Sociolinguistics and Language Education.pdf

Language Socialization 437
the appropriate communicative strategies, others may not, for a variety
of reasons, without explicit pedagogical intervention or consciousnessraising,
a point I will return to.
Language socialization research has always encompassed both language
education and language in education (i.e. socialization/learning to use language
and socialization/learning through language, Ochs & Schieffelin,
2008). However, education here should not be equated with formal education.
Language socialization research has examined the linguistic and
other communicative practices that people are socialized into across a
wide range of age groups and geographical, linguistic and social contexts
and also how language mediates the acquisition of other kinds of knowledge
(about science, law, engineering, about what foods at dinnertime are
considered tasty, about the nature of work, or morality; Ochs & Schieffelin,
2008). Informal education contexts range from parent–infant interactions
in the home to family dinner table discussions or community center groups
(Duff & Hornberger, 2008). The seminal early studies of the socialization
of young children (e.g. Schieffelin & Ochs, 1986) examined how people
convey expectations to young children regarding norms of communicative
competence in their communities, including sociolinguistically or
pragmatically appropriate language and literacy use connected with
everyday verbal interactions. Studies investigated how children learn, by
observation and sometimes prompts, reminders and admonitions to use
situationally appropriate greetings, requests and turn-taking behaviors
(‘Don’t interrupt’; ‘It’s not your turn’; ‘Now you can speak’) and considered
how children learn to take part in other ritualized speech acts, such
as teasing, shaming, or insulting one another or engaging in verbal play in
the manner that is commonly practiced in their communities (Ochs &
Schieffelin, 2008; Schieffelin & Ochs, 1986). The same children may naturally
experiment and innovate with language to develop new practices
and new codes of language, which create solidarity among their peers but
which they were not socialized into by their elders and, indeed, which
their elders may dislike or resist (e.g. youth slang or other forms of vernacular
language use, graffi ti, new instant messaging symbols or codes;
Lam, 2008).
Much language socialization research has, nevertheless, and increasingly,
been deeply concerned with more formal educational processes and
issues, such as the accommodation of diverse, often (potentially) disadvantaged,
learners within linguistic communities (Duff, 2008b; Heath,
1983). Researchers have sought to discover learners’ home and community
discourse traditions and any important differences there might be
between home and school (or school and work) environments with respect
to literacy practices, such as the ways in which children learn to talk about
texts. A practical goal has been to help educators and learners negotiate
better access to, and participation in, forms of discourse valued in