speech community in sociolinguistics

A Definition of Speech Community in Sociolinguistics

Fine Art Images/Heritage Images/Getty Images

• An Introduction to Punctuation
• Ph.D., Rhetoric and English, University of Georgia
• M.A., Modern English and American Literature, University of Leicester
• B.A., English, State University of New York

Speech community is a term in sociolinguistics and linguistic anthropology used to describe a group of people who share the same language,  speech  characteristics, and ways of interpreting communication. Speech communities may be large regions like an urban area with a common, distinct accent (think of Boston with its dropped r's) or small units like families and friends (think of a nickname for a sibling). They help people define themselves as individuals and community members and identify (or misidentify) others.

Speech and Identity

The concept of speech as a means of identifying with a community first emerged in 1960s academia alongside other new fields of research like ethnic and gender studies. Linguists like John Gumperz pioneered research in how personal interaction can influence ways of speaking and interpreting, while Noam Chomsky studied how people interpret language and derive meaning from what they see and hear.

Types of Communities

Speech communities can be large or small, although linguists don't agree on how they're defined. Some, like linguist Muriel Saville-Troike, argue that it's logical to assume that a shared language like English, which is spoken throughout the world, is a speech community. But she differentiates between "hard-shelled" communities, which tend to be insular and intimate, like a family or religious sect, and "soft-shelled" communities where there is a lot of interaction.

But other linguists say a common language is too vague to be considered a true speech community. The linguistic anthropologist Zdenek Salzmann describes it this way:

"[P]eople who speak the same language are not always members of the same speech community. On the one hand, speakers of South Asian English in India and Pakistan share a language with citizens of the U.S., but the respective varieties of English and the rules for speaking them are sufficiently distinct to assign the two populations to different speech communities..."

Instead, Salzman and others say, speech communities should be more narrowly defined based on characteristics such as pronunciation, grammar, vocabulary, and manner of speaking.

Study and Research

The concept of speech community plays a role in a number of social science, namely sociology, anthropology, linguists, even psychology. People who study issues of migration and ethnic identity use social community theory to study things like how immigrants assimilate into larger societies, for instance. Academics who focus on racial, ethnic, sexual​ or gender issues apply social community theory when they study issues of personal identity and politics. It also plays a role in data collection. By being aware of how communities are defined, researchers can adjust their subject pools in order to obtain representative sample populations.

• Morgan, Marcyliena H. "What Are Speech Communities?" Cambridge University Press, 2014.
• Salzmann, Zdenek. "Language, Culture, and Society: An Introduction to Linguistic Anthropology." Westview, 2004
• Saville-Troike, Muriel. "The Ethnography of Communication: An Introduction, 3rd ed." Blackwell, 2003.
• The Differences Between Socialism and Communism
• The Difference Between a Speech and Discourse Community
• What Is Linguistic Anthropology?
• Diglossia in Sociolinguistics
• Style-shifting (language)
• Discourse Domain
• Descriptivism in Language
• Communicative Competence Definition, Examples, and Glossary
• Idiolect (Language)
• Linguistic Variation
• Understanding Dialectology
• Sociolinguistics
• Definition and Examples of Anti-Language
• Information Content (Language)
• Social Dialect or Sociolect Definition and Examples
• Ethnic Dialects

Rethinking Community in Linguistics: Language and Community in the Digital Age

• First Online: 01 January 2020

Cite this chapter

• Sven Leuckert 2  

895 Accesses

5 Citations

Within the field of linguistics, sociolinguistics has a long-standing tradition of providing highly relevant contributions to community research, in particular with its work on speech communities and communities of practice. While ‘speech communities’ are groups with shared values and attitudes towards language use, the term ‘community of practice’ emphasises the idea of shared goals and practices in a community. Sven Leuckert’s contribution links these traditional notions of sociolinguistics to the digital realm by reporting on a case study using data from the social media platform Reddit , a major website for online communities. In order to establish that subreddits, i.e. specialised sub-forums on Reddit , are indeed (linguistic) communities, linguistic features shared by users on the website and meta-comments about the community are presented and discussed. A central outcome of the case study is that online communities have much in common with traditional ideas of communities, but they also offer new challenges and insights for sociolinguistics and community research in a wider context. In particular, the degree of freedom and accessibility as well as the blurring of modes of communication in online communities require in-depth analysis.

I would like to thank Bettina Jansen and Claudia Lange for their insightful comments on an earlier version of this chapter. All remaining shortcomings are entirely my own.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Quine on Shared Language and Linguistic Communities

Communities, Networks and Contemporary Language Revitalisation

Heteroglossia as Practice and Pedagogy

Androutsopoulos, Jannis. 2006. “Introduction: Sociolinguistics and Computer-Mediated Communication.” Journal of Sociolinguistics 10 (4): 419–438.

Article   Google Scholar  

Anthony, Laurence. 2018. AntConc (Version 3.5.7) [Computer Software]. Tokyo: Waseda University. http://www.laurenceanthony.net/ . Accessed August 10, 2018.

