Reading Working Papers in Linguistics 4 (2000) - The University of ...

SOCIAL NETWORKS IN A RURAL SETTING
[…] this chain of dependence running from political and socio-economic structures
through life-modes to network structure and ultimately to sociolinguistic structure […].
[…] these economically determined life-modes give rise not only to the social and
cultural differences described by Højrup, but to different kinds of network structure
(Milroy, J. and Milroy, L. 1992: 19 – 22, emphasis mine).
If these macro socio-economic and political factors are the actuators of modes
of production, then they have surely placed these two women of the same
social class into the same modes of production. This worker life mode
(Højrup’s life mode 2) should then produce similar levels of network
integration, and these two women should then have similar network and
language scores. However, as can be seen in the extract on Paula and Hannah,
they do not. If the mental orientation of these two speakers to the local
community had been measured, perhaps more light would have been shed on
their differing linguistic scores. I believe that Milroy’s data supports the
hypothesis that a positive mental orientation to the local group will cause the
person to signal this in language use, although mental orientation to the local
group was not measured in Milroy’s study. Personal character traits, such as
relative introversion, will affect personal choice in integration into local social
networks, but will still allow the person to signal local solidarity with
language use. This will produce low correlations between social network
scores and language use on the one hand, and high correlations between
attitudes to the local group and language use on the other, as is found in
Pedersen’s data and that of the Doric Study.
It should be made clear at this point that the alternative line of causality
proposed in this study does not ignore the potential influence a network may
have on an individual. It is felt that, while people are free to make choices
when it comes to social (including linguistic) behaviour, they are nevertheless
constrained by what is available to choose from. The question of who is the
agent is important, though. Social networks must have some effect on social
behaviour, and in certain contexts, this influence will be more keenly felt than
in others. However, I argue that mental attitude, solidarity, or orientation is the
locus of actuation, the driving force behind choices made about levels of
social network integration and language use. This can account for a high
degree of correlation between network indices and language use, as is found in
Milroy’s data, as well for low degrees of correlation, as found in Pedersen’s
and the Doric data, where mental urbanisation is found to be more important.
An individual with a highly positive mental orientation to a speech community
139