers of languages especially Laki and Kurdish speakers have more powerful sense of real identity toward their non-standard variety of Persian language.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

References
Brubaker, R., & Cooper, F. (2000). “Beyond identity”. Theory and Society. Reprinted in Brubaker’s Ethnicity Without Groups. 29: 1–47.
Chambers, J. K. (1995). Sociolinguistic theory: Linguistic variation and its social significance. Oxford, UK and Cambridge, USA: Blackwell.
Chambers, J.K., & Trudgill, P. (1998). Dialectology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Chambers, J. K., & Trudgill, P. (2004). Dialectology (2nd edition), Cambridge: Cambridge.
Crystal, D. (2007). How Language Works. (A. Rabie, Trans., 2014). Tehran: Elmī Publications. [In Persian]
Dabir-Moghaddam, M. (2008). Language, dialect, accent and variety:Their use in the writings of Iranian and non-Iranian Scholars. Journal of Adab Pazhuhi, 2(5), 91-128. [In Persian]
Dabir-moghaddam, M., Yousefi Rad, F., Shaghaghi, V., & Motesharrei, S. M. (2018). “Cognitive Sociolinguistics: Introducing a New Approach to Meaning and Linguistic Variations”. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 1(4), 20-29. [In Persian]
              doi: 10.30473/il.2018.5358
Edwards, J. (2009). Language and Identity: An introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Geeraerts, D. (2001). On Measuring Lexical Convergence. In Augusto Soares da Silva ( ed.), Linguagem e Cognicao (PP.51 -61).
Geeraerts D., Kristiansen, G., Peirsman, Y. (ed.s). (2010). Advances in cognitive sociolinguistics. Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG.
Giles, H., & Coupland, N. (1991). “Language attitudes: discursive, contextual and gerontological considerations”. In: A. G. Reynolds (ed.), Bilingualism, multiculturalism, and second language learning. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. 21–42
Kistiansen, G. & Dirven, R. (2008). Cognitive Sociolinguistics: Language Variation, Cultural Models, Social System. Berlin/ New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Kristiansen, G. (2006). “Towards a Usage-based Cognitive Phonology”. International Journal of English Studies, 6/2, 107-140.
Labov, W. (1966). The social stratification of English in New York City. Washington, DC: Centre for Applied Linguistics.
Labov, W. (1984). “Field Method of the Project on Linguistic Change and Variation”. In: J. Baugh & J. Sherzer (ed.s), Language in Use. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice ttall.
Labov, W. (1994) Principles of Linguistic Change. 1, Oxford: Blackwell.
Lambert, W. E. (1967). “A social psychology of bilingualism”. Journal of Social Issues, 23, 91–109.
Mousavi Bojnourdi, M. K. (2001). The Great Islamic Encyclopedia, Vol. 10. Tehran: The Center for the Great Islamic Encyclopedia. [In Persian]
mozaffari, S. , Modarresi, Y. , Afrashi, A. and Assi, M. (2019). “The Impact of Social Factors on the Use of Lectal Variations from a Socio-cognitive Linguistics Perspective.” Journal of Sociolinguistics, 2(4), 27-40. [In Persian]
              doi: 10.30473/il.2019.42023.1181
Pishghadam,R. , Ebrahimi,S. , Shairi,H. R. and Derakhshan,A. (2021). Introducing “Emotion Language” as the Missing Link in Ethnography of Communication: A Complement to Hymes Model’s SPEAKING. Language Related Research, 12(1), 1-41. doi: 10.29252/LRR.12.1.1. [In Persian]
Sachdev, I., & Bourhis, R. Y. (1990). “Language and Social Identification”. In: D. Abrams and M. A. Hogg (eds.), Social Identity and Social Cognition. Blackwell. , 211-229.
Sarli, N. (2008). Standard Persian Language. Tehran: Hermes Publications. [In Persian]
Young, J. E., & Gluhoski, V. (1997). “A Schema- focused perspective on satisfaction in close relationship”. In R. J. Sternberg & M. Hojjat (EDs). Satisfaction in close relationship, New York: The Gilford Press.
Young J. E., Klosko, J. S., & Weishaar, M. E.(2003) Schema therapy: a practitioner’s guide. New York: Guilford.
Linguistic Studies: Theory and Practice
Volume 3, Issue 4 - Serial Number 8
Winter 2025
December 2025
Pages 129-152

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 08 February 2024
  • Revise Date: 16 May 2024
  • Accept Date: 05 July 2024

Share

How to cite

Statistics