This document discusses the relationship between language and identity. It makes three key points: 1. Language displays one's identity through markers like accent and vocabulary, but identity is complex and can change over time or situation. People may choose to change languages and identities for social or economic reasons. 2. The emphasis placed on a language as an identity marker depends on social and political contexts. Minority languages often take on stronger identity roles than majority languages. 3. Identity is a fluid, dynamic concept that is shaped both by external factors and individual choices. While language provides cues to identity, it does not determine identity in an absolute sense. People have some ability to choose which identities they wish to claim or display through

1. Language and identity - individual,
social, national
At once, with contemptuous perversity, Mr Vladimir changed
the
language, and began to speak idiomatic English without the
slightest
trace of a foreign accent.
Joseph Conrad, The Secret Agent
One-dimensional social identities are not what they used to be
... We all
make choices about how seriously we take such identities, and
many of us
make choices about the identities themselves.
Walter Truett Anderson, Reality Isn 't What It Used to Be
A basic tenet of sociolinguistics is that language displays its
-ers' identity. The stories of Eliza Doolittle and the Osaka
samurai
sed in chapters I and 2, respectively, contain the same message:
_ language gives you away. This theme corresponds to strong
: ar beliefs about identity and language which on occasion take
__ ther peculiar forms. For example, when in March 2003,
desperate
_ ·ert the imminent Amei-ican attack on Iraq, Saddam Hussein

2. ....:::ed CBS reporter Dan Rather an exclusive interview, the
English
..=.::lation of his remarks was aired in an Arabic-accented
voice. The
~ belonged to Steve Winfield, a professional speaker known for
his
- in imitating accents. Upon inquiry, CBS declared the accent
was
-
03n ' to fit the nature ofthe broadcast'. This looks like an
instance of
-~r bizarre logic, since it was unmistakably clear that Mr
Saddam's
-=:nents were translated and hence not literally his words let
alone
oice. However, CBS's decision testifies to the belief that
identity is
_ -sed not just by what is said, but by how it is said; that the
.=:rage must match the message.
- twithstanding such unusual choice of accent as in the CBS
case,
_ is, of course, a great deal of inductive evidence for the
relationship
- intended to express. If you hear people speak Italian,
Japanese,
........ rican American English, you assume they are Italian,
Japanese,
- African American; and if you hear English spoken with an
Arabic
l71

3. 172 Sociolinguistics
accent, you assume the speaker to be an Arab: A more subtle
message,
perhaps, conveyed by the accented voice is this, 'once an Arab,
always
an Arab'. You are what you are. This is the whole point of
categories
and the logic of identity: p = p. Every individual is identical
with itself.
In linguistics, an important theoretical concept is grounded in
this
notion of self-identity. It is called 'native speaker'. 1
The native speaker is invoked as the arbiter of grammaticality
who is
needed as a conceptual reference point of grammatical
description,
although it is generally admitted that it has no real-world
referent. In
theoretical linguistics this concept is needed to justify the
delimitation
of the realm of inquiry and in order to be able to identify a
language. A
language in this sense is what native speakers speak. For the
purposes
of description and analysis non-native varieties can be ignored.
Like the
resultant grammar, the native speaker is a theoretical construct,
an
idealization, as Noam Chomsky has always emphasized. Yet,
this
concept has a strong popular appeal beyond the realm of
theoretical

4. linguistics where it is interpreted not as a construct but as a
primitive of
what we know about language. Everyone is a native speaker and
has a
native language, also known as 'mother tongue'; From this point
of
view, one's mother tongue is often conceptualized in Whorfian
terms as
an inescapable part of individual identity. A correlate of the
belief in the
nativity oflanguage is the widely held conviction that we can
have only
one mother tongue, just as we have only one (biological)
mother.
People who make us doubt this apparent truism are suspicious,
like
the above-quoted secret agent described by Joseph Conrad, who,
with
his non-native but perfect English prose, is a witness of sorts to
the case
under discussion here. Such suspicion is grounded in an
ideological
conception of language and identity which conflates individual
and
collective identity, linking both to loyalty. Only secret agents
and other
shadowy characters have a divided loyalty.
It should be obvious that the native speaker, the scientific
paradigm
that employs him and the grammatical descriptions that grow
out of his
testimony are a product of politics predicated on 'we-they'
distinctions
and the need for drawing community boundaries. Equally clear
is that a