Baym, Nancy K. 2003. “Communication in Online Communities.” In Encyclopedia of Community . Vol. 3, edited by Karen Christiansen and David Levinson, 1015–1017. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Google Scholar  

Blommaert, Jan. 2010. The Sociolinguistics of Globalization . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Book   Google Scholar  

Bucholtz, Mary. 1999. “‘Why Be Normal?’: Language and Identity Practices in a Community of Nerd Girls.” Language in Society 28 (2): 203–223.

Coupland, Nikolas. 2007. Style: Language Variation and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Danet, Brenda, and Susan C. Herring. 2007. The Multilingual Internet: Language, Culture, and Communication Online. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Dayter, Daria, and Sofia Rüdiger. 2016. “Reporting from the Field: The Narrative Reconstruction of Experience in Pick-Up Artist Online Communities.” Open Linguistics 2: 337–351.

Eckert, Penelope, and Étienne Wenger. 2005. “What Is the Role of Power in Sociolinguistic Variation?” Journal of Sociolinguistics 9 (4): 582–589.

Eckert, Penelope, and Sally McConnell-Ginet. 1992. “Think Practically and Look Locally: Language and Gender as Community-Based Practice.” Annual Review of Anthropology 21: 461–490.

Eckert, Penelope, and Sally McConnell-Ginet. 2003. Language and Gender . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Gumperz, John J. 1968. “The Speech Community.” In International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences , edited by David L. Sills, 381–386. New York: Macmillan.

Graham, Sage Lambert. 2007. “Conflict, (Im)Politeness and Identity in a Computer-Mediated Community.” Journal of Pragmatics 39: 742–759.

Herring, Susan C. 2004. “Computer-Mediated Discourse Analysis: An Approach to Researching Online Communities.” In Designing for Virtual Communities in the Service of Learning , edited by Sasha A. Barab, Rob Kling, and James H. Gray, 338–376. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Heyd, Theresa. 2016. “Global Varieties of English Gone Digital: Orthographic and Semantic Variation in Digital Nigerian Pidgin.” In English in Computer-Mediated Communication: Variation, Representation, and Change , edited by Lauren Squires, 101–122. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Hinrichs, Lars. 2006. Codeswitching on the Web: English and Jamaican Creole in E-Mail Communication . Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Hockett, Charles F. 1960. “The Origin of Speech.” Scientific American 203: 88–96.

Koch, Peter, and Wulf Oesterreicher. (1985) 2012. “Language of Immediacy—Language of Distance: Orality and Literacy from the Perspective of Language Theory and Linguistic History.” In Communicative Spaces: Variation, Contact, and Change : Papers in Honour of Ursula Schaefer , edited by Claudia Lange, Beatrix Weber, and Göran Wolf, 441–473. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.

Kopaczyk, Joanna, and Andreas H. Jucker. 2013. Communities of Practice in the History of English . Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Krefeld, Thomas. 2016. “L’immédiat, la proximité et la distance communicative.” In Manuel de linguistique française , edited by Claudia Polzin-Haumann and Wolfgang Schweickard, 262–274. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Labov, William. 1972. Sociolinguistic Patterns. Philadelphia: University of Philadelphia Press.

Labov, William. 1994. Principles of Linguistic Change, Vol. I: Internal Factors . Oxford: Blackwell.

Lave, Jean, and Étienne Wenger. 1991. Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lawthom, Rebecca. 2011. “Developing Learning Communities: Using Communities of Practice within Community Psychology.” International Journal of Inclusive Education 15 (1): 153–164.

Love, Robbie, Claire Dembry, Andrew Hardie, Vaclav Brezina, and Tony McEnery. 2017. “The Spoken BNC2014: Designing and Building a Spoken Corpus of Everyday Conversations.” International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 22 (3): 319–344.

Mair, Christian. 2013. “The World System of Englishes: Accounting for the Transnational Importance of Mobile and Mediated Vernaculars.” English World-Wide 34 (3): 253–278.

Meyerhoff, Miriam. 2011. Introducing Sociolinguistics. 2nd ed. Oxon: Routledge.

Milroy, James, and Leslie Milroy. 1985. “Linguistic Change, Social Network and Speaker Innovation.” Journal of Linguistics 21: 339–384.

Milroy, Lesley, and Matthew Gordon. 2003. Sociolinguistics: Method and Interpretation. Oxford: Blackwell.

Moore, Emma. 2006. “‘You Tell All the Stories’: Using Narrative to Explore Hierarchy within a Community of Practice.” Journal of Sociolinguistics 10 (5): 611–640.

Morgan, Marcyliena H. 2014. Speech Communities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Patrick, Peter L. 2009. “The Speech Community.” In Sociolinguistics, Volume VI: Theoretical Perspectives in Sociolinguistics , edited by Nikolas Coupland and Adam Jaworski, 245–267. Oxon: Routledge.

Preece, Jenny, Diane Maloney-Krichmar, and Chadia Abras. 2003. “History of Online Communities.” In Encyclopedia of Community (Volume 3), edited by Karen Christiansen and David Levinson, 1023–1027. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Saussure, Ferdinand de. (1916) 1967. Cours de linguistique générale . Originally published by Charles Bally and Albert Séchehaye with the Collaboration of Albert Riedlinger. Critical edition by Tullio de Mauro. Paris: Payot.

