speech community

is a community sharing rules for the conduct and interpretation of speech.

Hymes (1967/72:54-5): 'A community sharing rules for the conduct and interpretation of speech, and rules for the interpretation of at least one linguistic variety. . . A necessary primary term. . . it postulates the basis of description as a social, rather than a linguistic, entity.' For Hymes one can participate in a speech community without being a member of it, but the lines of demarcation are not fixed or universal: eg. accent, ways of speaking, grammar, etc. in different communities or at different times in one community. Distinct from but related to Sprechbund, language field, speech field, speech network.

is a group of people who, in their implicit sense of the regularities of linguistic usage, are united in adherence to the idea that there exist a functionally differentiated norm for using their 'language' denotationally. . . [which is] said to define the 'best' speakers of language.

Silverstein (1996:285) adopts a Hymesian notion of speech community, and contrasts it with 'linguistic community': 'A linguistic community[:] a group of people who, in their implicit sense of the regularities of linguistic usage, are united in adherence to the idea that there exist a functionally differentiated norm for using their 'language' denotationally. . . [which is] said to define the 'best' speakers of language L.' Notes such speakers may not actually exist... points to conflict of norm w/ everyday usage.

is any human group sharing a set of verbal signs and setting itself off from another group by significant differences in language usage.

Gumperz (1968/71:114): 'speech community': 'any human aggregate characterized by regular and frequent interaction by means of a shared body of verbal signs and set off from similar aggregates by significant differences in language usage'. A more restrictive concept, assuming a shared set of grammatical rules... emphasizes linguistic contrast w/outsiders. Gumperz also argues for regular relationships between language use and social structure. 'The speech varieties employed within a speech community form a system because they are related to a shared set of social norms' (ibid.:116) but may overlap language boundaries: e.g. Czech, Austrian German, and Hungarian speakers may share norms for speech acts, topics, conversational participation, etc.

is not defined by any marked agreement in the use of language elements so much as by participation in a set of shared norms.

Labov (1972:120-1): 'The speech community is not defined by any marked agreement in the use of language elements, so much as by participation in a set of shared norms. These norms may be observed in overt types of evaluative behavior, and by the uniformity of abstract patterns of variation which are invariant in respect to particular levels of usage.

is the widest context of verbal interaction, depending on patterns of variation in a group of speakers that is also definable on grounds other than linguistic homogeneity.

Duranti (1988:217-8): 'The widest context of verbal interaction . . . for sociolinguistic research is usually taken to be the speech community. . . Any notion of speech community. . . depend[s] on two sets of phenomena: (1) patterns of variation in a group of speakers also definable on grounds other than linguistic homogeneity (e.g. . . ) and (2) emergent and cooperatively achieved aspects of human behavior as strategies for establishing co-membership in the conduct of social life. The ability to explain (1) ultimately relies on our success in understanding (2).

speech community, n.All

speech community