5. unitary notion of native speaker and the linguistic theory based
on it
will have problems with stylistic variation, code-switching,
code mixing,
digloss(a, bilingualism, semilingualism, language attrition,
language shift,
nativized varieties of colonial languages, fluid mother-tongue
affiliations
and other language-contact phenomena that form the mainstay
of socio-
linguistic interest. They all have in common that they call for a
notion of
identity more sophisticated than 'p = p, and for ever so',
attesting
as they do to the great difficulty of distinguishing in a non-
arbitrary
fashion native from native-like, non-native and other"
gradations of
competence in a language and the consequent difficulty of
defining
Language and identity 173
_ speech community in objective terms. If, indeed, language
expresses
= entity, individual and collective, then, given the elusiveness
of a lan-
~age and its native speaker, identity, too, must be a rather
murky notion.
Destiny or choice? _!t'W&tt=h~~_!lIi
At the same time, it cannot be denied that language is experi-
=nced as a marker of identity, that it is loved and celebrated as

6. a symbol
f us-ness, as well as detested and cursed, where the speech
forms that are
:herished or despised stand in for the people using them. As we
speak, we
:-eveal who we are, where we grew up, our gender, our station
in life, our
ge, and the group we want to belong to. And we would not be
able to do
50 if others didn't act in like manner. The question is how it is
done, more
~ recisely, whether it is done inevitably or deliberately, by
destiny or
:hoice. Eliza Doolittle and the Osaka samurai attest the
symbolic as
Jistinct from the instrumental function of a language, but their
stories
~ve another point in common that is relevant here, and that is
that there
;- nothing native about the sociosymbolic function of identity
manifest-
tion. Attracted by the prospects of a better life, Eliza opted for a
new
.inguistic identity that made her acceptable to a group which
would
drnit no Cockney speaker, Cockney being a symbol of the kind
of
_owly life they distinguished themselves from. And Yukichi
Fukuzawa
.:ould slip into alternating roles, at one moment that of a
samurai and the

7. ext that of a merchant, just by altering his speech. Linguistic
identity,
::hese examples suggest, is not an inescapable fate imposed
upon us but,
:0 some extent at least, a social construct, a matter of choice .
Consider the experience of Alan Davies, a man from South
Wales
:aised in an English-speaking home, who as an adult decided to
brush
p his school-learnt Welsh as 'a test of his Welshness'. Having
acquired
a good command of Welsh, the question arose of what it meant
for his
fu ture life.
Proof of Welsh ness? Perhaps. More important for our present
purposes is
the appeal to the common human experience of feeling and
asserting
identity through language. We all want to belong, we all want to
be native
speakers, we all choose groups which we aspire to even though
we may
change our minds and leave , as I left, quite promptly, my adult
Welsh-
speaking group because I found its nationalism and
exclusiveness oppres-
sive and proselytising. As a proselyte, I was expected to choose
my
identity. I had always vaguely assumed that, like masks,
identities could
be added on ... But among those who were gryf yn yr achos
(strong in the
cause) [dual identity was not acceptable). You had to be either

8. Welsh or
English, either Welsh or British. Not both. Such a choice I
found
meaningless ... If to be Welsh meant making such a choice,
then, I
decided, that was a Welsh identity I did not wish to have .
(Davies
1991: viiif.)
174 Sociolinguistics
Several lessons can be drawn from Davies' reflections for
sociolinguistic identity studies, four of which I want to discuss
in
what follows.
1. Identity change is possible. Although Davies was not a native
speaker of Welsh, acquiring a certain degree of competence
made
him eligible, in the eyes of other Welsh speakers, to affiliate
himself
with the language and use it as proof of his Welshness. Davies
decided
that he didn't want the kind of Welsh identity that his teachers
pro-
moted, but he had the option. Critical age and the general
difficulties of
learning a new language notwithstanding, millions of
immigrants adopt
the language of their target country every year, as 'another mask
to add
on' without discarding the one they were used to wearing, or
exclusively
as the only language they offer their children. Immigration is an