The British National Corpus , version 3 (BNC XML Edition). 2007. Distributed by Bodleian Libraries, University of Oxford, on behalf of the BNC Consortium. http://www.natcorp.ox.ac.uk/ . Accessed August 14, 2018.

Thibault, Paul J. 1997. Re-Reading Saussure: The Dynamics of Signs in Social Life . London: Routledge.

Wenger-Trayner, Étienne, and Beverly Wenger-Trayner. 2015. “Communities of Practice: A Brief Introduction.” Wenger-Trayner , April 15. http://wenger-trayner.com/wpcontent/uploads/2015/04/07-Brief-introduction-to-communities-of-practice.pdf . Accessed September 20, 2018.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany

Sven Leuckert

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sven Leuckert .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Institute of English and American Studies, TU Dresden, Dresden, Saxony, Germany

Bettina Jansen

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Leuckert, S. (2020). Rethinking Community in Linguistics: Language and Community in the Digital Age . In: Jansen, B. (eds) Rethinking Community through Transdisciplinary Research. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31073-8_7

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31073-8_7

Published : 01 January 2020

Publisher Name : Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-31072-1

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-31073-8

eBook Packages : Literature, Cultural and Media Studies Literature, Cultural and Media Studies (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• Architecture and Design
• Asian and Pacific Studies
• Business and Economics
• Classical and Ancient Near Eastern Studies
• Computer Sciences
• Cultural Studies
• Engineering
• General Interest
• Geosciences
• Industrial Chemistry
• Islamic and Middle Eastern Studies
• Jewish Studies
• Library and Information Science, Book Studies
• Life Sciences
• Linguistics and Semiotics
• Literary Studies
• Materials Sciences
• Mathematics
• Social Sciences
• Sports and Recreation
• Theology and Religion
• Publish your article
• The role of authors
• Promoting your article
• Abstracting & indexing
• Publishing Ethics
• Why publish with De Gruyter
• How to publish with De Gruyter
• Our book series
• Our subject areas
• Your digital product at De Gruyter
• Contribute to our reference works
• Product information
• Tools & resources
• Product Information
• Promotional Materials
• Orders and Inquiries
• FAQ for Library Suppliers and Book Sellers
• Repository Policy
• Free access policy
• Open Access agreements
• Database portals
• For Authors
• Customer service
• People + Culture
• Journal Management
• How to join us
• Working at De Gruyter
• Mission & Vision
• De Gruyter Foundation
• De Gruyter Ebound
• Our Responsibility
• Partner publishers

Your purchase has been completed. Your documents are now available to view.

Redrawing the boundary of “speech community”: how and why the historicity and materiality of language and the space/place distinction matter to its reconceptualization

This essay contemplates how we adapt existing sociolinguistic theoretical concepts, methodologies, and analytical units to the world we live in today. Regardless of one’s location on the globe, our lives are profoundly affected by increasingly intense global interconnections and, at the same time, equally intense differentiation of space attending late global capitalism and the evolving nation-state system. While sociolinguistics has attended the heterogeneity within the speech community, in the world today as such, the idea of speech community as bounded is no longer tenable. In envisioning the future direction of IJSL and its leadership in the field, this essay suggests that speech community as an analytical concept would be significantly advanced through the theoretical integration of the space/place distinction and the historicity and materiality of language into its architectonics. By drawing on some of the recent works for guiding models, the essay argues that the reconceptualization of speech community would also demand radical openness to interdisciplinary approaches.

Since its inauguration in 1974, the International Journal of the Sociology of Language (IJSL) has been one of the staple intellectual resources for students interested in the social organization of language and language use. One of the most notable features of IJSL that has been sustained through its entire history is its commitment to expanding sociolinguistics to include both researchers and research sites from across the globe through, for example, region- and/or country-based special issues regularly published in the IJSL. Such an encompassing engagement in regionally and nationally specific sociolinguistic content is both intellectually and politically important, and I would like the journal to continue to honor – and renew – this tradition, as it warrants the journal’s firm commitment to striving to balance more Eurocentric knowledge and knowledge production.

Needless to say, IJSL’s truly international character is not simply a matter of editorial policies. The real challenge for IJSL in particular and the field of sociolinguistics in general is how to adapt existing sociolinguistic theoretical concepts, methodologies, and analytical units to the increasingly intense global interconnections and, at the same time, to do justice to equally intense differentiation of space attending late global capitalism and the evolving nation-state system. Do analytical units such as the speech community, the region, and even the nation-state, still hold in the same way as before, when, in reality, their boundaries are increasingly more porous and permeable, even as inequalities and “local” consequences of globalization proliferate across space? How might our existing commonsense assumptions about location necessarily change were we to revisit, for example, the epistemology of “speech community” for sociolinguistic research design, methods, and analysis? For example, we see a host of rich sociolinguistic studies engaging in networked ethnography and digital/ICT mediated ethnography, which address such issues.

In order to clarify my point, I would like to draw on marxist geographer David Harvey’s (1993) discussion of the distinction between place and space. Following Harvey (1993) , “place” can be understood as a surface to which people have subjective ties commonly called lived experience. Memories, hopes, despair, emotions, and identities are both literally and figuratively inscribed on place. It is a surface that is “meaning- ful ” for people. Sociolinguistics is at its best when it captures the dynamics and intricacies of the ways in which language plays a mediating role in sociality, for example, in the case of memory and other forms of lived experience. Sociolinguistics is at its best when it seeks to understand the role of language in such place-making, as its semiotic capacity can not only symbolically but existentially (or indexically) anchor linguistic practice in a given space.

“Space,” on the other hand, is a systematic surface, and is, therefore, calculative, abstractable, and standardizable. Space is not the medium of lived experience, but the “container” for thinking about processes that transcend place. That thinking can be either analytical (for example, the distribution or environmental hazards) or practical (the cost of transport and communication across distance), and either critical (for example, organizing social movements across national borders) or repressive (plotting the war on terror).

Capitalism, as Harvey and his colleagues have argued, is inescapably a spatial process in which uneven development and other spatial relations have fundamental rules in the production and appropriation of surplus value. The spatial effect of the capitalist machine is to produce differential – to make place in the concrete sense of fixed factories, communities of workers (and the unemployed), and arrangements of infrastructure. This suggests that space and place might be better thought of not in terms of the micro-macro scale, but as contemporaneously dialectic ( Amin 2002 ; see also Carr and Lempert 2016 ). As Harvey (1993) points out, capitalist globalization unevenly moves and invests its surpluses in other locations, which then bring about new places and new place-making processes. Global logistical and transportation systems, as well as new media and telecommunication technologies, inevitably alter the temporality of lived experience (“creative destruction”) in any given place and its material conditions. The production of a new place is simultaneously the production of a new and contingent connectivity between and among places. Such connectivity, whether it is logistical, juridical, cultural, or political, makes it all the more difficult to treat a place as bounded. Here’s another example: the idea of national sovereignty is no longer an inalienable prerogative that defines an absolute boundary. For example, it is well recorded by anthropologists that many states in the Global South have pockets of places within their “sovereign” territories where trans-local institutions such as the IMF, World Bank, and even NGOs provide development aid and assistance, eclipsing the institutional capacity of the receiving country. And, of course, capital’s mobility is both disruptive and opportunity-making, generating strong pressures for the migration of labor, spawning diaspora of various kinds, where people physically and affectively inhabit multiple locations. How can we, in effect, reverse-engineer complex global processes to discern location as the playing-out of the tension between place and space, and what can we learn from such insights about new ways to conceptualize the sociolinguistic research site?

What I am observing here is nothing particularly new or original, as there are abundant sociolinguistic studies relevant to these issues. For example, we see a host of rich sociolinguistic studies engaging in networked ethnography and digital/ICT mediated ethnography, all of which address such issues. What I want to suggest here is that these lessons and insights recast and productively complicate the research site both analytically and methodologically. Here I also take a cue from Lo’s (2020) critical observation that sociolinguistic studies often get thematized by the “language and X,” which would also lead to the potential ethnographic impoverishment of the research site as the speech community.

In fact, some recent work already directly engages the theoretical question of the dialectical tension between place and space. Heller and McElhinny’s (2017) Language, Capitalism, Colonialism traces the role of language in the social formations of capitalism and colonialism, and, by doing so, show us how distantly located places are in fact interconnected in the history of the expansive spatialization of capitalism and empire. The book envisions an alternative historiography of language and discourse. The contributions in Duchêne and Heller’s (2013) edited volume, Language in Late Capitalism: Pride and Profit, collectively demonstrate the extent to which the contemporary system of global production – variously termed late capitalism, the new economy, or neoliberalism – plays definitive but diverse roles in transforming local places and the linguistic practices that mediate them. The analytical discernment of the relationship between place and space also gives us new insights into how power operates and how power relations get reproduced (see, for example, Martin Rojo and Del Percio 2020 ). It is also important to note that all the works mentioned also work through the critique of the separation between language and materiality, or of the assumption of language as immaterial ( Cavanaugh and Shankar 2017 ). Reconceptualization of language as material practice and reconceptualization of the notion of speech community thus mutually inform each other.

Finally, I would like to highlight a couple of points as my “wish list” for IJSL as its new editors come on board. First, as discussed above, regardless of the topic, global political economy has significantly changed “speech communities.” Although it is not the only force, we cannot afford to ignore capitalism and the global state system, which touches everywhere with increasing intensity. This makes it all the more important to have a robust theoretical discussion on how to conceptualize the local and the role of language in its making. This kind of focus has additional entailments. First, the historicity of language. This does not mean a history of language as a system or its usage. What I would like to advocate for is “a history of the present,” to borrow Foucault’s (1991 [1975]: 31) terms. It is not concerned with the origin of things, but with the question of how things have come to be at the present moment. A history of the present does not causally connect the present to the past. Instead, it asks under what conditions a particular object came into being, rather than other objects; it searches for the conditions of possibility for what appears to be the logical or inevitable outcome of its “history” and thus undermines the discourse that claims self-evident truths. A history of the present is a history that critiques the present moment not as inevitable or natural, but as the consequence of struggle and power relations. Rosa’s (2019) Looking Like a Language, Sounding Like a Race exemplifies such a genealogical analysis. Part of his book explores how the racial categories emerged in the US history of colonialism, and how they underwrote the way in which Latinx identities came to be naturalized by the emblematic indexical linkage between language and race. The historicization of indexicality thus requires a broader understanding of the socio-political condition, as it is both the ground and the means by which power operates.