9. obvious occasion for such a choice to be made, although it does
not
explain how it is made, that is, whether the new language is
acquired
principally as a practical instrument or also imbued with
symbolic
meaning for identity expression. But the circumstances of
immigration
do not provide the only context for identity change .
Haaland (1969) describes a case of boundary transcendence
between
the Fur and the Baggara in western Sudan . The former are
sedentary
cultivators speaking Fur, a Nilo-Saharan language, while the
Arabic-
speaking Baggara are pastoral nomads. Every year about 1 per
cent of
the Fur take up nomadic life, joining a group of Baggara, a first
step in
the process of identity change. Their children will grow up
speaking
Arabic and will be considered, both by the Baggara and the Fur,
as
Baggara. The main reason that some Fur choose to become
Baggara,
according to Haaland, is economic. Although the cattle-herding
Baggara and the millet-growing Fur complement each other
economic-
ally and in lifestyle, many Fur also grow cattle which is more
profitable
if herds are allowed to migrate to distant pastures than if their
owners
remain sedentary.
More generally speaking, economic incentives provide a

10. principal
rationale for crossing group boundaries and identity change?
Ethnolinguistic identity change is indicative of the kind of
association
involved. Linguistically defined groups can be joined by
outsiders,
in principle, although not all groups are equally open or use
language
as the key entrance ticket. Max Weber (1968: 40f.) remarked
that
'ethnic membership ... differs from the kinship group precisely
by
being a presumed identity' . This holds true also of language
group
membership . It does not mean that a presumed identity is no
identity
at all, but that it is flexible and dynamic rather than unalterably
given.
Language and identity 175
2. Identity change requires effort and is not equally easy in all
cases.
Asserting Welsh identity by means of learning Welsh as an
adult is
more difficult than opting out of Welshness in an environment
where
English is the unmarked choice in most communications.
Making a
marked choice is always more difficult than making an
unmarked
hoice. This is a structural disadvantage for minority speech
commu-

11. nities, because unless they live in secluded settlements, the
minority
language will be the marked choice more frequently than the
majority
language. Displaying one's identity is not equa:lly relevant in
all situ-
ations, but in a majority/minority context with widespread
bilingual-
ism in the minority group, use of the minority language is in
many
-peech situations taken as a manifestation of identity, no matter
whether or not such manifestation is intended. For this reason
alone
and because of the utility differential between majority
language and
minority language, identity change from minority to majority is
always
~asier than vice versa, provided language is the key identity
marker,
:-ather than race, social class or religion.
3. The emphasis placed on language as an identity marker is
variable.
The same language may play differing roles as the vehicle of
group
identity. For example, Dutch is habitually instrumentalized as
an
~dentity marker in Belgium where it competes with French, but
much
_es s so in the Netherlands where it is unchallenged. Speaking
Dutch in
Holland is the default choice. Similarly, in diaspora the
symbolic
harge of languages generally increases because the question of
joining

12. a new group which never arose in the homeland cannot be
sidestepped .
In a language's homeland few people ever consider the question
whether they should retain it, although very small minorities
may be
faced with the issue of discontinuing their linguistic tradition. 3
There is another sense in which the language-identity link is
variable.
The identity associated with standard varieties of international
lan-
guages such as English, French, Spanish and German is more
diffuse
-han that of smaller, culturally more homogeneous speech
commu-
nities. Weak identity expression seems to be an inadvertent by-
product
of language standardization, but much . depends on the
linguistic cul-
rure. French has been a key symbol of French cultural identity
for
zenturies, the high degree of standardization of the language
being a
rucial feature of its esteem. It is a common standard that makes
F rench a valuable language, providing the peoples of many
countries
with a common anchor ofid~ntity. The institutional framework
of this
·dentity is the International Organization of 'Francophonie',
which
defines itself as an alliance grounded in French-based culture.
As
D ennis Ager (1996: 57) notes, 'for some, the defence of
Francophonie
. . the same thing as the defence of French culture' . Yet, a

13. certain
ension results from the universal appeal and internationalism of
_;6 Sociolinguistics
Francophonie, on the one hand, and the inalienable conceptual
ties
between the French language and French culture, on the other.
For, in
West Africa, in Canada and in the Antilles, French serves the
expres-
sion of cultures that have notable differences from the French.
One way
of resolving the issue is to consider France as the home of
metropolitan
cultural identity which is a critical component of various
subidentities
expressed by local varieties of French, as in Quebec, and French
creoles, as in the Caribbean, whose speakers recognize the
metropoli-
tan standard.
Other ' big' standard languages have been enlisted for identity
mani-
festation similarly, internal variability being exploited to that
end. Irish
English, also 'Hiberno-English', is a good example. In the event,
the
function of identity has been transferred from one language to
another.
As a result of steady decline since the early nineteenth century,
the Irish
language has lost its communicative functions, almost entirely
being