Second, as IJSL is posed to lead the field into new directions, I would like to urge radical openness to interdisciplinary projects. While new approaches are likely to appear with critical reflection on one’s own discipline, we should also seek serious engagement with theories and methods from potentially allied disciplines. We can tap into a range of disciplines in social sciences and humanities, including but not limited to cultural anthropology, geography, media studies, science and technology studies, political science, psychology, and so on. Interdisciplinary engagement should not be limited to simple “additive” gains, but can induce innovation in theory and method at the core of sociolinguistics. What have we got to lose?

Amin, Ash. 2002. Spatialities of globalization. Environment and Planning A 34. 385–399. https://doi.org/10.1068/a3439 . Search in Google Scholar

Carr, E. Summerson & Michael Lempert. 2016. Scale: discourse and dimensions of social life . Oakland, California: University of California Press. 10.1525/9780520965430 Search in Google Scholar

Cavanaugh, Jillian R. & Shalini Shankar. 2017. Language and materiality: Ethnographic and theoretical explorations . Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781316848418 Search in Google Scholar

Duchêne, Alexandre & Monica Heller. 2013. Language in late capitalism: Pride and profit . London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203155868 Search in Google Scholar

Foucault, Michel. 1991. Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison . Alan Sheridan (tran). Harmondsworth: Penguin Books. Search in Google Scholar

Harvey, David. 1993. From space to place and back again: Reflections on the condition of postmodernity. In John Bird, Barry Curtis, Tim Putnam & Lisa Tickner (eds.), Mapping the futures: local cultures, global change , 7–44. London: Routledge. Search in Google Scholar

Heller, Monica & Bonnie McElhinny. 2017. Language, capitalism, colonialism: towards a critical history . North York, Ontario: University of Toronto Press. Search in Google Scholar

Lo, Adrienne. 2020. Systems, features, figures: Approaches to language and class vs. language and race. Journal of Sociolinguistics 24(3). 293–307. https://doi.org/10.1111/josl.12414 . Search in Google Scholar

Martín Rojo, Luisa & Alfonso Del Percio. 2020. Language and neoliberal governmentality . London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780429286711 Search in Google Scholar

Rosa, Jonathan. 2019. Looking like a language, sounding like a race: raciolinguistic ideologies and the learning of Latinidad . New York, NY: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780190634728.001.0001 Search in Google Scholar

© 2021 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

• X / Twitter

Supplementary Materials

Please login or register with De Gruyter to order this product.

Journal and Issue

Articles in the same issue.

Literary English

Speech Communities in Sociolinguistics | Linguistics

In the vast realm of sociolinguistics, one captivating concept that stands out is “Speech Communities.” These communities form the basis of human language interactions, shaping the way we communicate and connect with one another. In this article, we will delve into the intriguing world of speech communities, exploring their definitions, intersections, and the concept of a community of practice.

What are Speech Communities?

A speech community refers to a group of people who share a common language or dialect and use it to communicate with one another regularly. It is essential to note that speech communities are not solely defined by geographical boundaries but can transcend physical distances through shared linguistic characteristics. In the social context, we expect certain individuals to exhibit linguistic behaviors similar to others, signifying that they may use the same language, dialect, or variety, and thus belong to the same speech community.

The term “speech community” originates from the German Sprachgemeinschaft. Another way to define it is as a group of people who share linguistic norms and expectations concerning language usage. However, there are some ambiguities surrounding this term, and its precise definition remains a topic of debate in scholarly literature.

When defining speech communities, certain aspects are often emphasized, including shared community membership and shared linguistic communication. As sociolinguistics examines language use within or among groups of speakers, the notion of a “group” becomes crucial. Defining a group can be challenging, so instead, we can consider its characteristics:

• A group must consist of at least two members, with no upper limit.
• People can come together in groups for various reasons, such as social, religious, political, cultural, familial, vocational, or avocational purposes.
• Groups may extend beyond their members as individuals can join or leave.
• Group members might also belong to other groups, and they may or may not have face-to-face interactions.
• The organization of a group can be either tight or loose.

Lyons (1970) provides a definition of a ‘real’ speech community as “all the people who use a given language (or dialect).” However, this definition raises questions about how to define a language or dialect, making it synonymous with the definition of a speech community. Thus, a speech community is essentially a social group with distinct speech characteristics that are of interest and can be described coherently.

Definitions of Speech Communities

Throughout the history of sociolinguistics, several distinguished linguists have offered their perspectives on speech communities:

•   Bloomfield (1933) offers a definition of a speech community as “a group of people who communicate through speech.”
• Charles Hockett, a prominent linguist, defined a speech community as a group of people who share a set of rules for communication. These rules encompass both verbal and non-verbal elements, enabling effective understanding and interaction within the community.
• Gumperz (1971) describes a speech community as “any gathering of individuals who regularly and frequently interact using a common set of spoken symbols, and they are distinguished from similar gatherings by notable differences in language usage”.
• William Labov, another influential figure in the field, emphasized the role of social factors in defining speech communities. According to Labov, members of a speech community not only share linguistic features but also adhere to specific norms and attitudes towards language usage.
• As stated by Patrick (2002), the category of group that sociolinguists have typically endeavored to investigate is referred to as the speech community.
• Dell Hymes introduced the concept of “communicative competence” as a defining characteristic of speech communities. This notion emphasizes the ability of community members to understand and produce language appropriately within various social contexts.

Intersecting Communities

Speech communities often intersect, leading to intriguing linguistic phenomena. In areas where multiple speech communities coexist, language contact can result in dialectal variations, code-switching, and language borrowing.

1. Multilingual Communities

In regions with diverse language groups, multilingual communities emerge. These communities foster a rich linguistic environment, where individuals might be proficient in multiple languages and engage in code-switching effortlessly.

2. Urban vs. Rural Communities

Urban centers, characterized by greater diversity and mobility, often house a variety of speech communities. On the other hand, rural areas might have more homogeneous speech communities with distinct linguistic features.

The Idea of Community of Practice

The concept of a “community of practice” complements the notion of speech communities by focusing on shared activities and interests. A community of practice involves individuals who come together to pursue a common goal, develop their skills, and create a shared language related to their domain. For example, within a workplace, employees involved in a specific project form a community of practice, exchanging domain-specific jargon and expressions that outsiders may find difficult to understand.

Speech communities play a fundamental role in shaping our linguistic identities and social interactions. From the definitions proposed by renowned linguists to the fascinating intersections with other communities, the study of speech communities provides valuable insights into the intricate world of sociolinguistics. Understanding the dynamics of speech communities can lead to enhanced cross-cultural communication, better appreciation of linguistic diversity, and the promotion of inclusive practices in various social settings.

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Speech community and beyond 2009

2009, The New Sociolinguistics Reader. Basingstoke: …

Related Papers

Te Reo Proceedings of the Linguistic Society of New Zealand

Janet Holmes

The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics

Udaya Narayana Singh

alireza dabbaghi

Interdisciplinary Journal of Linguistics, Vol(5):195-224

Prakash Mondal

In sociolinguistics and in society at large there are several phenomena and constructs like register, repertoire, argot, variety, dialect, style, diglossia ( or multiglossia), sociolect, accent, code switching, code mixing. These are part of a speech-society interactive relationship; they have no isolated existence other than that in which all these sociolinguistic phenomena and constructs mix up with one another, grow up and hence co-exist in an integrated setting. In every society, this sort of integration happens, but the degree to which those phenomena mix varies from one society to another, from one person to another and even within an individual from one situation to another. This article postulates that the organic co-existence of these phenomena (and constructs) happens everywhere in every utterance (and sometimes in writing), and that kind of mixture can be placed on a continuum on one side of which exists the most mixed case and on the other, the least mixed.

Katie Drager

Philosophical Transactions of The Royal Society B Biological Sciences

Todd Freeberg

The 'social complexity hypothesis' for communication posits that groups with complex social systems require more complex communicative systems to regulate interactions and relations among group members. Complex social systems, compared with simple social systems, are those in which individuals frequently interact in many different contexts with many different individuals, and often repeatedly interact with many of the same individuals in networks over time. Complex communicative systems, compared with simple communicative systems, are those that contain a large number of structurally and functionally distinct elements or possess a high amount of bits of information. Here, we describe some of the historical arguments that led to the social complexity hypothesis, and review evidence in support of the hypothesis. We discuss social complexity as a driver of communication and possible causal factor in human language origins. Finally, we discuss some of the key current limitations...

Stephen J. Cowley

The underlying assumption of this paper is that language co-evolved with social coordination. In the commonest forms of language-based coordination, therefore, people do things together while also talking. Although there are many other ways of coupling language with human action and coaction, our concern is with the relevant coordinative capacities. Rejecting the view that they reduce to either pure Shannon information or embodied mind, we trace its grounding to social coordination. Language is sensorimotor coordination that (re) enacts the symbolic pattern of a collective world. Together, these shape human modes of action. Physical coordination contributes to linguistic interactions. Rather than argue that linguistic forms are ‘wired’ by an individual brain, we turn to how cognition can involve “concerns that are not immediately related to physiological and biological events” (Froese & Di Paolo 2011, p. 12). Since language is both non-local and physical, language has an important constitutive role in the human ecology. Given its non-local aspect, as we speak through language, language speaks through us: strategic gains can have gradually accrued from mutual coordination. Linking this insight to both Becker’s (1988) and Maturana’s (1978) views, we suggest that languaging be defined as “routine face-to-face activity in which wordings play a part” (Cowley 2012). From an evolutionary perspective, this shifts the focus from the results of grammatical and lexicographical analysis to how language arises as collective modes of control provide a background against which we can concert sensorimotor activity. On this view, language is whole-bodied activity that functions both directly –as concerted action –and as pattern has a constitutive role in social routines and practices.