14. reduced to nothing but a token of identity expression for the
vast
majority of Irish families . Since this function alone cannot
sustain a
language, language shift to English as 'a means of gaining
access to
improve economic conditions both within Ireland and overseas'
(Harris 1991 : 44) is irreversible. However, notwithstanding the
rem-
nants of Irish, English has taken over all functions of Irish in
Ireland,
including that of identity display having evolved into a distinct
cluster
of varieties (6 Muirithe 1977).
A question of great significance for sociolinguistic identity
research
is what happens when a speaker oflrish English moves to
London, and
whether it makes a difference if that person is a man or a
woman, an
adult or a child, a lawyer or a longshoreman. Only some
generalizations
are possible. Children are more likely and quicker than adults to
drop
the Irish features of their speech and blend in with their new
environ-
ment, and the same can be said of professionals and labourers,
respect-
ively. But reliable predictions are difficult because individual
linguistic
identity is a synthesis of given and adopted elements, and, as
with
deportment and dress , individuals have preferences as to which
identity
they want to display and whether to display it in a conspicuous

15. or
subtle way.
4 . The language- identity link is historically contingent. Welsh
was not
always a minority language in the British Isles orin Wales;
speaking or
not speaking Welsh was not always a political issue. But over
time, in
the wake of industrialization and much intermarriage (Williams
1987),
English made ever more inroads into Wales and Welsh became a
language associated with provincialism and backwardness. 4 By
the
promotion of English, condemned by some as a policy of
language
eradication and welcomed by others as a way of providing
access to the
majority culture, Welsh came under pressure, being perceived as
a
Language and identity 177
stigma by the English-speaking majority and many of its own
speakers.
It is only against this background that the radical attitude
adopted by
the Welsh activists, among whom Alan Davies learnt Welsh, can
be
understood. A double identity is easy to espouse from the secure
position of a dominant language like English, but intolerable
from
the point of view of the underdog that has been driven out of its
proper

16. territory. Welsh activists were intent on, and, as they saw it,
entitled to ,
reclaiming this territory and, therefore, insisted on equating
identity
claims with undivided loyalty. That was in the 1970s . In the
meantime,
Welsh has regained institutional support and with it status and
func-
tion in Wales which helped Welsh speakers to some extent to
come out
of the defensive corner fenced off by the activists. Colin
Williams (1999:
_80) , coauthor of The Community Research Project on R
egenerating
Welsh as a Community Language (1997), explains: 'Support for
Welsh
can no longer be interpreted as essentially a symbol of
resistance to
nglicization, for the language is deeply imbued in the process of
state socialization.' Welsh is extraordinary because its decline,
it
seems, could be halted, but otherwise similar stories of
languages that
were charged in their history, at times more and at other times
less,
with the symbolic manifestation of identity can be found on all
ontinents.
At a certain point in history, Welsh was a stigmatized language,
discriminated against by a dominant society and state and
despised
by many of its own speakers . Such a fate is not uncommon
among
minority languages. While discrimination and self-hate foster
language

17. shift, it has been argued that they also strengthen support for a
lan-
guage. The persistence in the United States of African American
Vernacular English5 in spite of longstanding negative attitudes
toward
it provides a pertinent example. Why is it that, while 'good'
language is
widely perceived as a means of social advancement, low-
prestige var-
ieties like African American English are not discarded by their
speakers
and replaced by more highly regarded ones? The most
persuasive
answer is their role as symbols of identity, local, social, ethnic
and
national. Black English is a stigmatized variety because it is
spoken
mainly by those at the bottom of the social hierarchy in the
United
States. But although its grammatical and pronunciation features
are
used most by those with least education and smallest earning
power, it
is also endorsed and enjoyed by blacks who are well educated
and hold
good jobs. Rather than being a social indicator, it indexes
African
American ethnicity. 'Black adults of all ages talk the vernacular,
and
it functions to express their black identity, too ' (Rickford and
Rickford
2000: 224). Identity assertion by choice of variety, especially
by a
disadvantaged group, is often an act of defiance which can be
under-
stood only against the background of its sociohistorical context.