Ben Rampton

Chiara Celata

Benjamin Bailey

RELATED PAPERS

Carlos Eduard

British Journal of Ophthalmology

R. Hitchings

irena matyasik

Avian Diseases

Taseer Ahmed Khan (S/L) Physiology

IEEE Access

bal sanghera

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH

ANKITA JYOTIRMAYEE ROUT

Seminario-performances noviembre

Francisco Bethencourt Llobet , Marcos Roca Sierra

Alexander von Smekal

Analecta política

Mohamed Badine EL YATTIOUI

Semina: Ciências Agrárias

Juliano Fernandes

Phytomedicine

Amitabh Chandra

Biomaterials

Philipp Ciba

Revista Brasileira de Cartografia

Marcos Lins

International Journal of Biological Macromolecules

Aabgeena Naeem

International Journal of Stroke

Ulrike Waje-andreassen

Nayson Jonata

International Journal of Infectious Diseases

Marco Tovar

International journal of nanomedicine

Farman Ullah Khan

Autres familles Mâconnaises alliées aux DESVIGNES & aux de LAMARTINE.

Francis Hernandez

Pericles Zouhair

Slavonic Pedagogical Studies Journal

Tina Štemberger

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

40 Facts About Elektrostal

Written by Lanette Mayes

Modified & Updated: 21 May 2024

Reviewed by Jessica Corbett

Elektrostal is a vibrant city located in the Moscow Oblast region of Russia. With a rich history, stunning architecture, and a thriving community, Elektrostal is a city that has much to offer. Whether you are a history buff, nature enthusiast, or simply curious about different cultures, Elektrostal is sure to captivate you.

This article will provide you with 40 fascinating facts about Elektrostal, giving you a better understanding of why this city is worth exploring. From its origins as an industrial hub to its modern-day charm, we will delve into the various aspects that make Elektrostal a unique and must-visit destination.

So, join us as we uncover the hidden treasures of Elektrostal and discover what makes this city a true gem in the heart of Russia.

Key Takeaways:

• Elektrostal, known as the “Motor City of Russia,” is a vibrant and growing city with a rich industrial history, offering diverse cultural experiences and a strong commitment to environmental sustainability.
• With its convenient location near Moscow, Elektrostal provides a picturesque landscape, vibrant nightlife, and a range of recreational activities, making it an ideal destination for residents and visitors alike.

Known as the “Motor City of Russia.”

Elektrostal, a city located in the Moscow Oblast region of Russia, earned the nickname “Motor City” due to its significant involvement in the automotive industry.

Home to the Elektrostal Metallurgical Plant.

Elektrostal is renowned for its metallurgical plant, which has been producing high-quality steel and alloys since its establishment in 1916.

Boasts a rich industrial heritage.

Elektrostal has a long history of industrial development, contributing to the growth and progress of the region.

Founded in 1916.

The city of Elektrostal was founded in 1916 as a result of the construction of the Elektrostal Metallurgical Plant.

Located approximately 50 kilometers east of Moscow.

Elektrostal is situated in close proximity to the Russian capital, making it easily accessible for both residents and visitors.

Known for its vibrant cultural scene.

Elektrostal is home to several cultural institutions, including museums, theaters, and art galleries that showcase the city’s rich artistic heritage.

A popular destination for nature lovers.

Surrounded by picturesque landscapes and forests, Elektrostal offers ample opportunities for outdoor activities such as hiking, camping, and birdwatching.

Hosts the annual Elektrostal City Day celebrations.

Every year, Elektrostal organizes festive events and activities to celebrate its founding, bringing together residents and visitors in a spirit of unity and joy.

Has a population of approximately 160,000 people.

Elektrostal is home to a diverse and vibrant community of around 160,000 residents, contributing to its dynamic atmosphere.

Boasts excellent education facilities.

The city is known for its well-established educational institutions, providing quality education to students of all ages.

A center for scientific research and innovation.

Elektrostal serves as an important hub for scientific research, particularly in the fields of metallurgy , materials science, and engineering.

Surrounded by picturesque lakes.

The city is blessed with numerous beautiful lakes , offering scenic views and recreational opportunities for locals and visitors alike.

Well-connected transportation system.

Elektrostal benefits from an efficient transportation network, including highways, railways, and public transportation options, ensuring convenient travel within and beyond the city.

Famous for its traditional Russian cuisine.

Food enthusiasts can indulge in authentic Russian dishes at numerous restaurants and cafes scattered throughout Elektrostal.

Home to notable architectural landmarks.

Elektrostal boasts impressive architecture, including the Church of the Transfiguration of the Lord and the Elektrostal Palace of Culture.

Offers a wide range of recreational facilities.

Residents and visitors can enjoy various recreational activities, such as sports complexes, swimming pools, and fitness centers, enhancing the overall quality of life.

Provides a high standard of healthcare.

Elektrostal is equipped with modern medical facilities, ensuring residents have access to quality healthcare services.

Home to the Elektrostal History Museum.

The Elektrostal History Museum showcases the city’s fascinating past through exhibitions and displays.

A hub for sports enthusiasts.

Elektrostal is passionate about sports, with numerous stadiums, arenas, and sports clubs offering opportunities for athletes and spectators.

Celebrates diverse cultural festivals.

Throughout the year, Elektrostal hosts a variety of cultural festivals, celebrating different ethnicities, traditions, and art forms.

Electric power played a significant role in its early development.

Elektrostal owes its name and initial growth to the establishment of electric power stations and the utilization of electricity in the industrial sector.

Boasts a thriving economy.

The city’s strong industrial base, coupled with its strategic location near Moscow, has contributed to Elektrostal’s prosperous economic status.

Houses the Elektrostal Drama Theater.

The Elektrostal Drama Theater is a cultural centerpiece, attracting theater enthusiasts from far and wide.

Popular destination for winter sports.

Elektrostal’s proximity to ski resorts and winter sport facilities makes it a favorite destination for skiing, snowboarding, and other winter activities.

Promotes environmental sustainability.

Elektrostal prioritizes environmental protection and sustainability, implementing initiatives to reduce pollution and preserve natural resources.

Home to renowned educational institutions.

Elektrostal is known for its prestigious schools and universities, offering a wide range of academic programs to students.

Committed to cultural preservation.

The city values its cultural heritage and takes active steps to preserve and promote traditional customs, crafts, and arts.

Hosts an annual International Film Festival.

The Elektrostal International Film Festival attracts filmmakers and cinema enthusiasts from around the world, showcasing a diverse range of films.

Encourages entrepreneurship and innovation.

Elektrostal supports aspiring entrepreneurs and fosters a culture of innovation, providing opportunities for startups and business development.

Offers a range of housing options.

Elektrostal provides diverse housing options, including apartments, houses, and residential complexes, catering to different lifestyles and budgets.

Home to notable sports teams.

Elektrostal is proud of its sports legacy, with several successful sports teams competing at regional and national levels.

Boasts a vibrant nightlife scene.

Residents and visitors can enjoy a lively nightlife in Elektrostal, with numerous bars, clubs, and entertainment venues.

Promotes cultural exchange and international relations.

Elektrostal actively engages in international partnerships, cultural exchanges, and diplomatic collaborations to foster global connections.

Surrounded by beautiful nature reserves.

Nearby nature reserves, such as the Barybino Forest and Luchinskoye Lake, offer opportunities for nature enthusiasts to explore and appreciate the region’s biodiversity.

Commemorates historical events.

The city pays tribute to significant historical events through memorials, monuments, and exhibitions, ensuring the preservation of collective memory.

Promotes sports and youth development.

Elektrostal invests in sports infrastructure and programs to encourage youth participation, health, and physical fitness.

Hosts annual cultural and artistic festivals.

Throughout the year, Elektrostal celebrates its cultural diversity through festivals dedicated to music, dance, art, and theater.

Provides a picturesque landscape for photography enthusiasts.

The city’s scenic beauty, architectural landmarks, and natural surroundings make it a paradise for photographers.

Connects to Moscow via a direct train line.

The convenient train connection between Elektrostal and Moscow makes commuting between the two cities effortless.

A city with a bright future.

Elektrostal continues to grow and develop, aiming to become a model city in terms of infrastructure, sustainability, and quality of life for its residents.

In conclusion, Elektrostal is a fascinating city with a rich history and a vibrant present. From its origins as a center of steel production to its modern-day status as a hub for education and industry, Elektrostal has plenty to offer both residents and visitors. With its beautiful parks, cultural attractions, and proximity to Moscow, there is no shortage of things to see and do in this dynamic city. Whether you’re interested in exploring its historical landmarks, enjoying outdoor activities, or immersing yourself in the local culture, Elektrostal has something for everyone. So, next time you find yourself in the Moscow region, don’t miss the opportunity to discover the hidden gems of Elektrostal.

Q: What is the population of Elektrostal?

A: As of the latest data, the population of Elektrostal is approximately XXXX.

Q: How far is Elektrostal from Moscow?

A: Elektrostal is located approximately XX kilometers away from Moscow.

Q: Are there any famous landmarks in Elektrostal?

A: Yes, Elektrostal is home to several notable landmarks, including XXXX and XXXX.

Q: What industries are prominent in Elektrostal?

A: Elektrostal is known for its steel production industry and is also a center for engineering and manufacturing.

Q: Are there any universities or educational institutions in Elektrostal?

A: Yes, Elektrostal is home to XXXX University and several other educational institutions.

Q: What are some popular outdoor activities in Elektrostal?

A: Elektrostal offers several outdoor activities, such as hiking, cycling, and picnicking in its beautiful parks.

Q: Is Elektrostal well-connected in terms of transportation?

A: Yes, Elektrostal has good transportation links, including trains and buses, making it easily accessible from nearby cities.

Q: Are there any annual events or festivals in Elektrostal?

A: Yes, Elektrostal hosts various events and festivals throughout the year, including XXXX and XXXX.

Elektrostal's fascinating history, vibrant culture, and promising future make it a city worth exploring. For more captivating facts about cities around the world, discover the unique characteristics that define each city . Uncover the hidden gems of Moscow Oblast through our in-depth look at Kolomna. Lastly, dive into the rich industrial heritage of Teesside, a thriving industrial center with its own story to tell.

Was this page helpful?

Our commitment to delivering trustworthy and engaging content is at the heart of what we do. Each fact on our site is contributed by real users like you, bringing a wealth of diverse insights and information. To ensure the highest standards of accuracy and reliability, our dedicated editors meticulously review each submission. This process guarantees that the facts we share are not only fascinating but also credible. Trust in our commitment to quality and authenticity as you explore and learn with us.

Share this Fact: